http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3025.10.html
Now that we have unraveled the flux switching, I thought this post should have it's own topic not-to litter our precious resource.

Quote from: Honk on August 20, 2007, 10:17:16 AM

It looks very similar to both the Flynn and Hildebrand devices in most ways.
And many flux switching patents do share similarities.
If anyone manage to make a working MEG there must be a ton of lawsuits waiting to be filed.
Everybody wants a share of the big money cookie.

Not bad a guess after a quick glance, in fact the hundreds of magneto-lifter-apparatus all use the same effect. Apparently the skeptics forgot about this whole industry and are to far behind to ever catch up debunking said implementation thereof. hahaha

But you cant patent nor lawsuit the laws of nature.

A bit of competition would probably do miracles for Both Flynn research and Hildebrand intergalactic. After all the septics crawl back into the wood things will be business as usual. hehehe

Here is the link again.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3025.10.html

@Gaby

Business as usual?  Hmmm...I started to look at some of those patents you referred to over in your last post on the other thread...almost none have anything to do with the subject at hand.  Really intimidating list, though, if quantity is the only measure.

I don't quite "get" your logic.  You're comparing industrial PM lifters that have mechanical lever release mechanisms, it appears, to electromagnet-based flux "valve" or "gate" devices, both motor and MEG-like, and thus implying that, because the lifters work, the latter must also, of course.  Seems like a bit of a leap there. 

Sure, you can wrap an electromagnet around a PM and overwhelm the PM field, but it takes significant power to do so.  Or you can use mechanical means to either align or anti-align a set of PMs.  Still takes a good amount of work!

Same principal?  Well, maybe with a huge stretch of the logic of analogies...but...To carry the analogy to closure, then, I guess one could place a nice fat coil of wire next to one of those big industrial PM lifters anyone can buy and get big power out of the coil by simply wanking the lever back and forth real fast (since it's so mechanically easy). 

Can you calculate how much electrical power would be available from the coil versus how much work you'd have to put in to wanking the handle back and forth?  It would not amount to overunity; that's how much! 

Now maybe if you put 49 or 57 of them in a big circle and had them all wanking real fast back and forth; their changing flux fields turning a giant armature with a generator attached...hmmm...what will we call it?  Any good ideas?  I can think of one.

Just because a skeptic is quiet (I can hear Stefan whispering "promises, promises" in the background here), doesn't mean the true believers have prevailed quite yet.

Seriously, I am waiting with bated breath to hear and see the outcome of the latest artfully magnificent build of the Jack Hildenbrand motor with Honk's extra-special super-deluxe 1500% improved-drive controller.  If anyone can do it, these two guys get my vote as a super team with a fighting chance.  Their physical works reek of super quality.

This is one skeptic who will be silenced gladly by even one good solid success with valid and accurate measurements and good scientific engineering documentation of over-unity performance and/or self-running.  I am looking forward to being totally amazed and "reborn" as a true believer! 

Until then, I remain somewhat puzzled at the giant...uhhhh...circular...ummm...I forget.

With Good Humor and, of course, All Due Respect,

Yours Truly,

Humbugger

"I never used a calculation for anything."  Gaby de Wilde

I totally believe you on that one, Gaby!

As for the rest of your long rant, I'm sure it will appeal emotionally to all those who are deeply offended by any suggested use of critical thinking as opposed to building every variation of every idea...an infinite task.  I'm just curious...is there ever a situation where you feel skepticism, abstract reasoning and analytical criticism of a claim is a valid approach or must every idea be built and tested to prove it does not work?  Seems like the last several centuries have provided plenty of examples of efforts that have not resulted in perpetual motion or free energy or overunity machines becoming understood and available...and zero examples that have.

With your approach and the voluminous number of claims you seem to believe in, I assume you must have built many experimental devices yourself.  Did any of them work?  Were they suppressed?  Or, maybe it's okay in your book to accept incredible claims without any building and proving, but not okay to reject them without doing so?  Please explain...seems the same criteria should apply to both.

Does your statement "If you can't back it up your claim is useless, it's so premature it's just ridiculous." only apply to critical claims from skeptics?  It seems that way when you contrast it with your complete willingness to believe the claims of inventors and researchers who seem never to do any valid testing or present viable working designs.

Maybe I missed something in reading and browsing your site's pages (where most of the links don't work) but I don't see anything you've built and tested anywhere, working or not.  So far, your arguments against critical thinking and skepticism seem purely emotional, just as do your arguments and "proofs" for believing in so many "working inventions", none of which have actually been shown to provide access to any free energy. 

I fail to see how a patent for a decorative magnetic tool holder {with no release mechanism whatsoever} goes to proving that OU can be had by using the well-known principals of permanent magnet mechanical-release lifters.  Seems like you might not be reading your own references to see if they actually apply.  So far, your references offered as evidence or proof of that idea are rich only in quantity; entirely lacking in quality.  I do read...plenty...and I've watched hundreds of videos claiming to show OU machines/phenomena.  The level of deception, error and delusion is the only amazement.

I don't share your belief that reading endless unproven claims and watching "amazing" but unscientific videos is doing anything to provide us with working solutions to world energy-supply problems.

I say to your unquestioning acceptance of the incredible and your absolute rejection/denial of the critical and conventional...

Bah...Humbug

After all...you posted in the thread for "skeptical views", so it seems only fair that I be allowed my expression without your emotionally-based attacks!

"I never used a calculation for anything."  Gaby de Wilde

I totally believe you on that one, Gaby!

There is not much to believe there.

Math is like connecting the dots. It seems like it gets you an okay picture of the thing but all the round corners have become boxed. The original picture is brutalised beyond repair. Like writing motzard in Hertz. (http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/24.gif)

As for the rest of your long rant, I'm sure it will appeal emotionally to all those who are deeply offended by any suggested use of critical thinking as opposed to building every variation of every idea.

Oh, but I love critical thought I just don't think most people know what it is. Or more correctly, who it applies to. I could try put a figure on it and do math now.

My guess is that the end product of non effort is also nothing. If it doesn't create anything it's useless. I don't see how debunking something is more useful as building something. You talk about " those who are deeply offended by any suggested use of critical thinking". So you know they exist and what kind of behaviour they find offending.

You can find hundreds of thousands of topics where those unsure about the subject get shouted down and laughed off the board. "That's life" you would think but I'm not so sure if I have to accept it.

You demand to do this in the name of reason. So there is a point where one should stop. This point was crossed for a lot of those asking questions. This should be a learning opportunity. Even devices that doesn't work offers a great learning opportunity. But not if you shout at those investigating. Then those same stupid questions remain unanswered for ever! Learning and teaching is a very delicate processes. But look and read what snake like tricks are being played on people?

For example it was suggested I was beginning to sound like quote "your friend Lawrence", in those words. Now if you combine 20 or so of those remarks you would have to conclude this ends up a rubber stamping technique where people are blamed for who they talk with.

Rational it is clearly not. Combine 50 or so of those remarks and it becomes rather uninteresting to further share your thoughts on the topic. The learning moment is now dead.

Lets look what you teach us.

Age: 57 Pacific Northwest, USA

Dude! At least make a homepage? You don't have to put pictures of yourself on it but try be interesting for the duration of a whole page. It doesn't have to be that long. but you are 57, we are not fooled, you have all kinds of interesting things to teach us. Now look how you are waisting your time being a skeptic. It's truly breaking my heart. ghehehe

..an infinite task.

No, it's quite easy, you would be a master overunitist in no time. The thing is, you know everything already you just didn't make a page about it. You can play the act of the semi-septic who hates his overunity addiction. Put some ronpaul banners on there and off you go. No nekked wimmen plz.

  I'm just curious...is there ever a situation where you feel skepticism, abstract reasoning and analytical criticism of a claim is a valid approach or must every idea be built and tested to prove it does not work?

I think reasoning and analysis can lead to new perspectives or point out complications and imperfections. But you need it in it's full perspective man, you cant just use criticism. I compare that to trying to photograph a nesting bird with one foot in the nest. The criticism should be balanced with respect and honesty. If you make a homepage displaying your stuffed hamster collection then that will give your critique much more dimension flavor and life. Then when you convince us the search for free energy is hopeless you can teach us how to stuff rodents.

Seems like the last several centuries have provided plenty of examples of efforts that have not resulted in perpetual motion or free energy or overunity machines

Nobility Kelvin wrote that motion from heat was impossible. If you would have showed a solar panel 200 years ago they would have agreed it was magic. The number of things we have today that where unimaginable 20 years ago is flabbergasting. We cant interpret their horse and carriage research as significant of such one-liners.

becoming understood and available...and zero examples that have.

With your approach and the voluminous number of claims you seem to believe in, I assume you must have built many experimental devices yourself.  Did any of them work?

I have not decided if I will share the answer to this question jet.

 

Were they suppressed?

ok, now I have decided.

Or, maybe it's okay in your book to accept incredible claims without any building and proving, but not okay to reject them without doing so?  Please explain...seems the same criteria should apply to both.

I don't accept or reject things, I look at them the way they are. hehehe

Does your statement "If you can't back it up your claim is useless, it's so premature it's just ridiculous." only apply to critical claims from skeptics?  It seems that way when you contrast it with your complete willingness to believe the claims of inventors and researchers who seem never to do any valid testing or present viable working designs.

I don't believe anything, this makes reading the repeated duplicate believes of others rather dull to say the least. If they are intentionally annoying the point of arguing about the topic is just out of the question.

Maybe I missed something in reading and browsing your site's pages (where most of the links don't work) but I don't see anything you've built and tested anywhere, working or not.  So far, your arguments against critical thinking and skepticism seem purely emotional,

And this isn't appropriate?

just as do your arguments and "proofs" for believing in so many "working inventions", none of which have actually been shown to provide access to any free energy. 

now you are subscribing me to believes.

I fail to see how a patent for a decorative magnetic tool holder {with no release mechanism whatsoever} goes to proving that OU can be had by using the well-known principals of permanent magnet mechanical-release lifters.

Yes, but thats not how it works. I'm not the macdonalds. You get the raw ingredients and you bake something from them.

ROFL @ instant-everything

You come tell me my ingredients are no good, well show us then?

If you are not in the race then why are you on the track? At least get out of the way? lol

Seems like you might not be reading your own references to see if they actually apply.  So far, your references offered as evidence or proof of that idea are rich only in quantity; entirely lacking in quality.  I do read...plenty...and I've watched hundreds of videos claiming to show OU machines/phenomena.  The level of deception, error and delusion is the only amazement.

And you have not documented this knowledge? Do use reasonable words, don't go debunk your own hobby, eh I mean addiction.

I don't share your belief that reading endless unproven claims and watching "amazing" but unscientific videos is doing anything to provide us with working solutions to world energy-supply problems.

oh, but it's very obvious you are posting on this forum because you want to see a working device in the once and for all kind of sense.

You can say it isn't so but I'm much to smart for that. HAHAHA

I say to your unquestioning acceptance of the incredible and your absolute rejection/denial of the critical and conventional...

Social critics are cool, preferably with much pictures, videos, new math and new physics, drafts for lawsuits etc etc

Gaby...you are the man!

When I have something I think is worth sharing or building, I'll put up a website or draw lots of diagrams and make videos galore. 

Meanwhile, I'm watching, studying, learning and, yes, criticizing when blatant blunders are glossed over and illogical conclusions are leap to.

 

My best of luck, the agony is in that they don't know because you didn't tell them. (haha) People can only be ignorant if you allow them to be.

I appreciate the time and effort you are putting into "my case" here.  You're right, I'm a closet believer in UFO's, in the idea that amazing changes will take place in technology and physics...all that!  But that doesn't mean I have to chase every wild goose down a dark alley or wear rose-colored glasses all day!

 

I cant make much sense of the UFO records, some are military crafts, some reports are mind control projects where either the person or the public is to be dis informed. Rather then review little bits of info we should agree the information is there it's just not shared with us. Such lack of sharing with those who paid for it is evidence of something quite different. How is being kept stupid good for security? Nothing else as secrecy can make us doubt our governments more?

You also have me pegged politically...I'd love to see Ron Paul elected...and I'm a gold bug...a "holder of physical" as they say.  I believe there are lots of covert conspiracies going on behind the scenes, having even participated in a few many years ago...I gave up wearing a tinfoil hat a long time ago.

I guess we don't have to expect Europe to change any time soon. So I figure we have the best odds globally if we start rationalising things in the US first. The neocon fearmongers are just a perk. 

Changing the subject...

Here is a link to a theory you might enjoy about why so many airplanes are crashing.  It also predicts that, soon, AC power will no longer flow on our planet...wow!  Dire!

Of course, in my opinion, the theory is pure hogwash but I thought you'd appreciate it maybe. 

http://perdurabo10.tripod.com/id51.html

lol, much like the UFO's I gave up on looking at plane crashes. Some are so obviously assassinations it's a bit to scary to talk about for me. It's pretty safe to assume today there are weapons that would look far fetched in an episode of roadrunner. Manipulate contextual thought from satellites? ehm, sure?? ROFL?? We cant argue it doesn't work either as we paid for it ourselves? lol

Anyway, Gaby, take care and keep up the brainy philosophical sparring and enthusiastic curiosity.  It suits you well and you're damn good at it!

Humbugger

Thank you, I couldn't have written it without your description of skepticism. I guess it's okay to think of all free energy researchers as crazy, maybe it takes a bit of the crazies I don't know. But to keep pointing at those you think of as crazy and calling them crazy perpetually is just rude. I would much rather be crazy then a rude person.

It's not that they don't know they are being rude or acting crazy. Even the Loch ness monster enthusiasts know exactly what they are doing.

Yeah, maybe it's right to attack people for acting totally crazy. A rational explanation why they are wrong without any attacks would be a more rational approach.

Most of astrology may be bunk, at the end of the day we are constantly subjected to gravitation fields from the planets around us. They are very close to us actually. We also relate emotions to frequencies. So there isn't enough bunk in there to get rid of the thing just jet. But if we refuse to ever seriously look at it it's going to remain the weird thing it has become.

There is no way in the world the topic is going to escape it's firm septic grasp. the "there is no way out, you cant win" kind of logic cant be defeated by rational arguments.

The irony!

Question of efficiency and brain time saving.

Being an asshole = time saving?

If tens or hundreds of guys are trying to build something from apparently "brilliant" but bogus ideas, what they are building is not useful, it will never work (for ex. see the waste of Joule Thief threads).

Tens of thousands of stalkers harassing lone persons.

If these ideas are obviously bogus

Your ideas are obvious bogus, you are a crank and a loon.

There you have it.

What a waste of time you are!

Amazing!

for skeptics, it's surely more profitable for all that skeptics explain the flaws and people try other better ways.

Septics are not profitable in any way.

They are ego tripping lynch mobs.

Now go fuck yourself.

...
Now go fuck yourself.

I will not. Keep your own work method for you , the results are null: you have not a working device to show, not even a promising track, but only blah, like all irrationnal and ignorant FE bigots.

Flynn research surely needs miracles to become Flynn findings. Should we pray Jesus, Muhammad or the Devil?
In his "PPMT Technology" principle he makes the common error of under-undergraduate students, he is confusing force and work. Only one minute is needed to see the bug. So his "technology" is conventional, no overunity can be expected, Flynn research remains an ideal model for ignorants having time to waste.

With a mind set like that you are never going to find anything.