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

Plug Heater

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: 509039
  • *Total Topics: 15176
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!  (Read 8231 times)

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« on: October 11, 2007, 06:00:05 AM »
<<<UPDATE 27 Oct 2007 - I have now added a 'short path' version of 'What is Reality?' that is for intuitive people who just 'know' when something 'feels right' and is true! See further down for more info. >>>

There is one thing I must state very clearly at the beginning of this thread:

Please approach what is written here with an open mind and before you post, please take time to understand the ideas in the document attached to the end of this post...

This thread is intended to be positive! Help keep it so!

A couple of simple request to posters...

If you have more to add to a point you have already made, I would ask you to amend your original post if it does not alter its context within the thread (and thus make a later poster look like an idiot!) It saves space and makes the information content of the thread higher per post.. I adopt this practice so you may find if I have posted an answer to you that it might grow in time... ;)

If you reference another posters ideas or information for the first time in this thread, please credit them by name and highlight their name in blue, credit where credit is due, also others can then research the original source posts.


Question: Why is it so hard to reproduce OU devices and effects even when clear and seemingly simple instructions are available?

Answer: Obviously part of the problem might be down to inventors concealing some vital details, yet even when a simple device is reproduced different people get different results, some of which could be down to their skill, but maybe there is 'something more' to the problem than that!

This question and its answer have been bothering me for some time. Why is it that it is so hard to replicate OU devices? What is the 'something more' that might be contributing to the problem?

Once we do some research, follow our intuition and examine both scientific facts and other information available a simple yet radical answer becomes apparent! That 'something more' is your mind and your beliefs!

Ok, so this sounds crazy, but is it really that crazy! Quantum Physics and other science now acknowledge the importance of the observer, the observer is part of the system they observe, there is no such thing as a 'closed' system as is required to apply the Laws of Thermodynamics (which have proven violations as listed by Tom Bearden anyway).

So in order to help you understand what I am saying here, I am posting a document that aims to prove to you that what I am saying is true or at least very very probable. A tall order indeed! But then after 25 years of general research into the nature of 'Reality' and with my recent discovery that it makes me an experienced Phenomenologist maybe there is a chance.

So please find attached a copy of 'What is Reality?'. Its scope is somewhat broader than what is required for my purpose here, however rather than remove the parts that are not relevant to my purpose here I will instead direct you to the relevant section, and leave you to read the other sections if you wish to.

The relevant pages are 1 to 28...

<<<UPDATE 27 Oct 2007 - I have now added a 'short path' version of 'What is Reality?' that is for intuitive people who just 'know' when something 'feels right' and is true! This cuts the document down to the bare minimum, removing much of the supporting evidence that more conventional thinkers will need to understand. If you don't like the short path version I encourage you to read the more detailed version, as it contains real evidence to support the central idea. >>>


The non-relevant parts are about how to apply what has been learnt in order to improve your lot, rather in the spirit of such books as 'The Secret'...

I acknowledge the copyright of all whose work is reproduced within, via the bibliography at the documents end. I may update the document from time to time with the results of new research.

Acerzw, living in another reality....  :)


So let the discussion begin, does your mind and those of others affect your OU experimental results? I have presented my case, so now I will let you be the judge of that...


« Last Edit: November 02, 2007, 02:05:34 AM by acerzw »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline goddylla

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2007, 06:38:29 AM »
This is one of the most interesting threads that I've seen anywhere on the net.
I've made no attempts thus far to produce an overunity machine, so I'm afraid that I can't contribute there, but I agree vehemently with the thesis of this paper that you posted and your intent of applying it's (the paper's) content to the various OU endeavors of the members of this site.

The key to all of this is creativity. Look what Hutchinson was able to accomplish (although rarely duplicate) through his creative play.....because that's what it is. Why else would a single guy fill a small apartment to the brim with random electronic tech unless they loved it and were Playing with it?
When asked to duplicate, Hutchinson's results were dismal or sparse at best.

The only thing that really changed was intent of will. Same objective, completely different circumstances of consciousness during the act of propagation.

Once again, thanks for the paper and the thread. It's a breath of fresh air.

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2007, 06:59:23 AM »
The only thing that really changed was intent of will. Same objective, completely different circumstances of consciousness during the act of propagation.

@goddylla, thank you for your very productive comment... (love the avatar BTW)

The above quote from your post is a very concise description of what I am trying to convey "completely different circumstances of consciousness during the act of propagation" which is as you say a result of the "intent of will" of the individual concerned. However I am going a little beyond that, I also believe that there is a 'group' effect at work also i.e. the beliefs of others working on the same OU device or even just thinking about it will have some effect. With a background element of everyone on the planet, who is aware of OU, belief's on the matter.

Hence the more who believe in something the more likely it will be induced into becoming 'Reality'... which on a global scale does not bode well in terms of peoples belief in catastrophic climate change and terrorism... (note I am not saying climate change isn't a problem, it clearly is, but suggest that we are making it worse by inducing it be so through our fear of it...)

Hutchinson is an interesting case in point, I think in his case, his play, single minded and very focused intent, and his vehement self belief and belief that he could discover stuff that the 'Government' or others had concealed, plus his extreme self imposed isolation all added to his ability to overcome the dampening 'consciousness field' created by others around such devices working...

Your point about Hutchinson's own ability to reproduce his work shows that the effect of 'play' or enjoyment bears further consideration... it resonates with the idea in the 'The Secret' of joy being an important factor.. there is much evidence that emotion acts as a force multiplier or enhancer... hence I do make a brief mention of emotion in my paper... perhaps I will expand it in due course...

It is also a good point about him being asked to duplicate his results, being asked to duplicate something you did for fun removes the 'joy' of discovery from the equation and thus turns it into a 'chore'. So the force multiplier is lost and the dampening field overpowers the individuals intent!

This would lead to the conclusion that in order to replicate an OU device successfully you must enjoy the experience and believe that it will work...

Acerzw
« Last Edit: October 11, 2007, 07:36:04 AM by acerzw »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2007, 06:59:23 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Nastrand2000

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 326
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2007, 07:20:19 AM »
You may also note that Tesla kept an isolationist viewpoint. And look what he achieved. Not relying on preconceived notions (or proofs of said notions) about what is, but what can be.
Jason

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2007, 07:46:58 AM »
Yes, this effect can work on many levels and does combine with, and can therefore be masked by, more 'conventional' social effects...

Acerzw

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2007, 07:46:58 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline goddylla

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2007, 08:19:17 AM »
Hence the more who believe in something the more likely it will be induced into becoming 'Reality'...
Acerzw

Yes, conscious co-creation has a greater impact on the material level of "reality" (in this case as it applies to a working and distributable OU machine) but it is the singular consciousness which attains balance in all manifestations of existence that manages to *to quote Huxley* open doors of perception that lead to some kind of new order of thought.

There is quite a bit of discussion lately about the compartmentalization of science and it's undeniable failings. There are too many specialists who are unable to see the forest for the trees and since the view is limited, so are the avenues of productive and clear communication between the different sects. This is readily apparent in religion throughout the world, but it is more apt to be humanity's downfall within the realm of science.....although I feel as though I'm beginning to witness a rather large shift in consciousness (specifically on this site in terms of a leap of faith of those that have been indoctrinated into the languages of the specific sciences involved) that threatens to remove much of the steam that the fatalists are using to drive their fear based complacency

In essence, now that enough of can understand the material world down to the quantum level it is time to put it back together again, because the sum is always > it's parts.


Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2007, 08:43:21 AM »
[In essence, now that enough of can understand the material world down to the quantum level it is time to put it back together again, because the sum is always > it's parts.


Creative Reconstruction of humanities 'Reality' does indeed appear to be underway and not before time...

it is the singular consciousness which attains balance in all manifestations of existence that manages to *to quote Huxley* open doors of perception that lead to some kind of new order of thought.

That is what is happening now to many individuals, when it reaches critical mass which it surely must do, then the switch will have been flipped, and a 'New Age' will truly be upon us... our 'Reality' will have literally changed...

As an aside this is exactly what takes place in Shamanism, though the catalyst is a drug rather than self belief, it is interesting to note how the Egyptians used a blue flower that grew on the Nile to induce trances, and that the survival of many forest dwelling tribes also relied on the inventive insights obtained while in a shamanic trance... Indeed Terence McKenna whose work I reference (his paper which was used in my favourite song, the Shamen's 'Re-Evolution') was mainly based in this area.

Acerzw, connecting all the dots is so important...
« Last Edit: October 11, 2007, 01:24:09 PM by acerzw »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2007, 08:43:21 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Tracker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2007, 09:23:00 AM »
Great post.
One thing that bothers me: if our "reality" is so easy to alter, how is that possible that "mainstream", proven inventions are still working? Why my car's engine is not sopping suddenly if I will disbelief in its concept?
With all new "social networks" this approach should be easy to prove :)

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2007, 09:49:17 AM »
Tracker,

The answer is simple, nearly everyone believes in the physics involved in the internal combustion engine, it is built on the back of so many ideas that have a 'proven' 'reality' dating back generations that we all believe in...  In this case the majority rules wins... though if you doubt the reliability of your engine your are likely to find it develops faults that cannot necessarily be found when you take it to a garage... this is the origin of the notorious 'Ghost in the Machine' phenomenon, some machines work better for some individuals than others...

It is the reverse with OU devices, the principles are not well understood, some of the key physics of this obscure part of electronics is still doubted, so the collective assessment holds sway, it 'perpetual
motion', 'it breaks the Laws of Thermodynamics' etc. All these statements reinforce and make the current 'reality' one in which working OU devices are rare, and rarely reproducible. Once more of the concepts involved are 'proven', and more people believe OU devices can work, they will start to work more commonly... until the majority attitude is that they always work, and then it will become the current 'Reality' for everyone...

Shocking as the idea may appear, but if a group meditated with the strong belief that a particular device on a particular bench were to work and there were no skeptics in the lab at the time... It might just produce OU!

Some parts of 'Reality' are more established and deeply enmeshed in our collectively generated reality...

The 'syncronicity of invention' where several people 'invent' something at very nearly the same time, suggests this to be true, humanities global understanding of certain concepts grows, and 'pop' suddenly out of nowhere several people get this great Yureka! idea...

There may be personal or even group annexes in reality, for instance does the Yeti exist, well maybe literally for some it does and for others it doesn't. Perhaps its seemingly ethereal nature is just a reflection of a global and changing belief in its existence. But I am damn sure if we all believed in it, its photo would be on the front of National Geographic!

The same applies for another classical 'reality enigma' the the Loch Ness Monster, what's the betting that if it did exist, as as soon as a boat of sceptical scientists turn up, it becomes less 'real', so they find no evidence. Then a young enthusiastic individual turns up shortly later and takes a picture of it! However if that individual then reads the paper produced by the boat full of sceptical scientist's that says they found no evidence for it, the individual may begin to doubt what they saw... and so it becomes even less 'real' and the next enthusiastic visitor gets an even 'foggier' picture of it or no picture at all...

The same applies to UFO's, the blurring of an original photo may be caused by the effect of peoples beliefs and views on the content... retrospectively! (and the PEAR experiments show retrospective action such as this is possible, on at least the quantum level) So it really doesn't matter how steady your hand is, the quality of the film or camera.. 'reality' will conspire to blur it for you just enough to support the group view that 'everyone knows there is no such thing as UFO's'. But note the UFO was there since the photographer saw it, so reality is only revised enough to make the photographers 'reality' consistent with the group belief...The UFO cannot be completely removed from the photograph because that would remove the reason for the photograph being taken (and also require that any occupants it may have contained were somewhere else at the time!) and require too many other revisions to the 'reality' of people involved later, the lab assistant who developed the photos and so on.. (if the lab assistant is a UFO believer the photos may be less blurred though.)

In summary the chain of causality is modified consistently only by the smallest amount required to keep the 'reality' consistent with the balance between the individuals and the groups beliefs... It may be that the position of a conscious observer cannot be changed (including the UFO occupants) at least in this case) for does nature not always take the path of least resistance... the path that requires the minimum altering of the combined topology of time and causality... (on a roll here! forgive me..)

The statement about not being able to change the position of a conscious observer, however may not apply to something like the Loch Ness Monster, since it probably isn't a conscious observer but may be a thought-form a 'Tulpa' (see my document for a detailed explanation of how one is created.)

But as explained in my paper no-one would be aware of that, not even the original photographer, because it is not possible to cause a temporal paradox using the mechanism I envisage... everyones 'reality' and memory of their reality is changed consistently, instantaneously and simultaneously...

Its begs the question 'Is seeing really believing?' or as I suspect that and also 'believing/disbelieving  is seeing'... eek!

The easiness of altering a particular aspect of 'reality' has to be analysed in terms of its context, considering at least; the individuals belief and their state of mind compared against those commonly held by others...

Acerzw, making Charles Fort spin in his grave... spin Forteans!
(I can explain rains of fish too! really, you don't want to know! even the open-minded really wouldn't believe!)
« Last Edit: October 11, 2007, 10:11:23 PM by acerzw »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2007, 09:49:17 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline FreeEnergy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1928
    • HackersClub.NET
« Last Edit: April 04, 2008, 12:13:58 AM by FreeEnergy »

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2007, 11:39:19 AM »
Great link FreeEnergy, I was not aware of this, I will read with interest... and the nature of your avatar again shows a link from popular culture, the blue pill or red pill view of 'reality' is substantiated here, the agents (humanities collective beliefs) against the individual is manifest.. our reality is a matrix constructed of beliefs..

There are also similarities with the 'Kybalion', the 'Divine Cosmos' website of David Wilcock, and no doubt thousands of others, all roads lead in the same direction.. many different expressions of this same basic idea are required in order to help the maximum audience understand the nature of this 'Reality' game... its more fun then and we all get to consciously contribute to our collective destiny...

My particular expression of this same basic truth is aimed at a more 'geeky' audience than many of the others... for that is my nature... and I need to understand too!

Acerzw
« Last Edit: October 11, 2007, 08:04:18 PM by acerzw »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2007, 11:39:19 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Tracker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2007, 11:50:53 AM »
Acerzw,

I totally agree that we CAN change reality. Forums like this (or other social networks) will help us to "pump" much more information into new generations in higher ratios than it was done before. You are right that "common" sense of history can be altered. Interesting time we are altering right now. WE JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE. Interesting fact is that more and more OU devices are popping up. It is just a matter of time they will simply start to work. I personally think that because of their "mysterious" nature the first working design will be VERY VERY simple, because so much people will believe in it. We could make a small research (especially inside this forum as good source of information) to find which design (magnetic rotor, TPU, SMOT etc. etc.) is to be the most "reproducible" and has been witnessed working.
I bet with you this will be the most obvious design of all (like Orbo). Just spread the news and information and we will be soon witnessing a CHANGE. Regards

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2007, 08:29:29 PM »
Question: Why is it so hard to reproduce OU devices and effects even when clear and seemingly simple instructions are available?

Answer: Obviously part of the problem might be down to inventors concealing some vital details, yet even when a simple device is reproduced different people get different results, some of which could be down to their skill, but maybe there is 'something more' to the problem than that!


The "something more" could be as simple as there not being a design to date that works.

Offline acerzw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 455
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2007, 09:01:56 PM »
shruggedatlas, a fair and very important question, to which there is an answer...

The are many examples, for instance the many attempted replications of John Bedini's simple devices like the SGG, as first explained to me by tao elsewhere in the forum, John's machines work, you can buy DVD's of them working (The Energy from the Vacuum series, highly recommended), Tom Bearden explains in exhaustive detail the physics of how they work, they have published detailed circuit diagrams. Yet when others built identically as possible, their machines do not generally work... Sure, maybe the replicators are all bad inexperienced engineers, but that is not the case...

There are many other OU devices which suffer from the repeatability problem... even when being replicated by their own inventor such as Hutchinson who goddylla mentioned previously...

Any effect such as that I am describing will to an extent be masked by 'normal' causal factors... however, how else do you explain the blurring of UFO photos taken by so many different individuals with different equipment in different places at different times throughout history... it stretches credibility to suggest they are all bad photographers with shakey hands and faulty equipment.. I site this specific example because, it is a situation without many of the normal causal factors that could potentially mask the effect I am trying to explain, after all a camera, lens and film are basically simple devices the operation of which are well understood in contrast to an OU device, and should in common sense terms work reliably nearly all the time regardless of what they are being used to photograph... but against intuition the subject being photographed does appear to affect the functioning of the photographic equipment!

(I should also note here that the UFO photograph blurring effect does not necessarily require a retrospective action of the principle which I am explaining, since at the time when the photograph was taken it is a given that most of humanity did not believe in them!)

Acerzw
« Last Edit: October 11, 2007, 09:49:26 PM by acerzw »

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: OU - Reproducability why is it so hard? A New Perspective!
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2007, 03:24:45 AM »
shruggedatlas, a fair and very important question, to which there is an answer...

The are many examples, for instance the many attempted replications of John Bedini's simple devices like the SGG, as first explained to me by tao elsewhere in the forum, John's machines work, you can buy DVD's of them working (The Energy from the Vacuum series, highly recommended), Tom Bearden explains in exhaustive detail the physics of how they work, they have published detailed circuit diagrams. Yet when others built identically as possible, their machines do not generally work... Sure, maybe the replicators are all bad inexperienced engineers, but that is not the case...

There are many other OU devices which suffer from the repeatability problem... even when being replicated by their own inventor such as Hutchinson who goddylla mentioned previously...

Any effect such as that I am describing will to an extent be masked by 'normal' causal factors... however, how else do you explain the blurring of UFO photos taken by so many different individuals with different equipment in different places at different times throughout history... it stretches credibility to suggest they are all bad photographers with shakey hands and faulty equipment.. I site this specific example because, it is a situation without many of the normal causal factors that could potentially mask the effect I am trying to explain, after all a camera, lens and film are basically simple devices the operation of which are well understood in contrast to an OU device, and should in common sense terms work reliably nearly all the time regardless of what they are being used to photograph... but against intuition the subject being photographed does appear to affect the functioning of the photographic equipment!

(I should also note here that the UFO photograph blurring effect does not necessarily require a retrospective action of the principle which I am explaining, since at the time when the photograph was taken it is a given that most of humanity did not believe in them!)

Acerzw

I cannot speak on UFOs, and of course with a UFO, we cannot take the thing and examine it.

If an OU machine works on video but not in real life when replicated, there are two explanations.  One, the person who replicates the device does not do so correctly.  Two, the device only appeared to function in the video, but in reality did not function as the drawings/plans would indicate.  I tend to think that the second explanation is correct, given how many people have tried to replicate how many devices.

I think a working OU design is still in the future.  I agree that positive thinking is good, but at some point it becomes wishful thinking and hinders progress.

 

OneLink