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

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: 515721
  • *Total Topics: 15375
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible  (Read 54214 times)

Offline The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2009, 06:08:30 PM »
I have news for you New's Flash.

If you have access to two guitars (1 Electric --- 1 Acoustic), I will prove over-unity is possible.
That is, more energy is output than put in.

Step one... Strum the E string (lowest string) on the Electric Guitar (the guitar is not hooked up to an amplifier, by the way).

Step two... Note it's volume which is directly related to the energy present.
                         That is the amplitude of a wave is directly related to the energy vibration of the string.

Step three... Strum the E String on the acoustic.

Step four.... Note the volume again.

Step five...  Louder ?   
                         I think so. By 100's of times in fact !

Step six... Realize that there is more energy output than without the resonating chamber of the Acoustic.

If you are going to make a statement such as you have... please try to explain resonance !
                          I would greatly enjoy reading your explanation.

Have a great day,

The Observer

P.S.  Extra credit.... do the same experiment with a trumpet, trombone or tuba.
               That is, case 1 would be the volume from only the mouthpiece,
                              case 2 would be the volume from the mouthpiece and the horn when they are connected.

          I'm pretty sure I could blast your ears out in case 2.
                  What do you think?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2009, 06:08:30 PM »

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #31 on: January 31, 2009, 06:23:43 PM »
@Charlie_V
Quote
I find it hard to be a skeptic when there is so much evidence that an ordering mechanism does exist.  Its only a matter of time till we find it.

"A fish cannot comprehend the existence of water. He is too deeply immersed in it."
Sir Oliver Lodge
This ordering mechanism you seek should be obvious as you are a part of it-- Life
A tree takes randomly disspersed gasses, random chemicals in the ground and disspersed water and orders them into the structure we call a tree. Suns and stars vaporize matter and this matter radiates to the gravitational fields of planets where it is organized into form and substance. If you start looking I do not believe you will find one instance where chaos is not balanced by an opposite and equal force which organizes chaos into form. What few can concieve is the time frame in which this process occurs because it could amount to nanoseconds or it could be billions of years. If matter is ejected from suns and our universe is full of astronomical bodies and these bodies have gravitational fields which attract matter then it should be obvious that at some point in time this ejected matter must gravitate to something and in doing so it is organized into structure. Another example is light, if you can "see" the light from a star hundreds of light years away then this light must have propagated through every space inbetween you and the star, this light must also have radiated in every direction from the star for hundreds of light years. Therefore can we not say all space we know of must contain "light", we can call this light radiant matter or energy but the fact remains that it has travelled through space and gravitated to our planet producing life.

@All
On the subject of overunity, first we must understand what "unity" is before we can concieve that something could exceed it. What is unity?, If unity was considered to be all energy and structure within the confines of any given space then it would seem you have concluded that this space can have no interaction with everything else that surrounds it. Does this sound logical?--- that you could isolate a known area of space and everything it contains from everything else in the universe?. As well if unity is considered as all energy that is present and available for use in a defined space then how can you get more from something you have already defined as isolated. Maybe I am simple-minded but the error would seem to be in the fact that some people believe you can completely isolate one area of space from another, this would constitute blocking the motion of all known and unknown forms of energy, blocking all motion below the subatomic level across an imaginary boundary you have defined. I believe it is much more realistic to think that energy will always propagate from one place to another based on the conditions present irregardless of what we want or believe.
Regards
AC

Offline newsflash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #32 on: January 31, 2009, 06:25:23 PM »
If you have access to two guitars (1 Electric --- 1 Acoustic), I will prove over-unity is possible.
That is, more energy is output than put in

You are comparing two different guitars, set up differently. Just because one guitar is louder than the other does not make it overunity... lol

Quote from: allcanadian
On the subject of overunity, first we must understand what "unity" is

Overunity means you're getting more out than you put in (impossible). Unity would be getting the same amount back (also impossible, since heat is always lost. A system can never be 100% efficient). Underunity is getting less out than you put in (always happens, since no system is 100% efficient). It's very simple, and I'm surprised you're on this site with 600+ posts without even being able to clearly define overunity.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #32 on: January 31, 2009, 06:25:23 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Tempest

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #33 on: January 31, 2009, 06:27:05 PM »
A magnet does not store power, i.e., what you would need to build some kind of free energy device.

A magnet uses force.

I still have to ask you how a magnet works. I will not be so bold as to say I do. And I know that there are magnetic forces that can make electricity when you do work to a magnet. Ex. a generator. But where do those forces come from?  Can those forces be manipulated to CONVERT energy for the background radiation? And if some young bright lad or lady that can come up with one, then more power to them. You are saying that we already know all there is to know about magnets. I find that cocky. And ignorant.

By the way an electro magnet does store energy.

Offline newsflash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #34 on: January 31, 2009, 06:34:41 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #35 on: January 31, 2009, 06:46:39 PM »
Just to be clear, Mr. News, I would also like you consider this.

AN ELECTROMAGNET

A coil around a Low Coercitivity Ferromagnetic material. (this means the magnetic dipoles spin freely)

          First measure the magnetic field from just the coil without the Ferromagnetic Material inside with X amount of current.

          Second, measure the magnetic field from coil with the Ferromagnetic Material inside with same X amount of current.

Can you comprehend that the magnetic field is 1,000s of  times greater if not 1 MILLION times greater?

            Much less explain it?

The answer lies in ANISOTROPIC ENERGY ( a quantum energy that causes dipoles to line up when they shouldn't Newtonianly.)
And, the fact that electrons never stop spinning.

Stick that in your pipe,
                                         smoke it,
                                                            and let me know what you think.

Yours truly,

                    The Observer.

P.S.  Extra Credit.
                                Try to make a speaker by replacing the magnet with a coil and taking out the ferromagnetic material that is engulfed by the coil coming from  the amplifier.

                                If you can produce the same sound with the same signal energy, I will give you a MILLION DOLLARS ! (if i had it of course)
                       

Offline nickle989

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 81
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #36 on: January 31, 2009, 06:55:29 PM »
@ Charlie .. some would say that magnets are a form of order as it is the order that is able to create and continue that magetism until heat is applied which would cause disorder .. or a repulsing magnet of equal or greater strength diminishes the magnetism.  But I would have to agree with your statement that most of our physics and understanding comes from disorder vs. the other way around.  This could be an interesting topic on the observation of order ... hmm .. any one have any thoughts on this?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #36 on: January 31, 2009, 06:55:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #37 on: January 31, 2009, 07:01:03 PM »
@newsflash
Quote
Overunity means you're getting more out than you put in (impossible). Unity would be getting the same amount back (also impossible, since heat is always lost. A system can never be 100% efficient). Underunity is getting less out than you put in (always happens, since no system is 100% efficient). It's very simple, and I'm surprised you're on this site with 600+ posts without even being able to clearly define overunity.

Quote
Overunity means you're getting more out than you put in (impossible).

Hmmm, I can place a black piece of paper in the sunlight and the energy from this sunlight will heat the paper, I have put none of this heat into the paper---- the sunlight has, you are going to have to be much more specific in your objections.

Quote
Unity would be getting the same amount back (also impossible, since heat is always lost. A system can never be 100% efficient).
I would submit that every system is 100% efficient, this heat you say that is lost has to go "somewhere" does it not? If heat is lost from one place it must be gained in another or this would violate the conservation of energy. As you know energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it can only charge forms.

Quote
Underunity is getting less out than you put in (always happens, since no system is 100% efficient).
Underunity? Again, if energy cannot be created or destroyed how can there be underunity? Underunity would imply that there could be less energy that which you started with, just because entropy or radiation of energy from a system occurs does not mean energy is lost nor destroyed----it means energy has moved from one place to another. While this is an unwanted effect it is by no means underunity because the heat still exists in another place seperate from where it started.Your conception of underunity could be considered as nothing more that the "movement" of energy.


Offline exxcomm0n

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 791
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #38 on: January 31, 2009, 07:01:55 PM »
Hmmmm....seems the post from newsflash points to the "unified electromagnetic force" to explain magnetics, electricity, and their interaction.
We all know how many hundreds of years that has been understood.and unchallenged or redefined

A short history from http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Unified_field_theory

"The first successful (classical) unified field theory was developed by James Clerk Maxwell.
James Clerk Maxwell was a Scottish mathematical physicist, born in Edinburgh....
. In 1820 Hans Christian Oersted discovered that electric currents exerted forces on magnets, while in 1831, Michael Faraday, FRS was an English chemist and physicist who contributed significantly to the fields of electromagnetism made the observation that time-varying magnetic field could induce electric currents. Until then, electricity and magnetism had been thought of as unrelated phenomena. In 1864, Maxwell published his famous paper on a dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field. This was the first example of a theory that was able to encompass previous separate field theories (namely electricity and magnetism) to provide a unifying theory of electromagnetism. Later, in his theory of special relativity Albert Einstein  was able to explain the unity of electricity and magnetism as a consequence of the unification of space and time into an entity we now call spacetime."

The question I have is if that <above> is the perfect definitive answer for electromagnetism, why does it keep getting redefined by these "johnny come lately" types like Einstein?

Better yet, why do they keep calling it a "theory"?

;)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #38 on: January 31, 2009, 07:01:55 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #39 on: January 31, 2009, 07:02:20 PM »
Thank you for your prompt reply.

I guess I needed to mention that the strings are exactly the same as well their length and tension.

I kind of get the idea that you haven't considered resonance or how it works.

The point that you missed is that the acoustic guitar's body is a natural amplifier needing no energy from the ELECTRIC COMPANY.
  It actually stores the waves entering it, and emits waves of greater amplitude commensurate with the amount of wave energy it can store.
    It is truly an interesting phenomenon that is very different from 99.9% of all physics.

Please study this and get back to me.

I do Thank You for inspiring everyone to think hard though.

The Observer.

Offline newsflash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #40 on: January 31, 2009, 07:11:59 PM »
@newsflash
Hmmm, I can place a black piece of paper in the sunlight and the energy from this sunlight will heat the paper, I have put none of this heat into the paper---- the sunlight has, you are going to have to be much more specific in your objections.

OK, OK, this and everything else you said on that post are based on a common misunderstanding.

That energy is coming from the Sun. The Sun is a source of energy. That energy is transferred onto the paper. The paper then eventually cools down, as the heat is lost into the atmosphere -- again, a transfer of energy.

The energy goes from The Sun to the Paper, back into the atmosphere. It's the same damn energy the whole time. Nothing is created..

You have a scarily fundemental lack of understanding of the absolute most basic concepts. 10-year-olds can understand this.

Quote from: The Observer
The point that you missed is that the acoustic guitar's body is a natural amplifier needing no energy from the ELECTRIC COMPANY.
  It actually stores the waves entering it, and emits waves of greater amplitude commensurate with the amount of wave energy it can store.
    It is truly an interesting phenomenon that is very different from 99.9% of all physics.

It doesn't store anything, FFS. Your body's movements are the original energy source. You get that energy from the food you eat. The energy from your fingers is transferred onto the string, which vibrates. These vibrations are heard by our ears as sound.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #40 on: January 31, 2009, 07:11:59 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #41 on: January 31, 2009, 07:22:38 PM »
@newsflash
You seem to be very selective in how you reply to my questions? There is still the issue of why you believe there can be such a thing as underunity which I find very confusing. This would seem to contradict the conservation of energy and 100 years of physics.

Offline newsflash

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #42 on: January 31, 2009, 07:30:06 PM »
@newsflash
You seem to be very selective in how you reply to my questions? There is still the issue of why you believe there can be such a thing as underunity which I find very confusing. This would seem to contradict the conservation of energy and 100 years of physics.

Just what the HELL are you talking about. Underunity is where you get less energy out than in. That is the case for every system in the history of everything. Go back to school.

Offline jadaro2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1254
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #43 on: January 31, 2009, 07:35:12 PM »
But you guys, you're a bunch of non-scientists, for some reason playing around all day with concepts that will never work.
Ignoramus...

I am an actual scientist, employed as a scientist, and you are an ignoramus...

*chimes in
I told you this thread would get more posts than most good ideas.
- - - -
It's simply distracting me at this point.  People meddle in science, it's how they discover.  If they already knew the end result to which they seek, then there might be no other creation save for what is wanted to be created - given the state of human nature, the net result would be a minimalist society primarily revolving around an alpha male structure; but as it so happens, our would of interactions is filled with novelty items and other generally useless things that one person or another has come to find useful, or God forbid, entertaining, and this system has motioned in favor of other social forms and ways of living different from that of a pride of lions.

If we were to all truly be ignoramuses then we'd have to forget about the idea of science as it stands.

If we meddle in many things, we come up with many things.  These products may eventually result in the construction of something useful.  This is the idea behind open source at least.

Offline exxcomm0n

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 791
Re: Newsflash: Overunity is impossible
« Reply #44 on: January 31, 2009, 07:44:30 PM »
Most 10 year olds can answer a question too, so I wouldn't bandy about estimations of intelligence capability and understanding based on age at this point.

I'll re-iterate.

newsflash, why do you think these very learned men upon whose theories you rest in justification of your stance, label them so?

Let me help you.

From Merriam Webster:


Main Entry:
    the·o·ry Listen to the pronunciation of theory
Pronunciation:
    \ˈthÄ“-É™-rÄ“, ˈthir-Ä“\
Function:
    noun
Inflected Form(s):
    plural the·o·ries
Etymology:
    Late Latin theoria, from Greek theōria, from theōrein
Date:
    1592

1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2: abstract thought : speculation
3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>
4 a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn> b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory<in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>
5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6 a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b: an unproved assumption : conjecture c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>

Pay distinct attention to definition #5 's equation of plausible and scientific acceptable general principle and then consider the definition of plausible.


Main Entry:
    plau·si·ble Listen to the pronunciation of plausible
Pronunciation:
    \ˈplȯ-zÉ™-bÉ™l\
Function:
    adjective
Etymology:
    Latin plausibilis worthy of applause, from plausus, past participle of plaudere
Date:
    1565

1 : superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious <a plausible pretext>
2 : superficially pleasing or persuasive <a swindler… , then a quack, then a smooth, plausible gentleman — R. W. Emerson>
3 : appearing worthy of belief <the argument was both powerful and plausible>

....and notice that "superficial" and "appearance" seem the operative words.

It might be that such learned people know that they are just providing the "best excuse" until someone else comes along with a better one that answers more questions.

Just a guess ;)

P.S. The same energy was used to pluck the string of both the electric and the acoustic, but the acoustic used the tool of a sound box to amplify the volume of that finger pluck instead of the input of more energy from an electric amplifier.
The string may vibrate at the same way with the same frequency on both guitars, but I may not hear the note in a crowded room from the electric without an electrical amplifier, but I can from the acoustic plucked note.

Seems someone had this theory about the soundbox being the only way to amplify the volume amplitude of a guitar note until Adolf Rickenbacker made available his device to the  public.

Seems he had a theory too. I wonder if it will hold true as long as the soundbox's did.

 

OneLink