Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: anarchy on March 09, 2006, 07:19:12 PM
-
Why oh why... noone can be stopped from building their own energy source once the world knows how to build it.. free energy for everyone... no price on that :(
We all know that he has fallen for the money scam now and that this will never be shown again.. :(
Paul if you read this - do a truly unselfish act and give your plans to the world.. if someone in russia or a third world country can assemble this to warm
their house, noone can be stopped from using it! Money = evil and they will buy your stuff and burry it so deep noone can see it again! Hurry!
-
I just want to put in my two cent's worth on this topic.
I see Paul's point on pulling out, since others might move ahead in the technology he is pioneering.
It is a fine line, something like a tightrope walk, he is embarking upon.
I think he will succeed in this push to commercialize, since he has already learned how to commercialize another product, the insecticide.
His contribution so far is to show that overunity is a legitimate goal technically.
That is a big contribution, and he should not lose credit for it.
Tom Schum
-
His contribution so far is to show that overunity is a legitimate goal technically.
That is a big contribution, and he should not lose credit for it.
I disagree. Paul Sprain hasn't yet demonstrated overunity. The jury is still out. To silence all critics Paul Sprain has to show first a self-sustaining device and only then can he claim overunity.
Someone who can now claim overunity demonstrated by his device is Wesley Snyder.
-
Everything is just a matter of time now. There are very viable cheaply produced solar solutions near (I'm talkin less than $0.5 per watt... I've seen as low as 0.20). I've seen many plans and a lot say they are within a year of production. So lets say 5 years ;) The power of these companies will fold enough IMO within another 5 years of those coming out that they will no longer be able to control OU devices from coming out.
-
without a coil and external energy with this construction. In his motor, rotor magnet moves from low density field to high density field (like steel ball in SMOT experiments). But when the rotor magnet reaches the last stator magnet, in front of it density of field is lower then that behind it and the rotor magnet stops. To achive a closed loop without using external energy, he have to change the construction drasticaly. With this construction it is imposible.
-
without a coil and external energy with this construction. In his motor, rotor magnet moves from low density field to hi density field (like steel ball in SMOT experiments). But when the rotor magnet reaches the last stator magnet, in front of it density of field is lower then that behind it and the rotor magnet stops. To achive a closed loop without using external energy, he have to change the construction drasticaly. With this construction it is imposible.
That's correct. Sprain's motor utilizes the principle of SMOT but lacks its most important feature -- the interruption of the loop (magnetic loop) by gravity -- spontaneously, that is. He has to apply energy from without to overcome the sticky point. Now, that we have Snyder's experiment, Sprain's device is more or less obsolete.
-
@Omnibus,
Synder?s motor will probablyput out ,
also if it will really work in a static frame,
only very low power levels of power.
Paul Sprain?s motor is much better in power output and
can deliver KiloWatts of power in pretty small devices !
So I think in this moment Paul Sprain?s motor leads the pack of
new inventions !
Regards, Stefan.
-
Stefan, with all due respect, I think Sprain?s and Snyder?s motors are incomparable in their importance. If what I see in Snyder?s video is a real effect, this is a revolution. For the first time in history something always thought impossible is directly demonstrated in flesh and blood ? the spontaneous production of energy from a conservative field. This is unheard of. You know that the mainstream science has always denied such a possibility. The ramifications will be enormous not only technologically but in our understanding of Nature as well. Be sure, if the effect is real much better engineering solutions will be found.
For the importance of inauspicious experiments such as Snyder?s recall the experiments by J.J Thompson or E. Rutherford at the Cavendish Lab in Cambridge or, say, A. Compton?s effect. What is the direct practical application of shooting alpha particles at an Au foil? Obviously, none. However, you, of course, know what revolution experiments such as those have caused. Here in Snyder?s experiment we?re facing something even more dramatic and with much greater far-reaching impact on science and technology.
I should also say that in my opinion, the real breakthrough was made by Fleischmann and Pons when they demonstrated the continuous production of excess energy in an undivided electrolysis cell and later with the invention of the SMOT by the Australian fellow Greg Watson when direct periodic production of excess energy is demonstrated for the first time in a mechanical device. I don?t mention Howard Johnson who probably should be credit as the pioneer but he has never directly shown his achievement for a peer-reviewed scrutiny. Same applies, unfortunately, to Mike Brady or anyone else who for one reason or another hasn?t been forthcoming to peer-review. Paul Sprain revealed his invention but, as I already said, its principle is nothing more than a SMOT but lacking the most important feature of SMOT ? sudden spontaneous disruption of the closed loop trajectory along the magnetic field due to gravitation.
-
@Omnibus
before you break out he champagner
wait til Wesley L. Snyder can show it also running in a static stator.
Also the Paul Sprain concept is the only concept so far I see
it now, which will allow the production of huge output power
in a relatively small device.
The Snyder motor will be nice as a toy and for the
proof of concept, that pure magnetic motors could work
(if indeed he gets it to spin in a static stator),
but it will not have much output power, also not in a bigger
device.
So I still see the Sprain concept, where you gain the energy
from the 340 degree rotation for free as the best upscalable
concept to build usefull small devices with usefull output power
ranges.
Regards, Stefan.
-
before you break out he champagner
wait til Wesley L. Snyder can show it also running in a static stator.
OK, let?s wait and see. As a matter of fact, I don?t mind if the stator is not static, as long as he or someone else doesn?t hold it in his hand and as long as no energy is input from the outside.
As far as Sprain?s device it?s pretty intuitive and of far lesser overall importance than Snyder?s motor. I?m not at all concerned at this point of time about the low output of his motor. First, I?d like to see that it?s a real effect, then we?ll talk.
-
I had to remove all the thread info about Paul Sprain?s
new motor, cause he demanded it,
cause his investors have invested millions of dollars
into it and they want first to patent it.
Maybe we can then now concentrate on the design
user Honk has put into the open source.
Many thanks for understanding.
Regards, Stefan.
-
Hi Stefan,
I had high hopes that Wesley Snyder will show the effect without touching the parts of the motor. Unfortunately, he hasn't done it yet. There have been several other claims, as you know, the latest of which is that of @xpenzif. As a general rule all these claimants disappear without a trace. Some of them (recall that Mike from the Bedini thread, or that latest @xpezif) will hang around for a while just to wet our appetite only to disappear later forever. Take one Torbay, for instance, or that Danny from Ohio or that other fellow from Canada (or were they two of them) etc, etc. Anyway. Secrecy hurts the inventors the most. So what that Frank Fecera and a dozen others hold US patents for perpetuum mobile's? Nothing whatsoever unless they demonstrate openly the viability of their devices which they haven't done yet. Recall also that Paul Sprain was already to have shown a self-sustaining device. Nothing of the sorts yet. As you have probably noticed, I've changed my understanding of the practical role Paul Sprain's device has. In fact, now it seems to me this is a very promising direction to go for practical purposes, if the effect is real, because the brute force Paul Sprain applies avoids the excruciatingly sensitive adjustments the regular pmm's require. It's being a perpetuum mobile has yet to be demonstrated, however. This we should not forget.
-
@Ergo,
As far as I understand from reading the posts there are complications regarding priority. Butch LaFonte appears to be claiming priority also. Let the courts sort this out. I don't think we can be part of this. As many here know, these secrecies, patent protections and fights are contrary to my core values and beliefs. My goal is Science and patents aren't something that has much to do with it. Also, I don't think in the long run any of these constructions can sustain their patent protection because the concepts they are based on have been known for a long time. I should also say that I think it's entirely up to Paul to withdraw all his input here, as it is for anyone of us whenever one deems necessary to do so.
-
I had to remove all the thread info about Paul Sprain?s
new motor, cause he demanded it,
cause his investors have invested millions of dollars
into it and they want first to patent it.
They can't. Its been done before. That is why Takahashi never bothered.
Paul.
-
Ergo! Why are you messing with me? Please remove the zip file. I should have not said anything. Please dude i'll get in trouble.
Paul
-
Paul,
I removed Ergo?s message, so you can still sleep again
and won?t be afraid of your investors getting furious with you...
-
Drawing of the motor and video of it is still out there - no problems to find those even several of them are now deleted. Or isn't it that which is the problem?
Vidar
-
The old post is still available as google cache.
Just try out ( paul sprains wankel ) or similar combination of words.
-
As I have understood it, Paul don?t wants his investors to get furious now,
as he has already told us too much, so that he might not
get a patent anymore....
But after he has got his patent he wants to show it all...
this is my understanding of it...
So we still have to be a bit patient.
-
I don't hope my FBDISSM is intruding his EMILIE.
Perhaps it will intrude his patent rights and perhaps this will kill the FBDISSM.
If so, I guess I will get to know it sooner or later.
-
Honk,
you don?t use both poles of your magnets, so you are wasting 1/2 of
the possible power.
Just redesign it to use both magnet poles!
Just use "U" shaped rotor and stator magnets or just use bar magnets
with a core, so they are "U" shaped all in all !
Good luck !
Regards, Stefan.
-
I have transfered my answer to the official thread.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3456.msg57716.html#msg57716
-
Ergo! Why are you messing with me? Please remove the zip file. I should have not said anything. Please dude i'll get in trouble.
Paul
You'll get into a lot more trouble than that if you are withholding from your investors the true extent of the prior art.
-
I think what has been happening more frequently in this forum is dispicable. A person uses everyone elses knowledge to forward their own agenda and then asks that any reference to what has been discussed be removed from the forum. hartiberlin you should not be enabling this to occur.
@hartiberlin
You should have a disclaimer where you type messages, that anything posted here is considered open source and may not be removed. This would bring your forum more in line with what you have stated in the past. That people that do not want to contribute to the general good and only want their private/pattented items to be furthered by the forum are not welcome.
To allow for people editing their posts, but not allowing them to just go back and delete all they have done, a history of the old messages should be kept when edited, and a link in the upper right of the message should link the the old versions of the messages. This way a message can be edited, but the original one can always be referenced. (similar to a wiki). This should hold true to any files/images that were attached and actually posted.
This is just my two cents worth... and would make me feel like any contribution by the forum will not be snubbed when a person is bought out by money.
-
I think the format should be kept as is. If someone wants to delete his or her postings, let it be. These patents are no good anyway. See how many perpetuum mobile patents the US Patent Office has already issued. What is the outcome of that? Has Science recognized perpetuum mobile as anything other than nonsense? Do we have perpetuum mobile's powering anything else but the imagination of certain people? The answer to both question is in the negative. Let Paul Sprain, and whoever else, dream of becoming wealthy. Why should it be of concern to you?
-
All,
I do not see any problems for Paul receiving his patent. US patent office is only to well known for its' ability to give patents to anyone. You just ask for it. However, Paul's "patent" is untenable at best. There's not even required 35% of difference to be found in his claim. The concept is already in public domain, being nearly 40 years old and the only difference between "Paul's" motor and original spiral motor, also known as magnetic Wankel (maybe Wankel's family would have something to say about the unauthorised use of their name?) is attraction instead of repulsion.
That can't hold water in any court. If Paul receives his patent, it can be annulled in no time on appeal. But that would be waste of time as it is not even necessary.
If Honk's experiments yield results (overunity in a useful amount), what will Paul do then? Hopefully Honk won't fall into that trap himself and will keep the word to have it open source.
But the best news is that, for as long as you make one, or many, and do not sell it to anyone, no patent is protecting the "inventors".
In the spirit of true open source, various pieces can be manufactured by various people and they can sell to each other, and to the rest of us, just these pieces (you would have to assemble it by yourself or a third party professional) and no breach of patent's right would occur.
Patents are just a joke if you know how to perfectly legally neutralise their limitations.