What a beating today, but thats part of the game. I decided to post on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZrMbmQ4seQ

The LED is very dim but the unit is generating enough power to:
a. Light the LED
b. Over come voltage loss in the bank of caps (213ea 4700mv= 1 farad)
c. Shown even a slight increase of energy being stored in the 1 farad bank

What a day!!
The LED will stay lit as long as the clock operates.

    Well Bill,

You have won the Rube Goldburg prize for sure.  After watching your silent video, I conclude that you are indeed a true artist.  I have never seen so much pains-taking hardware used to accomplish a less impressive goal.  I am fully underwhelmed.

This video should be watched while listening to your early interview as a primer on OU insanity.  You should dub in your fantastic claims and self-congratulatory blather about how easy and simple OU is with your fantastic unique invention (from the interview). 

Yes, you have won the prize for the guy with the biggest, boldest initial claims and the most elaborate, expensive, complicated and entirely useless machine in the end result.  All that work, huffing and puffing, self back-patting and all those posts...and you have proved that an LED can be lit so dimly that it's tough to find even in the dark using only the energy stored in a spring...at least for a short while.  Incredible!

You are the absolute World Champion!  I guess the chips have fallen where they may, all right!

Over Unity...BAH  HUMBUG!         At least you need not worry about the CIA knocking on your door!  I think you're safe for now!

Albert Einstein once said, "Everything should be made as simple as possible but not simpler!"  You certainly are in no danger of having over-simplified!

Humbugger

*All you claim to know is IT CANNOT WORK

I claim to know somewhat more than that, but you are right...I know it will not and does not work.  Are you saying it does?

Question for Bill:  Back on Dec 2, as well as in many other posts, you said, "At this time I can run the motor to rewind the system totally from energy produced by the caps.  No external input totally self running closed loop!"

Were you lying outright, Bill?  Or do your imaginations, hopes and speculations, in your own mind, constitute real achievements? 

Were you lying to us or deluding yourself or both?  I'd say both.  Shame on you!

Please don't try to tell us that men in black made you change your machine so it now only lights up a dim LED and is not overunity...what really happened then?


Humbugger says "BAH"

okay, Bill...but could you please just honestly answer the question about why you repeatedly and clearly said you had achieved OU?  did you lie or just make a mistake?  i promise if you give an honest answer, I'll never post in this thread again.

in fact...if you really tell everyone the truth behind your early claims and just really tell the world the story, i'll quit the whole forum permanently and never return.

Dear Larry,

You state:  "(7) The energy and the time required to do the rewinding should be approximately the same. (This is an educated guess at present)." 

You seem to share Bill's confusion about energy, power and time.  Just say...the energy...because the term "energy" already includes the time factor.  It is power multiplied by time, remember?  It is amazing to me how people in this forum cannot seem to keep that clearly in mind.  It is basic.  You wouldn't say "The kilowatt-hours and the hours required" or "the watt-seconds and the seconds required", why say the energy and the time required?  Energy is time...the amount of time that power is used.

Now...Do you mean the energy required to rewind it once or do you mean the energy required overall to sustain indefinite OU operation (perpetual motion)?  Nothing you have suggested will change the nature or energy storage capacity of the clock spring, so it clearly will always take the same energy input to go from fully unwound (or whatever percent unwound one decides to start the rewind procedure at) to wound fully tight.

You do acknowledge in (4) that a faster pendulum (no matter how it gets to be that way) will unwind the clock spring faster as well.  While it will obviously take the same amount of energy to rewind the spring each time, you will equally-obviously have to do the rewinding more often if you unwind it faster! 

Therefore, any advantage you get (5) in faster charging of the capacitors is totally cancelled by the fact that you must rewind sooner each time (more frequently overall) as well!  Why do you fail to mention this obvious fact? 

I guess because it ruins your theory of how to fix an unworkable system that is already far too complex for what it accomplishes by adding yet more elements!  Not exactly classical Eastern philosophy, Larry! 

Where is the approximation, guesswork or education needed (7) to understand these quite simple and clearly obvious facts?  It seems you are purposely obscuring them.

Larry...

Nobody pays me and I don't have any desire to suppress any great new workable idea or concept.  I really don't like all the people pretending they know some great and special information when they really don't.  So many are encouraging foolish ways of thinking and foolish ideas that simply do not work and never will.  I don't like that.

I notice that your reply totally ignores the simple basic issues I bring up, as if I had said and asked nothing.  If you will take the time to comment on my points and observations and answer my simple questions, I might take your suggestion and read up on your theories and, if they seem flawed, attempt to point out the flaws. 

But what would be the point if all you will do is ignore any critical comment or question as if it were never made and respond completely off subject as you have done here?

"The use of the Law of Conservation of Energy as a roadblock to hinder the Cosmic Energy Machine developers has been removed."  Personally, I do not agree with this statement but, for purpose of scientific discussion (do you know how to do that?) let us say it were true.  My questions would be...

1) When was it removed and by whom?

2) What then is the roadblock now pray tell?  Where are the working machines that all these conquerors of the laws of nature for the past hundreds of years have given us?  I'm just as tired of buying gasoline and paying electric bills as everyone else!

3) What can I do to help get us there faster? 

Right now, since I see nothing yet that appears to have any real chance of working, the only thing I can do is point out the obvious reasons why certain poorly-thought-out approaches won't work.  What is so wrong with that?  That's what science is, for the most part!  You propose theories and then try every known way to break them! 

The way fake science works is that theories are proposed as if they were proven fact (often proclaimed to be by the proposing guru) and then the mob clamors to immediately build machines that use the theory, always with insufficient hard information from the theory guru.  Usually, the "new principal" involved is magical and must be taken purely on faith.  Enormous and unending confusion results and no two attempts at "reproduction" are the same; none ever actually work.

Anyone who questions the theory using anything like reason or logic or simple mathematical proof is moderated out, shouted down with emotionally-based arguments, shunned and accused of being a professional debunker working for big energy or big brother or just glossed over and ignored. 

When the theory and the resulting machines have been given plenty of development time (often decades) and cannot be made to work or produced readily, the next guru pops up and the process begins anew.  The skeptic is never given credit for being correct in the end.  No science is accomplished or technological art pushed forward.  Nothing is learned.

Like Bill (and all the others) despite his utter and dismal failure to deliver what he over and over assured us was factual, simple, a unique exclusive breakthrough and oh so easy, he still will not admit that he ljust plain lied or made any particular mis-measurement or deluded himself and publicly stretched the truth.  He has no idea where his mistakes in thinking were!  I'm just trying to help on that.

Now, Larry, it seems like what you are saying is that Bill's machine, up until now, was good but didn't have the secret ingredient for OU, which your suggestions will provide.  Am I hearing that right?

Humbugger

Larry...

Do you intend insult by saying I should correct typos?  Is this your response to the "energy and time" comments?  This, you are saying, was a typo on your part?  I recall one post of Bill's where he was claiming his machine "produced 50,000 volts per" week month year, whatever.  Then he later corrected that to 8,600 volts, claiming it was "a typo".  It was obviously not a typo...but rather a confused miscalculation.

The point is, peoples' words reveal their misconceptions.  It seems Bill spent a lot of time calculating dv/dt (time rate of voltage change) as if it, by itself, were some kind of meaningful measure of energy.  When words are what we are using to communicate concepts, a good effort should be made to use the correct words. 

Your "typo" regarding time and energy is far too familiar and common to be a true typographical error.  Bill made the same error frequently.  People doing energy research should not be guilty of confusing voltage, current, power, energy and time in their writings.  When they do, and I point it out, I am doing far more than helping them edit.  I am pointing to underlying confusion that is at the root of the very problem.

I went and looked at the two documents you suggested.  They are both entirely without merit as far as clearly describing any reproducible device or revealing any new natural laws or refuting any old ones.  Neither really proposes any particular theory that I can detect or argue the merits/flaws of, pro or con.  It's gibberish.

I am happy that Mr. Wang has a new job in a big company.  How that in any way proves he has invented a working free energy machine does not compute.  When I can buy one and try it out or read about other people doing so happily, I might believe.  Seems he's been working the idea for 30 years already...where's the machine?