Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: billmehess on April 07, 2006, 07:33:35 AM
-
Thank you for your input as to what constitutes a true magnetic motor. I am now ready to post
Please look at the site I have set up:
www.geocities.com/auction606/index.html
Tim Ventura has just posted an audio interview he has done with me as a feature article.
You can access that audio at his website: www.americanantigravity.com.
Its Thrus evening 10:30PM I will be available until 10:00 am Tomorrow morning (Fri) to answer any questions. I will be out of town fromFri-and back Sunday evening.
This motor works!!
-
I believe your machine may work,but it seems very complex with many moving parts. I am a reductionist by nature, remove all the B.S and you are left with the fundamental process.Then manifest this process with as few parts as necessary,just a thought
Good Luck
-
The device is very very simple. The only moving parts are the magnets moving in and out of the coils. The system ran for 8 days straight.
I am going to increase the size of the magnets and connect up the motor to automatically rewind the system. It will be able to run
and generate voltage continuously.
I believe this to be the first true magnetic motor. Look at Tim Venturas www.americanantigravity.com web site and listen to the audio interview. It will answer a lot of questions.
Back Sunday night.
Bill
-
billmehess, if we're talking about a motor with input energy, no matter how small, Minato, Butch, Sprain etc. have shown better solutions than yours, I think. There are, however, self-sustaiing magnetic motors such as those made by Wesley Snyder and Walter Torbay which need no input energy whatsoever. These are the motors that attract the most interest and can really silence sceptics.
-
What about instead of having it go in and out of the coils have it going over the top of 6-7 lined up underneath it?
-
Good idea, and very interesting...I await the inclusion of the "winding motor" and the results gained from storage and subsequent "use of" the stored energy to sustain the clock winding... very good idea again I say!
If it works as you say....get ready for a lot of press ;D
-
If it works as you say....get ready for a lot of press ;D
Yes because the parts are easy to get ahold of. The clock part is complex but you can buy that already done pretty much anywhere.
-
Interesting concept, but what about the drag on the magnets that
go through the coils, when he draws current from the coils ?
Is this compensated by the springs in the clock ?
I really would like to see first his charged up capacitor being able to rewind the clock
first, before you break the champain bottle and then also run a real load like an LED with it....
Looking forward for some updates with a bigger clock pendulum and bigger magnets...
-
It's hard to say anything not seeing the schematic.
8 days is not bad, but some Adams motors work the same way, till battery finally fails.
Can we see a diagram?
-
It's a needlessly complicated mechanism for converting mechanical energy stored in a spring to electrical energy in a capacitor, (at some loss.)
Why is this thing of any interest to anyone?
-
@maxwellsdemon
He said, he can produce more energy with it than it needs to rewind the clock,
so it runs perpetually and can deliver excess energy to a connected small load.
-
thought it might be of interest:
http://www.shiawasseehistory.com/chicagoexpo.html
-
@maxwellsdemon
He said, he can produce more energy with it than it needs to rewind the clock,
so it runs perpetually and can deliver excess energy to a connected small load.
"Can" produce more energy, or <i>does</i> produce more energy?
-
So it's a clock with a pendulum and a pm rotor on the pendulum-interesting . Pendulums are very conservative,and I cannot see what role gravity would play here so Im guessing it's a timing function.Too many people rush things, current being one of them, If you allow the pm enough time to work with electron/current flow and not against it maybe we can come out ahead. I have thrown this adea around forever, using a magnet on the back of a coil and a larger metal plate as a rotor so all current flow has ceased by the time the rotor leaves. As well, I think almost any mechanism is better than the current generator systems we use today, they are terrible.It may not be big power but it is power none the less, I wish you the best of luck. I found an excellent web page on the wesley gary motor you should look at, Im in the process of building his motor and kicking around the idea of putting a resonating arm on the opposite end or a pendulum, one input-4 outputs? Veljko Milkovic's pendulum is interesting as well. Here is the link for the gary motor(http://www.fevj.org/FEV-magnet-motor-by-W-W-Gary.php) it is the best I have seen yet.
-
Its Sunday night 9:15 Pm PST, I just got home and ready the replies on the site.
So here goes:
I believe that the answer to a working magnetic motor is the ability to utilize a power source to run the motor. I do not believe that a magnetic motor will run by itself. This is like trying to grab your shoes and lift yourself off the ground. Does it not strike all of us as strange that NO ONE has been able to build such a motor. I do not believe the Snyder or Argentine motor will work. I saw the Synder video like everyone else how hard is it to attach the motor to a stationary platform and see it work on its own?
Butch, I know you are shaking your head now, and I have the utmost respect for you as does I am sure
everyone else in the community but until I see a working Synder or any other motor I simply cannot
except it as a working device. If I am proven to be wrong -so be it, its ok but I am a real nuts and bolts person I simply want to see a real working device.
Enough of that
What I have in my motor is a way to create a electric current by passing a permanent magnet in and out of a coil. This is certainly not new and I do not claim it to be, Faraday is well understood.
The problem is how to keep this motor continuously running. For this I am using the back and forth motion caused by a pendulum from a mechanical movement of a clock.
Its so simple
With this process I can generate current for up to 31 days using a 31 day movement. I am currently using a 8 day movement. During that 31 days I will be storing the output via capacitors or work to directly trickle charge a rechargable battery.
Think of each permanent magnet moving in and out of a coil as one (1) power unit producing over a 31 day period x amount of energy. The more of these power units I have working the more output will result. Remember each unit is really totally independent of each other so "stringing" these together and connecting them in series will produce any voltage I need its only dependent on the number of units in use.
Its so simple
As far as re-energizing the movement to cause the device to continue to operate I need only to store enough power to turn a motor for under 10 seconds which will begin the 31 day cycle all over again.
Tomorrow I will begin building the next upgrade model will the n-45 2in in diamenter 1 inch long magnets I have which will be moving in and out of larger coils. The 2 magnets I am using now, and that show in the video are only 3/8' wide by 1/2". The greater amount of current that will be produced with the stronger magnets will be dramatic.
I can produce enough flow to in 31 days rewind the movement as well a plenty left over to light a bulb.
Talk is cheap I HAVE NO DOUBT that I can do this, after reading this I hope that you can understand how this device works.
Its so simple-
Producing a current continously for up to 31 days= energy
This unit is not area or input specific. It could work anywhere, in a closest, a basement in a cave it makes no difference. It does not require water(Hydro) the sun , wind or any kind of peto fuel to run and it can run continously producing a flow of truely FREE ENERGY.
ITS SO SIMPLY- SEE THE VISION!!!!
REMEMBER!!!!!!
I need only to string as many of the magnet/coil combinations together to achieve the necessary current flow.
This is very important- this unit it generating electricity and the power that is required to run it continously only has to be tapped once a month. All other magnet motors must be providing its own input from second one. There in lays the problem for that kind of motor. It simply cannot produce more than what it takes to run it-basic law of physics folks.
-
lol this is great news! pass it on people!
-
Well, I hope you can prove me wrong.....but I think that the power needed for the gear motor (or whatever you are going to use) to wind the main spring back up will exceed the small amount of energy you can generate with the mechanism. Yes, you only need to run the winding motor for a few seconds every 8 or 31 days, but main springs need a huge amount of torque to wind...and a gear motor that can develop that kind torque will need more power than you can generate. Hopefully, I am missing something here. ;)
Dave 4664
-
Yes,Bill, Dave is right, the gear motor will need more energy, than you can generate, at least in theory.
Try it with a big capacitor first and let us know, if you can rewind the clock with it, without using a battery..
If you use a battery you have to wait too long, until it is drained...
-
The necessary power to turn the main spring of the movement will not be a problem. Remember
the amount of stored energy necessary to do this is accumulated over 31 days. Each permanent magnet/coil configuration is producing voltage it is only necessary to have enough of these to provide what ever is necessary to turn the movement.
Also what if I simply walk up to the device for 9 seconds every month and manually wind the movement. The self winding concept is simply to satisfy the "purist" who what to see a device producing enough to in effect reenergize itself. This does not alter the fact that this is indeed a free energy device and will work continouly as long as the movement is working.
FACT:
A permanent magnet moving in and out of a coil will produce a electric current
FACT:
Each magnet/coil combination will produce lets say 1 unit of power thus 10 will produce x10 and 1765467364 will produce x 176546364 -get the picture. The amount generated is scalable to almost any amouint for any purpose.
FACT:
A pendulum from a mechanical movement can move this magnet in and out of the coil for 744 hours(31 days) See my web site www.geocitiies.com/auction606/index.html
Also these FACTS are indisputible. Connect the dots. This unit will work.
Its so simple!!!
-
Woops- put an extra "i" into geocities. Sorrry again web site is:
www.geocities.com/auction606/index.com
-
I think I was up to late last night-
Web site is :
www.geocities.com/auction606/index.html
-
Bill,
you don?t understand coils and magnets.
If you draw current from your coils you will break the movement
of the pendulum, due to Lentz law ! If you connect too many
coils from which your draw current, the pendulum will come to a stop.
Did you ever try to rewind the clock with a motor connected to
your charged up capacitor ??
I guess you did not yet...
Try it and let us know how much voltage you need on a 10.000 uF capacitor
to rewind your clock ! And then see, how fast you can charge the capacitor to this
voltage.
-
Yes, I'm afraid this isn't going to do anything at all. Shame really, It would have been nice to have an OU device that tells the time aswell!
-
The movement I am using is sufficiently strong to push and pull 4 of the 2" n45 cycl. magnets through the coils. I am going to build the bigger unit right away. The next post will be with videos of the working unit. Lenz law will be fairly easy to counter because of the inertia created by the magnets.
See you all very soon.
Bill
-
Lentz law problem solved.
The large permanent magnet exiting the coil was exhibiting a lot of drag do to Lentz law dynamics.
The drag was enough to stop the pendulum swinging after just a few moments. I solved this
by moving the coil approx 22" from the swinging magnet and let the magnet swing free.
On the other side of the coil I placed another permanent magnet of equal size (I have 12 of these) suspended by a free swinging pendulum.
When the magnet that is being swung by the clock movement begins it causes a like movement in the
magnet hanging from the pendulum. This magnet moves in and out of the coil producing a electric current. Because the magnets are so much larger and stronger the magnet swinging from the clock movement is strong enough to pull and push the other magnet in in and out of the coil Even though the magnet behind the coil is moving slower.
Also in my first tests with the much smaller magnet/coil combination I was only able to generate about 3 mv per hour. With this new array I am generating up to 100 mv per hour
This works out to 2.4 volts per day on with a 31 day movement a total of approx. 74 volts can be stored. This is many times over what will be needed to renergize the system by rewinding the clock movement with a geared dc 12volt motor hence keeping the device working indefinitly.
I have posted new video on my site: www.geocities.com/auction606/index.html.
Geocities only allows a maximum size of 5 meg. this video is about 4.35 meg.
This device will be able to run continuously and totally independent of any external power source as well as being able to generate an excess of usable power.
I have purchased a 1/2 farad capacitor, about 10" high and nic. rechargeable batteries. I will be replacing the small capacitor I am using now with this larger capacitor to store more voltage and have the capability of charging the batteries to be used at will.
This device is working, I will continue to refine and post info and video as it evolves.
I believe I have a working overunity energy producing motor.
Feel free to contact me with any questions.
Bill
-
What uF value does your current capacitor have ?
How many Amperes and voltage does your rewind motor need
for how many seconds to rewind your clock ?
If you don?t list this, we can not calculate if you really can rewind
your device with the generated energy.
Thanks.
-
Capacitor 0.5 Farad, Surge voltage 20 vdc, rated working voltage 16 vdc
Overall Dimension 76 mm x 180 mm.
I am leaning towards my 8 day clock movement. Much eaiser to wind than 31 day. 8 day takes 7-9 seconds to totally rewind. Also since I can now produce around 2 volts/day this times 8 days works well with this large capacitor in terms of capacitor storage.
Going motor hunting tomorrow.
-
I guess what we are all waiting for is to see how much energy is needed to rewind the clock mechanism.
Have you made any calculations or measured what amount of energy will be rquired to do this?
You have mentioned it takes 8 or 9 seconds...... but in 8 or 9 seconds you can use a lot of stored energy.
Kind Regards
Mark
-
Computing the required energy to wind the clock motor has got me scratching my head a little. I think I am just going to have to experiment. I always have the option of using a 31 day movement as this would allow me to store around 75 volts. I am looking at a 12 volt dc motor that is used in rolling car windows. Very very high torque and I'm sure draws a lot of current but there are a lot of motors out there and between them and a gear system I am sure I can come up with a way to rewind the movement. I certainly do not see this as a insurmountable problem.
I'm quite excitied about this I know it's not the "conventional" magnetic motor design but if it meets are the criteria of a free energy device, self running then...
-
Hi Bill,
from your last post it is getting clear, that you never yet tried to rewind the
clock with the generated energy and that your "overunity" claim is just
not based on experiments....but just on speculation only.. which could be
wrong.
Are you sure, that your capacitor is a 500 000 uF type ?
-
Stefen, I have been running a working unit for up to 8 days producing a voltage which is being stored in a capacitor. This is a physical device not a pie in the sky or cad drawing. The device works I will be able to store enough power to rewind the motor. If I was running this on my 31 day movement I would have had a running unit generating electricity for 31 days.
Frankly I see the rewind as a enginering problem only.
The core of the device has been to find a way to generate power, store that power and all of this working in a unique way in such that I do not have to draw down on that stored energy to run the unit. This is the problem that all magnetic motors have, they must generate their own energy immed. to run themselfs.
Remember time is on my side. I have as much as 31 days or 744 hours to store energy.
Yes the capacitor is a 1/2 farad capacitor- very large physically.
None of this is theory , the device is working!
-
Hi Bill,
okay, if you really get to around 75 Volts on the 0.5 Farad cap,
then you have an energy of around 1400 Wattseconds to rewind
the clock.
In 10 seconds you can then use a motor that uses 140 Watts
of power, that means you could use a 12 Volts motor
that draws 11,6 Amperes for the 10 seconds...
But you will also have many losses during these days inside the
0.5 Farad cap, so if you will still reach half of the energy
level inside the cap that would already be quite a lot with all the losses
from stray resistances inside the cap.
What voltage level did you reach until now in the 0.5 Farad cap
after the 8 days ?
-
Great info-Thank you!
Running the device for the last 96 hours (4 days) has generated 8 volts in the capacitor. The capacitor is rated for 20 volts but no more than 12-14 volts should be stored.
The high torque window lift motor runs on 12 volts dc and draws 8-10 amps under a load. I also have a lead on a company back east that sells dc motors exactly for the purpose I am proposing they are a clock parts company. I will call them Fri am to get their specs. I live in Oregon so its to late today.
Again thank you for your help it is greatly appreciated.
-
Remember the stored energy in the cap in
Wattseconds can be calculated as:
E= 0.5 x C x (Voltage)^2. So if it is 10 Volts on the cap we
have 10 x 10 Volts= 100 x 0.5 Farad x 0.5 = 25 Wattseconds.
With a 12 Volts motor you can just draw 2.08 amps for just 1 second !
So still not enough energy to rewind yet and you are only at 8 Volts yet!
At 8 Volts you are just only at 16 Wattseconds energy in the cap
and that will last only 1 second on a 12 Volts motor at 1.3 amps !
Not very much to rewind the clock.
-
Very true BUT I will have approx 16 volts at the end of the 8 days in one capacitor. With a 31 day movement I would have approx 4 times as much in 4 capacitors. This gives me 9-10 seconds of winding time.
I'm also looking at a standard weight driven movement. There are usually 3 weights that decend and run the pendulum over a 8 day period. It would take not much of a high torque
dc motor to rewind up the weights to begin the cycle on a continuous basis.
-
Capacitor charging and discharging is not a linear process. Here is a good site to show the logrithmic relationship of capacitance http://www.kpsec.freeuk.com/capacit.htm scroll about half way down the page. I would suggest not waiting the eight days to rewind the mechanism...just a thought.
Jason P.
-
For those interested:
I have been able to increase the rate of charge in the capacitor from 2 mv/ hour to 3 mv/ minute or 180 mv/ hour. I realize that the capacitor does not charge at a constant rate but this still represents a large increase in the amount of electricity I will be able to store in 8 days.
I also have ordered in a 8 day grandfather clock movement from a company called Klocket. This uses weights instead of a spring/key driven mech. to move the pendulum. The movement comes with three weights. The two outside weights are used for the chime system. Since I don't care about this feature I will be using only the center weight which controls the pendulum.
The center weight weight 6.8 lb so it will take considerably less motor power to rewind that up as opposed to a key winding method.
In other words I see no problem being able to generate enough stored electricity to reenergize the system so that it can run indefinitely
and produce usable power.
Again this motor system will run independent of any external power source, it will produce enough electricity to power, and reenergize itself and produce and excess of electricity.
Because this type of movement is so much stronger than a key drive/spring system I can move my large magnet directly in and out of the coil system again.
Will keep posting as the device evolves.
-
Excellent work Bill, I hope to see a vidieo in the near future
-
maybe you can use this to operate your clock.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_battery
-
Yes, or better use one of Walter Hoffmann?s Saltwater cells !
They last at least 10000 hours !
Maybe this way you can scale up the output of the batteries !
Have a look here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,298.0.html
-
I have received a lot of emails requesting an update on my project. It's always interesting that design changes are inevitable when actual building begins. I have progressed from a charging rate of 3 mv/ hour to 180mv/ hour to now over 60mv/minute or 1800mv/ hour or 1.8 volts/ hour. I can also link a number of these units together to produce much higher levels of capacity. At this level I will be able to charge batteries to do pretty much what ever I want. I have everything in house to go ahead and assamble the unit into a finished product.
Will post videos on my site very soon.
Thank you for your inquires
Bill
-
Sorry my math is off 60mv/ min equates to 3.6 v/hr not 1.8 v/hr of charging capacity.
Bill
-
My site is www.geocities.com/auction606/index.html. This won't really help you as I have made a number of changes. The basic concept of moving the magnets through the coils remains as the primary force in my design. I will post the new videos with the design changes and info on this site as soon as the unit is assembled.
-
Been working straight for the past 5 months, everything is now working will post everything before the end of the month. Finishing up some legal work regarding device.
Time to break our the champagne!!!
Yes I have rewond the clock numerous times!
-
that is great news! lot of good news lately here at overunity.com
keep it open source! and good luck ;)
peace
-
Been working straight for the past 5 months, everything is now working will post everything before the end of the month. Finishing up some legal work regarding device.
Time to break our the champagne!!!
Yes I have rewond the clock numerous times!
Without the use of a battery or some other form of energy input?
Can you post a pic of the current device as it is running?
-
I will be posting a video next week showing the complete working unit. There is no electrical input to the system.The moving pendulum from the clock motor moves the permanent magnets in and out of the coils to produce a emf. When I first started I could only produce 2-3 mv per hour. I can now generate about 8 volts per hour. This represents a 4000% increase in performance. The motor is on for only 12 seconds per month (the length of time to rewind the clock) . The motor is run by a 12 volt battary which exhibits a voltage drop of only about 40 mv. I have been able to recharge the battary numerous times because of the large excess of energy I am creating. As a matter of fact it takes only a fraction of the energy to rechare the battary as I am gnerating
in excess of 5000 volts per month.
I think this is it guys!!!
-
I will be posting a video next week showing the complete working unit. There is no electrical input to the system.The moving pendulum from the clock motor moves the permanent magnets in and out of the coils to produce a emf. When I first started I could only produce 2-3 mv per hour. I can now generate about 8 volts per hour. This represents a 4000% increase in performance. The motor is on for only 12 seconds per month (the length of time to rewind the clock) . The motor is run by a 12 volt battary which exhibits a voltage drop of only about 40 mv. I have been able to recharge the battary numerous times because of the large excess of energy I am creating. As a matter of fact it takes only a fraction of the energy to rechare the battary as I am gnerating
in excess of 5000 volts per month.
I think this is it guys!!!
Hi Bill,
To prove it to yourself, take a charged capacitor, and use it to replace the battery with. Your system should recharge the capacitor to keep the device running. Just take the battery out of the system completely.
Hope to hear good results.
-
Bill,
You can also wave the magnet past a coil rather than in and out.
Pendulum devices that are OU can be traced back to late 1800's. Self winding watch uses a pendulum.
9 hits at the European Patent Office - not all relavent:
http://v3.espacenet.com/results?EC=h02k53%2F00&AB=pendulum&DB=EPODOC&sf=a&CY=ep&PGS=10&ST=advanced&LG=en
Do a search for ltseung888 - He's a Chinese engineer that explained the pendulum/gravity effect rather nicely - posted the data on several sites. This patent appears to be the same thing - use bebelfish to translate:
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=DE19744326&F=0
Congratulations! Have you been able to run a load and still charge yet?
-
Moving the magnetS in an out of the coilS produces a much greater emf than passing it over the coilS. I am using a 12 volt deep cycle battary to run the motor. The uniqueness of this device is that the motor only has to be energized 12 seconds per month to operate the clock pendulum for the entire month. I have a pleantly of juice available from the battary to run external loads and be able to recharge the battary back up to its full capacity.
I have run small dc motors and bulbs and been able to recharge very easily . I will file a provisional patent on Monday 11-13 with updates on the original provisional patent I filed in June of this year.
Next week I will load a video and all data and info of the device.
This motor generates electricity with no electrical input. It is not dependent on any outside source. It is totally a closed system. The device is totally scaleable. I will show that it meets all the requirements of the FIRST REAL
OU system.
-
In responce to Liberty's suggestion of charging a capacitor in place of using a battary please consider the
following. Charging capacitors to run a motor that draws 4.5 amps to turn the clock motor for the 12 seconds it takes to rewind it is very inefficient.
The goal is to produce a device that will power itself and allow also excess energy to be produced to do useful
work.
This device will recharge itself much more efficently by charging the battary that is used to run the motor.
After all if it can do this (and it does) it has met all the criteria for a OU device.
-
Bill
I just recently joined this group and find your device very interesting. How much energy is required to wind the spring compared to the energy created by the device?
Peter
-
The spring can wind in 12 seconds which will then run the clock for 30 days. The motor is a high torque low speed 12 vdc drawing 2.5 amps running free and 4.5 amps running under the load of turning the spring unit.
The unit can generate around .45 volts in 5 minutes. This is run into a series of capacitors. In other words
over a period of 30 days I can store around 5000vdc. A deep cycle battary is then pulsed with approx 20volts
per second from the energy stored in the capacitors. Since the battary only shows a small 40mv voltage drop
(remember it is on only for 12 seconds) it is quite easy to recharge the battary with a fraction of the voltage stored in the capacitor bank. Hence OU. With quite a bit still stored in the capacitors .Video and all data will be posted next week.
-
Thanks Bill. I look forward to seeing the video and data next week.
Peter
-
Thank you for your input as to what constitutes a true magnetic motor. I am now ready to post
Please look at the site I have set up:
www.geocities.com/auction606/index.html
Tim Ventura has just posted an audio interview he has done with me as a feature article.
You can access that audio at his website: www.americanantigravity.com.
Its Thrus evening 10:30PM I will be available until 10:00 am Tomorrow morning (Fri) to answer any questions. I will be out of town fromFri-and back Sunday evening.
This motor works!!
"Coming soon..."
is all i got??
-
In responce to Liberty's suggestion of charging a capacitor in place of using a battary please consider the
following. Charging capacitors to run a motor that draws 4.5 amps to turn the clock motor for the 12 seconds it takes to rewind it is very inefficient.
The goal is to produce a device that will power itself and allow also excess energy to be produced to do useful
work.
This device will recharge itself much more efficently by charging the battary that is used to run the motor.
After all if it can do this (and it does) it has met all the criteria for a OU device.
Hi Bill,
I understand your setup better now. With that kind of current draw, a capacitor would probably not store enough energy to run the rewind function and excess energy would have no place to go for storage. Do you think that your device will charge a second battery and only run off of one of these batteries? This might be a way to split off excess usable power to run a light or something?
-
I could charge a bank of battaries. This device is totally scaleable.
-
You say, Bill: "The unit can generate around .45 volts in 5 minutes".
But to know the power involved, we need to know the amps generated
at the same time.
Paul.
-
Next week when I post I will show all values. I have been able to increase my voltage output from .45 volts/5 min. to about .85 volts in 5 minutes. Again I will detail all values next week. I need to file the provisional patent on Monday. Please bare with me.
-
Hi Bill, well done.
How do you drop the 20 Volts capacitor charge into the battery ? Via a mechanical switch ? If yes, this is the way you can get overunity, as you have the Newman spark gap effect during mechanical switching and dropping ampere pulses via a mechanical contact into a lead acid akkumulator. There are always small sparks involved, which have RF burst with them which recharge the battery quite nicely and overunity. So if you would use transistor technology to drop the charge into the battery, this would not work. It also plays an important role, which contact materials you use. Copper-graphite works quite nicely. Looking forward to your video. Regards, Stefan.
-
Hi Stefan
Yes I will you a mechanical switch. What is really beneficial is that I can use the clock itself to deliver the pulse to the battary. Remember I have second, minute , hour hands to perform any and all types of timing functions that may be needed. At 16-20 volts a very nice spark is created to charge the battary.
-
Hi Bill,
well done.
You can try to "tune" this spark to get more charge.
Try to use different contact material pairs like
copper-graphite
or
magnesium graphite
and this will help alot !
Regards, Stefan.
-
Outstanding-Thank you!
-
Next week when I post I will show all values. I have been able to increase my voltage output from .45 volts/5 min. to about .85 volts in 5 minutes. Again I will detail all values next week. I need to file the provisional patent on Monday. Please bare with me.
Bill you must also provide a messurement of amperes, a well sealed dry pile can generate 10,000 volts for over 200 years but its only at one nano-amp which means it generates much less then even a thousandth of a watt per hour. The average US household uses 2kw of power per hour, so as you can see voltage has little bearing on power without also having a proportionaly high amperage. I am exited to hear more about your experiments on this project, I just hope the data is more elaborated.
Thanks for sharing your information,
~Dingus
-
Ok,I understand. I took a LED ratred at 2.1v with a current draw of 20ma. I charged up one of the capacitors from the device to 2.15 volts. When I connected to the LED I got a light burst.
To use the pulse method to recharge a battary you should pulse it each second. I plan to pluse with 16 volts
which will give me a amp pulse of around 160ma. This should be fine as use a 12vdc battary charger that has two setting 200ma or 600ma.
I have made some significiant strides today in voltage production. I can produce 1 volt/minute or 60volts per hour. Remember I have 28 days to generate electricity!
60 v/hr x 24 hr= 1440 pr day x 28 days= 40320 volts.
If I doubled my pulse voltage to 32 volts which would give me 320ma I would be able to pulse the battary
1260 times (or seconds) which is 21 minutes.
When I connect to by 12 volt charger at 200ma it charges back up in about 4 minutes.
Remember I am experience a voltage drain of only around 50mv under a full load (winding the clock spring).
Two things to consider:
1. The battary "recovers" 20-30mv on its own within 15 minutes.
2. Because of the small drain I could run the battary once a month for a year (or more) you can see how much juice would have to work with over that time and recharge it one a year. Though it is better for the battary to charge it more frequently.
Notice I am using 28 days instead of 30. I do not want to run the clock all the way down. It will be eaiser to regage (rewind) at a specific time rather than at a specific rate.
-
Hi Bill,
what do you mean by
"I can produce 1 volt/minute or 60volts per hour"
?
Is that at a specific capacitor value ?
So if you have for instance 10000 uF as a capacitor,
do you mean, you can charge it up to 1 Volts from zero Volts
in about 1 minute of time with the magnets going into your coils ?
Or do you mean the battery voltage will rise 1 Volts/minute ?
And what do you mean by:
"When I connected to the LED I got a light burst. "
Is that this way, that the LED constantly then gets light bursts,
when the pendulum swings back and forth or did you only connect the
LED to discharge the cap in one big flash ?
-
I will answer all these questions as to exactly how it works with all values of diodes, capacitors, voltage generation how the system works in its entirety on Monday as soon as I file my provisional patent.
At this point in a nut shell capacitors are charged to be able to pulse a battary. The comment about the LED
was to show that it is generating amperage, it was a response to Dingus post.
This little device generates a hell of a lot of "storable" useable voltage.
-
you must load an condensor ,like 1000mf or 10000mf.
to "any voltage" , and than "unload" it over an Resistor to the led.
tat reduce an overamperade flow over the LED tat will only burn for example
at 2,0 to 2,5 volt . At more votage and higher current it will disturbe.
So if you load to tehe capacitor to 12 Volt and unload over 500-ohm Resistor,
that will the Led light take 20mA if the Condensor is 12Volt load , abd the currend go down (over time) as the Voltage drops up to 2 Volts.
This way you can also SAY : My Invention produce xxx Mittiwats per hour.
If you find more technical Informations, you can use "insted the resistor" an constant current source (made from to transistors an some resistors). Also LED with buildin
constant current souces (as 10mA) are avaiable on the marked. (All Voltages from 5 to 25
Volts can directly connected to this LEDs)
Pese
-
Just passing on some of my prior work in a similar field of mechanics and clock like power distribution.
This idea for rewinding without any electrical input, I hope this gives you new ideas about energy.
Enjoy! ;)
-
This is interesting but I observe the following:
Its really big and massive. Also it needs a constant source of energy (in this case water) running at a constant rate. What if you are running no water at the time, based on this design nothing would happen. Also Not a closed loop system and it requires an external input from a non regulated source. A standard hydroelectic system with running water from a river or dam is an example.Fun to look at though, as always thank you for the input. This is a great community!
My motor will run 24 hours per day. It does not need any external input, it is a totally closed loop system.It can generate its own workable power and store additional. Its OU!!
I wanted to post today but I need to finish up some last minute additions to the unit. I will post tommorow
morning, Tues am. pacific standard time.
-
This is interesting but I observe the following:
Its really big and massive. Also it needs a constant source of energy (in this case water) running at a constant rate. What if you are running no water at the time, based on this design nothing would happen. Also Not a closed loop system and it requires an external input from a non regulated source. A standard hydroelectic system with running water from a river or dam is an example.Fun to look at though, as always thank you for the input. This is a great community!
My motor will run 24 hours per day. It does not need any external input, it is a totally closed loop system.It can generate its own workable power and store additional. Its OU!!
I wanted to post today but I need to finish up some last minute additions to the unit. I will post tommorow
morning, Tues am. pacific standard time.
Well put, but my point was just like your discribed set up it uses weights to sustain output over 1-28 days depending on how you gear it. The water required to reset it daily or monthly is less then the waste deposited by a household daily. Its just a way of extracting energy from a waste process that already is occuring. I look foward to your results.
-
Ok here it is,
This is the first phase of the design
Web site address is a bit long and must be entered exactly as follows, no www
http://geocities.com/auction606/index.html
Text except for last page is copy is the provisional patent. Any questions feel free to contact me direct.
Bill Mehess
503-366-9135
Oregon USA
The time I am posting this is 12:56 Pacific Standard time
-
Excellent Bill.
Makes you wonder if you could use the same principle regards using the swinging magnets to clear the sticky point on a magnetic spiral wheel as in my experiments I am down to only moving the magnet back a few mm's to get past the sticky point.
You would have to calculate the correct size of the wheel to match the swing and the RPM's would remain the same, but I wonder if the torque of having the wheel would produce more power than exciting the coils.
Fantastic idea though and well done!
Regards
Sean.
-
V/Hours ;D
-
Hi Bill, well done.
A few questions:
Why do you charge each capacitor independently ?
Do you then put all in series and dump them across the battery ?
You better could use Shottky diodes, which can conduct better and have not such a high resistance as Germanium diodes.
Also better use alufoil capacitors. Electrolyte capacitors have too many losses.
Do you dump the charge only once per hour into the battery ?
-
Hi Stefan
Each capacitor is charged indiv. as the circuit is closed by the lead contacting the copper strips. Remember I have about 600 mv to work with each charge so I do not need to charge more than one at a time. The key word here is time
at 600mv per minute in 30 days I can produce a lot of juice. About 24kv/ month.
When I have a sufficient amount stored I would then pulse them into the battery.
This germanium diode is a special diode with only a .2 voltage forward drop I tried the other kind and the
germanium gave me a better performance
They are alu. cap. they have a voltage drop or leakage of about 30-40 mv over a 24 hour period. Since I would be paulsing the battery more frequently than that the caps I am using are doing the job
My big surprise was the amprage available I was hopeing for 20-30ma pr cap. in a paulse. I am getting
between 300-600 ma per paulse.
In terms of watt if I use say 20 caps at 600 mv each which is 12 volts and at a medium of say 450 ma
per cap at 20 caps which is 9 amps I can make the battery stand up and dance.
As a point of interest my voltage drop is so low on the battery (remember it only runs for 12 sec./month)
that when I put a standard 12 volt 600 ma battery charger on it the battery recharges in under 10 sec.
The battery at 12 volts and drawing 4.5 amps under the load of rewinding the mainspring draws around 50 watts.
I have also done this experiment 20-30 times running the battery with the load and then recharging with my 12 v.600 ma charger and the battery does excellent.
Frankly I could turn on the motor once a month and run this device for an entire year before I would have to
recharge. better for the battery to charge up more frequently though. All closed system NOTHING IN.
-
All closed system NOTHING IN.
Except the huge battery that starts off containing enough power to run the system for a year...
-
Ok
If I run the system for a year and at the end of that year the battery has noT degenerated and the system has
also run x number of other loads.
Or at the end of a year the battery has not degenerated AND there are more batteries setting next to it fully charged...
WHAT DO WE CALL THIS?
-
Bill,
why don?t you charge up one bigger capacitor to about 20 Volts ?
Why are you using several capacitors ?
Is there any reason for this ?
It seems, with the power you generate at the swinging pendulum
going into the coils you could just power an LED maybe constantly
over the time all the time,
if you would not use a battery.
So in this moment the energy output seems to be pretty low...
Did I understand it correctly that you only pulse the battery in this moment
about every 1 hour?
If yes, this is way too low and thus you could NOT connect a for instance 10 Watt
load to the battery to have a real load on it and expect that the battery will
not be drained after a few days..
So in this moment you are generating maybe only a few milliwatts
of power, but if you wil take more power out of the battery by running a real load
all the time, the battery will be discharged, before you can rewind the clock
after 30 days..
Maybe you can scale it up by using this new bycicle generator that
Lee Bell tried in his wind mill ( The one, where there is a magnet in
a small plstic housing bouncing back and forth and generating induction,
when an outer magnet is passed by.)
So better try your experiment with a supercapacitor instead of a battery,
so you can be sure, that you really produce overunity with it.
Maybe you can speed the swinging pendulum up in speed,
so it runs faster and you can see the results faster than to wait for
one whole month !
Regards, Stefan.
-
Bill,
why don?t you charge up one bigger capacitor to about 20 Volts ?
Why are you using several capacitors ?
Is there any reason for this ?
well this is not adressed to me, but unlike battery capacitor when charging actually is rising it's "resistance" to a new charge, so to
charge it well (to much higher voltage (20V)) source has to rise its voltage to overcome that resistance (that would make it inefficient to charge it to 20V). Of course we all now that but sometimes it slips...
wiz
-
I would have to agree, the recovered wattage is not enough.
If you do have a clock weight reseting motor now:
-Drain the battery with a light bulb as load over night. (12+ hours)
-Manually reset the clock for a full 28 day cycle by hand. (synch time)
-Wait 27 days... See if the load affects clock accuracy.
-Show us your findings on the 29th day.
(maybe a video of the event)
Have you considered using a series of induction coils in a arch along the pendulums path?
If you turn the magnet 90 degrees, it will align it with each coil in the arch thus more mW/T.
Just an idea I had...
-
Well like I said this is phase one of the evolution of the device.
First I would love to be able to use one large capacitor and charge it to 20 volts instead of a group of capacitors to achieve the same results.
The nature of charging capacitors is that they will not charge more than what is going into them. My device generates around 1000mv in about 1.5 minutes. The capacitor will charge up very quickly to about 500-600mv and then begin to flaten out within 1 minute. To charge the capacitor to 20 volts would mean I would need probably around a 30 volt input.
Now that is not impossible it would simply require :
1. Larger Magnets
2. More Magnets
3. Larger Coils
4. Faster swing time
At this point I am simply trying to show that it is possible to recharge the battery over a certain period of time
to keep the system running indefinitely .Any additional power I generate over the amount to bring the battery back up to a full charge could be used in a different manner.
If you know how I can charge up a "super capacitor" to a voltage higher than its input voltage. PLEASE let me know. I admit to a self taught knowledge of all of this.
-
Some other thoughts
Please do not get to caught up in the fact that the device is only generating 500-600mv this device is completely scaleable Again its only a function of magnets, coils, speed and clock motor size. I could have a main spring built for me that could swing 20 lb magnets if I wanted to. The 2 magnets I am using now weight 59 gr. each.What if I was produce 20 volts or 200 volts instead of 500 mv. At his time I am trying to show a workable concept.
The concept scale up could produce what ever you would want. Of course it would take more power to rewind it
but so what.
In one 28 day period there are 2,419,200 seconds the motor has to run for 12 seconds out of that time to regage the system. But during entire this time electricity is being produced and stored.
Thats what makes this comcept so unique, every other system requires 100% power input 100 of the time to keep it running and that has been there down fall.
There is no combination of only permanent magnets that will ever work on a continious basis to produce a
function motor- its a dead end (I expect to hear a lot of flac on this).
-
Bill, well, that you can charge your caps only to a low voltage is the case as with the voltage on a cap the stored energy goes with a square factor:
E=0.5*C *V^2
Well, if you put several caps in series, then the capacitance also will be lower and thus less energy...
Hmm, the only solution I see in this moment is to really scale it up and have a big mass swinging with very big magnets and also with coils with much more windings and like Dingus has drawn in his animation and being able to charge up one capacitor to at least about 15 to 20 Volts easily and then dump at least every 10 seconds such a charge via a copper-graphite switch into the battery.
It would be better, if you could do it already after each swing, so one charge drop about every second...!
So this means:
Bigger is much better!
-
Hi Bill, you must design your coils and magnets this way, that you would induce into a coil already around 100 to 200 Volts, when the magnet swings by...
Then it is easy to charge up just one cap to only 15 to 20 Volts with a few swings...
So try to wind much bigger coils with bigger sized wire and much more windings.
Have a look at the Newman material you can find over here in the forum.
Many thanks and looking forward to, when you can drop the charge every 2 seconds.
You already have a nice rewind setup, now you only have to scale up the pendulum unit.
Regards, Stefan.
-
Well, if this unit dos not drag down the spring in the clock, so that it really runs for a month and can generate at least 1 Watt constantly, then just forget the rewinding mechanism and just build it only with capacitors and show it running a 1 Watt high power LED light constantly for one month without any battery involved !
Then I would say I am happy to rewind the clock myself once a month, if I can just have a constant 1 Watt output already from it.
So Bill, better go into this direction as with the inclusion of the battery not many people will trust you it to be a real OU device. Thanks.
-
Sounds interesting I will try that.
Also I'm not really sure how important this whole over unity thing is. At this point I may go ahead and scale up to produce enough to keep a bank of batterys charged up. Inverters would provide ac power. The same kind of hook up in a solar home but without the drawbacks.This could actually be a whole house system.
Imagine in your basement or garage you had a system working 24 hours per day totally closed loop.
I had a friend of mine who used to sell wind generators actually get out of the business because of the after market problems, also solar is very limited as well as hydro electric.Just a thought but the more I think of it the more it like the idea.
-
Bill if you scale it up, so it will generate at least 10 Watts constantly, I would be happy to rewind myself the clock manually each few hours per day. So with 10 Watts constant output you can already charge up quite nicely a battery or supercapacitor bank for later usage, if you need more power... So better go this direction and drop the selfwinding effort. One can do this easily oneself 2 or three times a day...Thanks.
-
Yes Bill, just try to keep a battery bank charged up all the time. Then with inverters you can generate the needed 120 or 230 Volts AC for each household.
And remember to drop the charges of the caps via graphite-copper contacts, that will give more juice back to the batteries.
And build the pendulum really big, maybe 3 Meters long thread and at least a 100 Kg weight with all the magnets inlusive and fix the clock with must have a big spring to your basement ceiling. This way you could generate power 24/7 all day and night long !
-
Hi Bill, if you directly connect a white LED to each coil, can you already light it up, when the magnet swings in with your current setup ?
Maybe just rectify the output of your current device and show a video, where the LED shines brightly all the time.
Then I am happy to rewind the clock once a month, if I can have such a "perpetual" light for one month. Could be well sold as a table top toy lamp !
-
And build the pendulum really big, maybe 3 Meters long thread and at least a 100 Kg weight with all the magnets
The longer the pendulum, the longer each swing takes.
http://www.abbeyclock.com/Pendulum.html
-
Yes it takes longer, but you also can stack besides it more coils, so you have more charge pulses. You have of course make sure, that the generated current with its Lenz law back drag effect will not slow down your pendulum motion too much, so loose coupling ala new bike generator is much suggested..
-
Nothing can be coupled to the pendulum the slightest tention will cause it to stop. yes the longer the pendulum and the heaver it is the slower it swings. The answer is to have just the right combination of magnets to achieve the optimium results. I can connect a LED to the system and as the magnets swing in and out of the coils
gets a continous paulse of light. This does not impress me that much. My interest is to be able to charge up a battery (s) over the long time period to do something useful.
My numbers tell me that I can still have enough juice stored in the battery(s) to do what I want.
Obviously the best thing is to be able to generate enough of a emf , around 15volts+ to charge the battery
directly from the coils. This has always been the goal. This simply requires that the system be ramped up.
Magnets moving in and out of a coil give me a pulsed voltage.
This is perfect:
1. It allows me to paulse charge the battery
2. Gives me a stable platform from which to draw from.
The goal here is to be able to charge up multiple batteries (remember that 28 days looms large) and have
a real stable, closed loop power system.
THIS WOULD BE TRUELY AWESOME!!!!!
-
Nothing can be coupled to the pendulum the slightest tention will cause it to stop. yes the longer the pendulum and the heaver it is the slower it swings.
My interest is to be able to charge up a battery (s) over the long time period to do something useful.
Actually weight has little or no effect on pendulum physics, but as you stated the EMF drag will slow it and inhibit its swing distance. Also I must agree with Stefan again, the battery will only provide skeptics with disbelief. Have you considered my experiment???
-Drain the battery with a lamp as load overnight (12+ hours)
-Manually reset system
-run for 1 month cycle with no loads
-see if the automated motor will fully reset system. (this is unity)
good luck,
~Dingus
-
How would this prove overunity?
First if I totally drain the battery it will most likely wreck it. So lets say I take it down 50% to 6 volts. During the month I charge it back up to 11-12 volts by paulseing daily once I have enough juice stored in the caps do do so efficiently. At the end of the month I run the clock and rewind so it starts again.
This is what I have been proposing all along. The only difference is that why do I have to run the clock down so It can set for a month and not do anything.
Possibly I'm not getting what you mean. Your input has been very helpful so far but I guess I don't quite
understand this suggestion.
-
I didn't mean run the clcok down I meant run the battery down
-
Hi Bill the problem what you face is, that your system as it is now only generates maybe constantly about 10 to 20 milliWatts only. So you must wait a long time, until you can generate enough juice to fully upcharge the battery again. So when the battery will power a 100 Watts bulb then the battery will drain down quickly and the 10 MilliWatts from the pendulum will not reach out to recharge the battery.. So better try first to see, if you can make the output from the coils much bigger...
-
Stepan
When I run the motor the voltage drop is around 100 mv for the 12 seconds that it runs.
It would take approx 200 caps charged to 500 millivolts each pulsing at 1 pr second (200 seconds) to recharge the battery. Charging 200 caps to 500 millvolts each would take about 1.50 minutes per cap or a total of
300 minutes this is 5 hours out of the 28 days that must be devoted to charging the battery.
The process of charging the battery to keep the system operating continously uses only a small percentage of the total amount of energy generated.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt-hour ;D
-
How would this prove overunity?
The weight falling for a month would generate more power then that required to lift it in 10 seconds...
Hence... Overunity!
First if I totally drain the battery it will most likely wreck it. So lets say I take it down 50% to 6 volts. During the month I charge it back up to 11-12 volts by paulseing daily once I have enough juice stored in the caps do do so efficiently.
Use a deep cycle 12v or rechargable battery pile, it will recharge and wont be "wrecked". Also the important thing is not the voltage its the current... if the battery can no longer light a bulb its dead and cant contribute any energy to the equation and thats really important here.
At the end of the month I run the clock and rewind so it starts again.
You cant touch the weights once it starts dropping, if you need to push a button or something thats ok but you cant introduce any energy.
This is what I have been proposing all along. The only difference is that why do I have to run the clock down so It can set for a month and not do anything.
Possibly I'm not getting what you mean. Your input has been very helpful so far but I guess I don't quite
understand this suggestion.
I dont know what you mean either...
LOL
~Dingus
-
Here, this might help your calculations:
-Voltage represents e-field generated along a conductor. (like magnetism but NOT!)
Think of voltage as the hill, the higher the voltage the taller the hill.
-Amperage represents the ammount of electrons passing a point on a conductor per second.
Think of amperage as stones to roll down your voltage hill. The more stones you roll per second the
more work you can do. The work is done with the momentum added by rolling down the voltage hill.
Interesting fact: amps are actually coulumbs, and a coulumb is
6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons per second.
-Wattage is volts*amp thats it... (W=A*V)
I really do hope this was helpful and not patronizing...
Sorry in advance if it was.
~Dingus
-
Bill, let me put it into easy words:
In this current state of mode you might have overunity, but you can not do much useful work with it.
You can only let it run for months but you can not connect an additional load, otherwise your battery will run down.
So better first try to upscale the power output from the pendulum, so you can at least drive a 10 Watts load constantly with it.
Regards, Stefan.
-
Bill,
A method of using a pulsed force and a pendulum to generate electricity was posted on several sites a few months ago by Lawrence Tseung of China. He explained the phenomenon in detail and provided the theory and math to support it.
In short, you can create OU from a pendulum, a magnet, a couple of coils, and a bat or cap.
See attached:
-
The goal in the first phase of this project is to simply show that it would be possible to "rewind" the device
and keep it going continously from its own power.Also I am not using the weight. The clock wind up has a sproket connected past an idler directly to the motor. Of course the next step is to construct a larger unit that will by bypass the capacitor storeage concept all together and charge the battery direct. Even with the small permanent magnets I am using I am getting a
nice 400-600 ma pulse on each swing.
A larger unit producing 15-16 volts at a decent amperage and then run thru a diode to get a forward plus voltage would keep a bank of batteries full charged. Connect these batteries thru a inverter and you have a
completely closed whole house system.
I have sufficient resources to build this system and I am going to do so.
In my building of the unit I have solved numerous problems in its design, there are so many little things that have to be working just right to get the desired results.
The journey continues
-
I will be out of town and back on Monday. Have enjoyed the bantering back and forth with your emials. Will answer any new ones posted on Monday.
-
Good morning group!
Its always interesting how projects seem to go thru a evolutionary process. I have decided to run the motor totally from capacitors instead of using the battery.
This will I feel move the device into a true over unity status.
To accomplish this I need to do the following:
The clock takes 12 seconds to completely rewind which will then allow it to run the system for up to 30 days.
I will rewind the clock in approx. 6 second shots instead of 12 seconds for the following reason.
Using the equation e=.5(c)(v)(v)
c= capacitance
v=voltage
I will be using 500 ea 4700uf cap.rated at 35 v. with an input voltage of 1 volt that is generated from the device.
Plugging in the numbers:
e=.5(.004700)(500)(500)
e=.00235 x 250,000
e= 587
I will be winding two clocks with the motor which draws 7.5 amps at 12 volts for a total of 90 watts.
90/587 gives me 6.5 seconds of run time. This in effect "rewinds" the unit to run up to another 14-15 days. I can generate the 500 volts needed in approx. 100 hours.
I can thus power the unit from the caps and still have excess power.
No batteries, totally self contained, closed loop system, with extra power generated.
Is this not overunity?
I am ordering in the 500 caps today and figure it will most likely take about a week to ten days to put it all together
I wish all a happy thanksgiving!
-
Bill, if you put the fivehundread caps in series to get 500 Volts total, you only have a capacity of 4700 uF / 500, so your equation result is wrong. you have a factor 500 less energy available....
-
Captain if I giver any more power she's gonna Blowwww! :o
More power Bill we need more power.
-
Opps!!
Stepan was right. I have a lot of juice being generated over a 28 day period I will figure out some way to charge a capacitor(s) to run the motor.
-
Opps!!
Stepan was right. I have a lot of juice being generated over a 28 day period I will figure out some way to charge a capacitor(s) to run the motor.
I'm quite pleased to see your plan to remove the battery from the equation. The outcome of your next experiment will truely show us all if your device is indeed over unity. Thanks for sharing your plans and information.
Good luck,
~Dingus
-
Hi Bill,
better first try to scale the weight and the magnets and the coils
up, so you can light constantly a 1 Watts LED non flickering...
Then I am happy to rewind manually the clock each day twice and
use this to charge up a battery.Maybe you can modify the spring in the
clock for more power output ?
Just try to show how much INSTANT always usable power you can generate at maximum
with it...
This would be great.
Many thanks.
-
Bill checkout this magnet coil magnet
combination.
http://www.freelights.co.uk/how.html
you could use this easily with several coils along the swinging
path and generate a lot of energy without breaking the motion
of the pendulum.
it might even give the pendulum some additional mechanical pushes...
-
I did try something very similar to this at one time. The "drag force" as they call it is sufficint enough to stop the pendulum.
Here is what I am going to do.
I will charge up with my system 100 ea to one volt 1000uf caps. I will then dump that to a 1f 50 volt cap.
repeatley until I have 25 volts in the large 1f cap, at that point I can generate around 8 seconds of "wind time".
I have tried this with some smaller 1f 5.5 volt caps I have with a smaller motor and it works really well.
If this works then I have the first REAL overunity self closed loop system.
This 1f 50 volt cap is quite large in size and not readly available but I have found a source and will order it in Fri. morning.
-
If the system requires 12 seconds of wattage to rewind, then storing 8 seconds of wattage means the system is only 66% efficent. Sorry but thats the deal, and that means 8 seconds would not be overunity. :-\
-
No No No,you don't understand. I can produce that 8 seconds of "wind time"in around 4 days. Remember I have 28 days to work with.
In 28 days I can produce much more than what I need to keep the device running continously.
Also even if I chose to rewind the clock for 8 second intervals this would in itself run the device for 66% of 28 days or around 17 days.I have pleanty of power!!
-
I hope your calculations are correct and I cant wait to see hear the conclution of your experiment. I have always thought the pendulum could hold a significant role in OU technologies. Good luck in your experiments and please update us if you find you can gather enough power to fully rewind the clock with only one week of weight fall time. That would really be rather conclusive if no battery was used in the experiment.
Good luck to you,
~Dingus
-
Good morning Bill:
I been following your thread here. Very interesting. Since this is a site for sharing and helping, maybe I could give you a hand when you get ready to scale your machine up. I've got a small smelter that will melt 20 lbs. of aluminum, ready to pour in a couple of hrs. if that would help ya out. Hell. I would even loan it to ya. Also have a small lathe. 12 inch swing, 36 inch centers and would machine parts for ya if it wasn't much more difficult than the Griggs hydrosonic device that is in the News section of this site. (I posted pictures)
Cost for this would be the "Tom Peterson" price. I'm sure you've been in the Portland area long enuf to know who he is. His moto was "Free is a very good price"
I don't live very far from ya. I been running dozer in Manning, Just west of Banks.
If ya PM me I'll send ya Name, Address, Ph# I believe your machine will work with or without a battery, and good luck with your project.
Dave
A guy has to have fun with this stuff or it'll drive him crazy. lol ;D
-
As of 7:03pm Mon Nov 27 I have my motor able to rewind itself by the energy totally derived from a series of 1 farad capacitors
There are no batteries!!!!
This represents the FIRST real veriable no BS over unity system.
I will post videos by end of week.
Bill
-
To verify overunity I need to ask some quick questions:
How long did the system run to build the full rewind charge?
From what height was the weight lifted from?
The device is only truely overunity if the energy was gathered in less than 28 days and the weight was lifted from its lowest point to its highest point (full 28th day fall point to intial drop point).
Thanks for the update and I really do hope you've got something!
~Dingus
-
To answer your questions Dingus
It took 82 hours to generate enough to rewind the clock motor.
The device does not use a weight ,I have the motor connected directly to the clock mainspring via a drive chain.
See the web site:http:/geocities.com/auction606/index.html.
When I post the new videos the battery will be gone. The system is now completely self contained using only capacitors.
I have a lot of work to do to reassemble the device its all over my workshop. As soon as its done I will repost all videos. There is a number of people who are on this site that live within my immediate area. I am going to invite them over and have then evaluate the system. It does what I say it will do!
-
Hmmmm...
Since its a winding spring and not a weight I have to change the question slightly. When you rewound the spring was the sping completely empty of kinetic energy? Or was the sping only partially unwound? How do you calculate if the spring is indeed fully rewound?
I have to ask because lets say the spring was fully wound up (100turns) and then unwound 20 turns out of the 100 turns and then the sytem self rewound 19.9 turns its not overunity.
Now on the other hand if the clock unwinds 20 turns to gather power and you allow the system to then fully unwind and the power from those 20 winds is enough to fully rewind the 100 turn system then you've got something.
I hoep that made sense... But basically I just need to ensure your tests and experiments are accurate and fool proof to retort. Because if your system curently winds the only as far as it unwinds you may be losing a tiny ammount of energy, but if it winds further then it unwinds then you absolutely have overunity.
Thanks for keeping us in the loop.
Good job thus far and good luck,
~Dingus
-
To Dingus
To rewind the spring from totally unwound to completely wound takes 15 complete turns of a key to the mainspring.
Now to completely rewind from a totally unwound to a wound position takes the motor approx. 13 seconds. But it is not necessary, or desirable to let the mainspring wind all the way down which remember takes 28 days. I only have to rewind the spring back up say for 5-6 seconds which will keep the system going indefinitly. This 5-6 second represent up to 14 days of run time.Remember the uniquness of this device is that I have 28 days worth of power being generated at the rate of 600mv/minutes.
I ownly need a fraction of that to rewind the unit to keep it going indefinitly.
In that 28 day period I could complete rewind the system many times, but I own have to do it once.
Also the rewinding is very linear. One turn of the key 360 degress is
approx 1.8 days or 46 hours. this remains constant throughout the 28 day process or the clock would not be able to keep correct time. Of course I am not intrested in correct time. I am hence using just a small percentage of the total of 672 hours of total run time (24hr per day times 28 days) that is available to me. Being able to generate 600 mv per minute and running 24 hours per day you can see the amount of energy available to me.
Every other magnet motor requires constant input to keep the system running. And this is their downfall. There is no combination of totally permanent magnets that will ever produce a magnetic motor. It must be a hybred system. I need only to "pulse" the system to keep it running.
Think of a bicycle wheel spinning and then every once in a while you spin it with your hand to keep it going.
-
You came very close to answering my question...
If 15 turns at the key will fully load the sping, how many turns were lost to charging the system and how many turns was it rewound?
If the two numbers are equall you need to retest by making the system rewind more turns then it was given. The length of time makes no difference to me... The only important thing to test is the fact that for every 1 turn of unwind you must get back more then 1 turn in rewind.
-
It does not make any difference if it takes 15 turns to rewind the system and I can produce say 4 turns on demand. Remember I have 28 days to produce 4 turns many many times. I will never let the device run down more than half way anyway. So durning that 14 day period I own need to "rewind" twice. I could rewind 3-4 times durning that same 14 day period.
Pay no attention to the small capacitor bank you see in the video it is going to be changed tremendously.
When I post I will explain in detail how the capacitors charges up
and runs the motor.
The core of the system is two 1.2 f 20volt huge capacitors. Each one is 10"tall 3" in diameter. Manuf. is Pyle model #PLCAPE12.
They are "filled up" by a series of 4700mf 35 volt electrolytic capacitors that are being charged directly from the swinging magnets, All detail will be available and completely open.
This is the real thing!
-
It does not make any difference if it takes 15 turns to rewind the system and I can produce say 4 turns on demand. Remember I have 28 days to produce 4 turns many many times.
It does make a difference, the instance where it would the most
difference would be if your device used 4 turns to rewind 4 turns
then it would not be overunity... just unity or possibly 99.99%.
So the question reamins how many turns did the system unwind to
gather power and how many turns did the gathered power rewind?
If the values are equal I would like to suggest an expirement:
Discharge the caps so they are empty, and wind the key 7.5 turns.
You can know for sure that your system is overunity as soon as it
can rewind the spring 8 turns or more. Even better would be if you could fully rewind the clock by starting it at 7.5 turns or less.
If your device can do that... :o
I hope my point makes sense.
Thanks for keeping us all updated,
~Dingus
-
Dingus my friend your just not getting it. One last time- the clock when fully wound will run for actually 30 days straight. I have only said 28 to have a safety margin. So lets stick with 28 days.
During that time I can produce enough electricity to rewind the system MULTIPLE TIMES to keep it running continously.
A closed loop system re-engerizing itself over and over and over
without ANY external input. Totally closed loop.
The clock only runs down about 1/2 turn per 24hr. Or 2 turns in 96 hours/4 days. In that four day period I can produce enough juice to
turn the clock ( and keep the system running) 4 times.Twice what I need! Remember the clock is running down at a linear rate.
-
Understood Bill,
Thanks for your patientce, replies, and updates. I hope to read some more conclusive data during your next tests. Good work!!!
Thanks again,
~Dingus
-
hello bill this is jose, following your invention.
I have been doing the same as you are doing for a while. I just have not posted annything yet but here it is a description of what I'm doing...
instead of rewinding the clock I am using a smaller system that uses guess what? 1 small aa battery that runs out in about 2 or 3 years.
this is what I a doing...
since it is a smaller system, for shure I am getting a lot less power that the 1 your getting but still I am able to get1.3 volts in about 1 minute or so.
this is what I did...
I used 1 brand new batt.1.5 v and I connected a small motor to it.
The motor ran for about 10 minutes at about 1,000 rpm. it is a very small motor.
and then I charge some caps with the system(1 pendulum only and 1 coil and magnet from 1 of those hand shake flashlights).for about 1 minute up to 1.4 v.
and I connect the same motor to the caps and the motor makes only 1 spin .if you do the math...
so I believe in yous system...keep it up
sincerelly.
Jose.
-
Hi Bill,
Good work.
Can you be sure that there are not external transmitters or transformers nearby that could charge the system through the diodes you are using?
Its just that a very similar experiment on this forum:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1720.0/topicseen.html
used this principle to charge up a capacitor to drive a pulsed coil to power the wheel.
It should be possible to work out the power generated if you know the capacitance and the voltage rise per minute.
I will try and dig out the equation for you.
I was thinking of ways that you could improve this experiment by getting the magnet to cut the windings with a stronger flux density.
I am thinking about a rotating disk(s) with two sets of neodymium magnets either side of a fixed coil cutting in from the perimeter.
The coil could be wound in a trapezoidal shape with each set of magnets cutting each leg, north-south for the first leg and south-north for the second.
Regards
Rob
-
No transformers near by. The emf is generated strickly by the magnets moving in and out of the coils. Back emf is very very critical. I was having a lot of problems with that but I have solved that problem but it cost me a reduction in voltage produce down to 140 mv/min. This is still pleanty to run the system as at that voltage I can completely rewind in 5 days. Remember I have up to 30 days.
The 1.2 farad large cap with digital readout is incrediable it gives me the power I need to run the motor. The 1.2 farad cap itself is being charged up by a large bank of 4700 uf 50 volt caps.
I think the equation you are refering to is e=.5(c)(v)(v)
This will give you the energy produced. Divide that by the total
wattage used by the motor under the load of turning the mainspring and you have the number of seconds the motor will run.
I will be rewinding the clock spring at 6 second intervals. I will do this only twice in the first 5 days. Remember this will then power the unit for another 25 days. Rember it takes only 12 seconds per month or "motor time" to keep the device running continously.
Again no external imput, completely closed loop!!!!
-
hey Bill,
check this out! it's a TWO-STAGE MECHANICAL OSCILLATOR that i think will work well with your system! :)
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/OscilacijeEng.html
44.MB size: http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Video/Veljko_Milkovic_(video-1)_full_video_presentation.wmv
-
Hi Bill,
So you have a closed loop system, that is fantastic!
Couple of questions for you:
What kind of magnets are you using?
So you are using the 1.2F capacitor to drive the winding motor with, no batteries?
Do you start of with a totally discharged capacitors in the whole circuit?
Where do you get hold of a pendulum clock mechanism?
Regards
Rob
-
Just go home its 7:05 pm here in Oregon USA.
Yes the device runs soley on caps. No batteries anywhere!
The magnets are n40 cylinderical in shape each one is a n-40 neo.
About 5/8" diameter by a little over an inch long. Look at video and you will see them.
Clock mech. comes from a company called Merritts there web site is www.merritts.com they are the only company providing a 30 day wind up movement. Most companies have only a 8 day movement.
The 30 day movements are made in Korea. Cost is about $50.00.
The motor is run of the 1.2 f large can caps. The 1.2 f cap. itself is pulsed from a bank of 4700 mf caps. There is more to it than this I will be showing all when I finish the final assembly and post.
I devote full time to this project and it will most likely take me another week to assemble it back together to make it presentable. 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!
I have not changed the old video so it still shows a batterry and a small bank of caps. The battery is now gone and the large bank of caps feeding the large 1.2 f. cap is not yet shown in this video.
The basic idea is still there if you wish to see the clock mech, motor, linkage and magnets swinging through the coils.
www.http://geocities.com/auction606/index.html
-
Sorry forgot to answer one question. Yes the caps are totally discharged when the system begins to function. They begin to charge up immed. The beauty here is that I have up to 30 days
to charge before I need to tap it to run the motor. I will actually be running the motor in short 2-3 second bursts. There is over 700 hours in 30 days I will be using but a fraction of that to run the motor, this system is highly efficient.
-
Hi Bill,
Thankyou for all the info, like MrAmos said, it makes a refreshing change to see someone like yourself helping out with all the details of your experiment.
I have had a look on the website you mentioned, I think the clock movement you refered to was a P103 - 31 Day Korean Movt (kitchen)?
I am looking for somewhere in the UK that sells them but as of yet I can only find a quartz pendulum movement.
So that leads me on to another idea, what about using a high torque quartz movement and remove the need for the windup motor.
With the clock running off a capacitor charged by the pendulum movement.
The movement is a lot cheaper and easier to measure the power requirement and the power generated by the pendulum.
I have never really played around with clocks before but there does seem to be a lot of places that can sell you the parts to build a complete clock.
The question is, is a mechanical movement more efficient that a quartz movement?
Regards
Rob
-
I think the problem with the quartz movement is that it requres a battery, or a steady flow of voltage to run it right from the start and continously throughout the running of the system.
Remember the beauty of the device I am showing is that the motor only need to run up to 12 seconds per month to keep it going continously.
-
@billmehess
Take only Goldbonded-Germ-diodes 1N270 or 277
Not signal diodes as 1N34 1N60 that have higher Vf.
Also Collector-base junction from Germanium transistor can used.
!
Pese
-
Pese I'm not going to explain this system again I guess you just don't get it. The term "free energy" is meaningless.
One last time this is a closed loop system that functions without any external energy being applied. Please give me even one other device
that you know of that has been built that will do this.
-
Hi Bill,
I built a magnet motor yesterday using a 0.5Kg spool of wire and some ceramic magnets.
I can just get it to rotate against the earths magnetic field with just 5uW,
(0.000005 watts). I have to manually apply power to the coil to get it to rotate.
This could be replaced by two thin wires shorting on a small commutator on the hub.
This was in the hope of repeating your idea but with a rotating magnet.
The thing is that I do not see how I can get any more out than what I put in.
If I short the coil out you can actually see the drag it causes on the rotor and it slows down very quickly.
You must see something similar where the pendulum is dragging slightly as it enters/exits the coil because you are loading the coil with capacitors which act as a resistance until they reach the same potential as the coil's peak voltage.
I don't know how you have managed what you have but I take my hat off to you, what you have achieved is brilliant.
(http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m25/kingrs/DSCN4775.jpg)
Regards
Rob
-
I encounterd the same problem with the pendulum stopping when it left the coil I solved the problem and when I post I will tell how I did that.
I am in the process of reassembling the device. Right now my work shop looks like something out of Fankensteins laboratory.
I want to present a professional looking device that will be clear in its function and leave no doubt that it works. I have a large number of 4700mf cap being shipped to me from Texas. I was able to purchase them for only 87 cents each as I bought a over 550 of them.
As soon as they arrive I will put it all together, post all data and videos and open my home up to any one interested in seeing the unit.
I plan to ask Sterling Allen to test the device for validation.
-
Hey bill when you said
"I encounterd the same problem with the pendulum stopping when it left the coil I solved the problem and when I post I will tell how I did that"
Im guessing this is the key to the technology? I bet your opening the circuit before the pendulum leaves the coil, so you slowly charge the cap over a long period-the induced current is very small per swing so the mechanical contacts never arc and has minimal losses. The problem would be induced voltage being small, but a DC-DC converter would easily solve that and the charged cap simply rewinds the clock after the long charge period.
Just thinking out loud here.
Im not sure anyone has looked into super slow pulse charging a cap, but if you could and come out ahead power generated Vs cost could be an issue. Personally I wouldn't care, OU is OU, 1 mw or 1Mw it makes no difference it's all about the principal.
I really hope you succeed in this.
-
Interesting ,but thats not how I do it will show soon when I post.
-
@billmehess
Take only Goldbonded-Germ-diodes 1N270 or 277 (lower Uf)
Not signal diodes as 1N34 1N60 do use.
Also Collector-base junction from Germanium transistor ca be used.
Pese
-
Bill,
This looks very promising, nice work. Just wanted to know what amperage you are getting?
Thanks,
Mark
-
The motor under the load of rewinding the clock mainspring draws 4.5 amps. The motor runs on 12 vdc.
Assembly almost complete the device can rewinds itself from the energy it produces , no external input. There is also exta energy stored in the capacitor banks.
I plan to post new videos and all data on Christmas morning. This is my little way of offering this as a Christmas present to all who would wish to replicate it.
-
Bill,
That is great news, can't wait for that post. Guys lets keep this at the top of this thread.
Regards,
Mark
-
Hi Bill,
No video yet?
How did you get over the drag problem when the magnet enters/exits the coil windings?
This is the critical thing I think that allows your device to work.
Regards
Rob
-
:-\
I was so psyched to read this thread today, but nothing new yet...
What is going on Bill?
-
hey bill,
is it christmas yet? >:(
lol,
sam
ps: merry christmas
-
I took a few extra days off because of Christmas, it will take me another week or two to finish up and then I am going to show you something wonderful!
I live in Portland Oregon and plan to rent a conference room somewhere in town to preview the working unit. No later than mid Jan. anyone interest can email me if they wish to come.
There will be no "hidden" items, any and all testing will be allowed.
I will show the first real and verifiable OU system.
-
I don't mind waiting a little longer, I just wanted to make sure you were still around.
Let me know when the public demo is and I may fly in or send a friend from Seattle.
Please please please confirm the best you can before hosting a demo as I would hate to spend good research money on a unnecessary trip. Thanks for the updates! Good luck!
-
I will confirm everything. At the demo I will hand out a spec sheet on the device and answer any and all questions will no reservations what so ever.
As I value my time I value others time. So there will be no surprises or anything hidden.
-
I hate to pry but when you said "it will take me another week or two to finish up" do you mean finalizing tests or tweaking of the device? If you mean you have had positive results up till now and you are now in the phase of measuring the excess energy then that would really get people interested in coming out for its first demo.
-
I have postive results in such that I can rewind the device from its own power without any external input. The device uses a large bank of capacitors over 800 of them. And I am still putting them all together. My output from the coils is between 500-600mv per min. as you know you cannot just dump this into a single cap. I have to charge a large number of caps one at a time. I am using a matrix approach where I charge the caps individually. They are arranged in parallel strings and the strings are arranged in series.
When I have charged up each cap and the entire system is charged to a certain voltage it is then dumped into a large 1farad capacitor arrangement that is used to run the motor.
When the large mattrix dump happens into the 1 farad cap this must be done multiple times to build the 1 farad up to the voltage I need to run the motor for the required time. I have done this miltiple times. It takes approx 68 hours to charge the device. This turns the clock key 2.6 times. One complete turn of the equals two days or 48 hours.
In other words I can now generate in 68 hours enough energy to keep the system continously running for 125 hours.
It is this large bank of caps and the assembly of the device which is taking the time.
I am using the clock hand itself to individually charge each individual cap.
This is kind of a simplified version of the device but it shows the basic running operation.
-
Anybody heard from bill yet?
-
Anybody heard from bill yet?
Not a word since the 28th... And its roughly 2 weeks after the initial deadline too. He did say "it will take me another week or two to finish up", but he claimed he was assembling additional cap banks for storing all the excess energy. I don't know why this is needed for the video though. Measure a empty cap bank, run the machine, cut scene for 68 hours or more, rewind spring. Unfortunately this will only add to the skepticism. It would take no more then 3 days to fully demonstrate this device according to his last post. The only problem is there is no way to determine what happened during 68 hours plus cut scene.
Due to that conclusion, I would like to suggest a concept for the public demo. Lock the device in a internally hinged cage that can be held shut by multiple locks. Each demo participant brings their own kind of lock. The device is then pre checked for stored energy and upon finishing first day inspections the cage is locked by each observer and they retain their keys for their locks. After a set number of hours the cage is then opened. The rest is obvious...
I still really hope he still releases a video though! :)
-
Ok then, I will be posting my own design of the pendulum tomorrow.
this prototype uses 1.- 1.5 volt batt and is able to generate as much as 1.5v volt in 1 day connected to about 7 caps from diferent sizes with a total of ~.5 farad.
the current is very minimal and it is not compared to the 1.5 volt batt. but I think I can get more current than of the batt itself if I connect more caps to it.
god bless all.
-
Well thats been well over many days, no updates from Bill or this one above? Nothing?
-
sorry it took me longer than what I expected but here it is:
-
hi slncspkr,
looks very nice.
How much electricity canyou generate with it ?
Isit enough to rewind the clock mechnism ?
Many thanks for posting the video.
-
I took a few extra days off because of Christmas, it will take me another week or two to finish up and then I am going to show you something wonderful!
I live in Portland Oregon and plan to rent a conference room somewhere in town to preview the working unit. No later than mid Jan. anyone interest can email me if they wish to come.
There will be no "hidden" items, any and all testing will be allowed.
I will show the first real and verifiable OU system.
Wonder what happened. It's almost the middle of Feb. ???
-
@Harti:
Hello Harti. I'm not using any clock mechanism at all.
I'm using an electronic circuit that is powered by 1._ 1.5 volt small batt and pushes the pendulum everytime the small magnet atached to the pendulum passes by the small coil in the circuit as you can see in the video and I'm able to produce about 1.5 volts a day but...... no enough current. I think I need to add more caps to keep filling them up but it is going to take longer for them to fill but I have about 1 year before I drain the batt out. plenty of time. :)
-
Hi,
if you could get at least one white LED constantly running this way
for one year it would be definately overunity !
Looking forward to see new videos !
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
-
@Harti:
Hello Harti. I'm not using any clock mechanism at all.
I'm using an electronic circuit that is powered by 1._ 1.5 volt small batt and pushes the pendulum everytime the small magnet atached to the pendulum passes by the small coil in the circuit as you can see in the video and I'm able to produce about 1.5 volts a day but...... no enough current. I think I need to add more caps to keep filling them up but it is going to take longer for them to fill but I have about 1 year before I drain the batt out. plenty of time. :)
Bill,
Is this why we have not heard from you, not enough current?
Regards,
Mark
-
Here is some information on Bill and his Clock Pendulum.
http://pesn.com/2007/03/24/9500464_BillMahess_pendulum_clock_generator/
-
Ok here's what's happening.
I'm not going to be overly specific but the device is in it's final build and functioning correctly.
First moving the magnet(s) thru a coil via the clock mech. will not generate enough
voltage. The two magnets I was using connected to a 4700mf cap. will generate about 150mv/ min. Not enough. I have read many posts on overunity saying you need to just connect up a bunch of caps to store voltage. Won't work. Caps in series will allow you to store up as much voltage as you want but the total storeage capability will be reduced by the number of caps used. In other words 10 caps in series charged to 1 volt each will read 10 volts but the energy stored is devided bt 10. This is a dead end street. Storing energy in caps in parallel will store the energy but the initial voltage does not increase.
The answer is to have sufficient working voltage generated at the source to charge a bank of caps to 12 volts. When I turn on the motor 12 volts will discarge from the caps to the motor and turn the clock mech. one complete turn. I am using a 30 day clock movement. It takes 12 complete turns to wind the clock hence each turn is equal to 2.5 days or 60 hours. I can generate 5 mv. per min or 300mv/hour, do the math and you can see how I generate the 12 volts necessary to keep the device running continously.
The breakthru was using good old gravity to instead of swinging the magnets thru the coils I have found a way to use the clock to "drop" them thru. Again not to specific at this point but each "drop" will pump 5 mv into the cap. bank. The cap. bank is 213 4700mv 25v electrolytic caps. in parallel. This gives me a 1 farad cap with basicly no leakage.
Stay tuned
I have been running the device now continously for 2 months.
When I finish up this final build I will ask Sterling Allen to evaluate it thru the New Energy Congress as well as showing it to the public.
-
WOW! Bill is back!
We were worried for a while there.
Glad to hear you are still doing R&D.
I'm excited to hear more, and I'll see you around!
~Dingus Mungus
-
Received a number of emails inquiring about my progress. So here is the status.
First I can rewind the clock mechinism to keep the unit running continously from the power generated by the magnets dropping into the coils and being stored in the bank of caps.
This alone is something that I truely feel no one else has ever done in reality!
This is in itself a self runner.
Since I can charge up the caps in a shorter time it requires to run the device I have additional energy stored in the caps- this is a good thing!
Is it practicle at this point as a power supply doing extra work. Probably not. BUT
this is proof of concept. The first microwave was 800lb and 6 feet tall, the first airplane flew 100 + feet at a height of 12" etc.
I have watched the alt. energy sites for years and have seen 100's of so called working devices, with out fail NONE of them have so far panned out. My unit works because of the unique need to only energize the prime mover only periodically. In this case just 1-2 seconds every 60 some hours.
As we all know it is very easy to design a device much harder to build it. As I assemble the final model for demonstartion I am constantly revising as the need developes. Litttle things like a copper plate that connectly to a sproket having to be replaced because it bends under a small weight. So I have to disconect a big portion of the device to replace with steel plate. Constant upgrades and changes. But that is the device going thru a evolutionary process towards completion.
I want to show a final completed device with no flaws that is my goal.
When I have completed the device I will as mentioned ask Sterling to evaluate it thru the New Energy Congress. I feel his organization and dedication to this new industry is unparralled in both scope and integrity.
I will also freely show the device to the public in a open and non biased demonstration
in Portland Oregon, USA
I consider it to be a privilage to be a member of this OU community and as aways I thank Stephan and this great site for the chance to post my work.
Thank you
Bill
-
Hello Bill:
Thanks for keeping us updated. Really interesting device you have developed. I wanted to ask if you have considered to also ask to EarthTech for an independent evaluation of your device, as a way of having more support for your claims.
Regards.
-
I like this idea. Have to admit I don't understand it 100% but if it is efficient as it has been explained to be, then its a great leap.
Also, just thinking about it, it really wouldn't matter all that much if it did not put out a ton of voltage. Just thinking about a car engine, you cant power a car with any great results off one small piston. However put 8 small pistons in the design and you can get a lot of power. Same would appear for this device. Think of the device as one piston. If the device charges itself in say 7 days(don't know exact figures, have been a lot) enough to power the motor to reset the drive force, then technically one device could rewind 3 other devices. Then take the power the 3 others produce and wind 4 units off each. That would be like a 16 cylinder engine. And with 16 of them scaled up, you could quite possibly produce a good amount of electricity. Now if it can only produce enough energy to power itself, then its a neat device, but not really useful.
I do give high praise to everyone helping, and especially bill for taking the time and money to develop his ideas. Great work, keep it up, cant wait to see more. Have a good one.
-
Could this principle be worked into the Mehess model ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_cradle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_cradle)
My imagination pictures something like having magnets on both ends, that then alternately 'penetrate' a coil.
Laughing out loud is certainly permitted, since I have no physics skills or knowledge worth mentioning. ;D
(Would need a soundproof casing, btw)
-
This device is nothing more than a pendulum I guess.
vidar
-
Why yes, but won't this setup retain its momentum much longer ?
Or will coil drag that I've read about completely spoil it ?
-
Hello Group
Got some questions to throw out there. I can produce and store in caps as much as 50,000 volts that I can generate from my system in a 30 day period. Very high voltage but very low current. How can I use this voltage to do something "useful".
My knowledge of electronic is limited.
Can I change the dc to ac and then step it down for a lower voltage but more current and then using a bridge rectifier convert it back into dc?
Could I from my large cap bank discharge thru resistors to generate larger currents?
As aways any input is very appreciated.
Bill
-
Sorry need to clarify this the 25volt 4700mf caps I am using would currently allow me to store around 8600 volts not 50,000 volts, sorry for the typing error.
-
My pendulum system allows me to charge up a cap to 200mv/minute. Electronics is pretty simple. Positive output of coil connected to postive side of cap. Neg. output of coil connected to diode one side. Other side to neg. side of cap.
Caps are eletrolytic 25v 4700mf.
Currently my cap bank is 213 caps in parallel = 1 farad.
200 mv/min= 12volts/hr= 288v/day.
The unit will run via the clcok pendulum for 30 days cont.
288v/day x 30 days=8640 volts stored.
-
Bill,
Something is very wrong and you do not seem to get it, do you? It?s almost 20 pages and over a year since you keep saying that you produce some mV/min so you get thousands of volts/month. This is not even bad science and I guess its time that someone tells it to you frankly. You have met that person. Now, I don?t want to be rude but just very clear in what I have to say. I guess everyone, including me, is respecting your dedication, work as well as the money and time you have spent on this motor you want that much to bear your name. Fine. But it?s time to stop this, because I also guess that you have to respect the others as well.
To be short: if you get 200mv/min, you will never get 12V/hr because of two reasons:
1. Capacitors do not charge linear in tension. That is, for you to understand, if you get 200mv in the first minute, you get ALWAYS les than 200mv in the second minute, even lesser in the third and so on, so on. This is not a matter of ?what if?, to find a clever solution to it. This is the bottom line. ALWAYS. Period.
2. The second reason for which you will never get ?thousands of volts per month? is that an electric source is not able to charge a capacitor above its maximum voltage. So, if you have a small battery, it will charge a capacitor at no more than 1.5V (maybe a little more if alkaline). A car battery will charge a capacitor at around 12.5V. And so on. And that?s it! Period.
If you really want to charge a capacitor at a higher voltage, you have to have a step-up converter, which is fine but which also works under-unity and it does not do any help in your case. But without any converter, you?ll find that your capacitor, although it may be charged to 200mV in the first minute, will stop charging maybe somewhere around 3-4V judging by the size of your coils and the strength of Neo-magnets and the speed at which they move. In another words, as you may already know by now but you simply do not want to admit it, not in 30 days but in an eternity and your caps will not charge above that maximal value, be it 3-4V or around.
Now, you change yourself around and around, once connecting the capacitors in series, the other times in parallel but it is the same. You can not get more energy by switching the connection between capacitors. You go in a circle. A vicious one. Every time you keep saying the same story, which is not even close to reality. Every time you say it, hundreds of us are wasting time, reading it. Some answer to you but in vain. Some will even believe what you say, and it?s what I hate to mislead a young man in his twenties or so to believe such stories and to grow with misconception just because you want to promote a non-working motor on your name. Why is that? Why are you doing it? I can?t believe you really didn?t make your own judgment by now!
There is more: I guess that you have found also by now that if you disconnect the coils, the clock will run for 30 days or so. But as soon as you charge capacitors with those coils and magnets, the clock will no longer run 30 days, as designed, but much less. How many days is it running, Bill? 26? 20? Or just 8?
So, please read carefully the above and try to move on. This is surely not your strongest field of expertise and although I respect free experimenting, I do not respect creating and maintaining a thread which requires hours of reading for no benefits.
Last, but not least, the website you promote contains the same errors. I strongly suggest that if you are in good faith and if you do not try to gather money or other benefits, to remove the description and at least the part with thousands of Volts per month.
Finally, I do not wish to have a ?debate? with you because it would lead to nowhere but to hundreds of members I respect consuming their valuable time in reading it. Therefore, if you want to spit into my face, please use the PM. But I?d like very much to ask Stefan to close this thread once forever, or at least until you?ll be convincing one of the senior members that you really have something new to report on the subject.
Yours respectfully,
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
-
Hi mramos,
Very long and touchy message. Somehow impolite and even a bit rude at the end but thanks, anyway. I?m not sure that I?ve grasp all of it but I?ll try to reply as I can. At least we talk?
I?m not that new here. It?s just that I do not post as soon as I?m making a coil or other relatively small part needed for experiments. I do not have than much time and I do not see beneficial to post for peanuts besides of having fun, increasing your own rating and establishing contacts. I have experimented with pendulums long ago (about 15 yrs); otherwise I wouldn?t dare to talk. Last pendulum experiments were relatively recent (several months ago), and I?ve conducted them in connection with Mike?s motor. Results were reported on gn0stik, the starting place of Mike, if you want to check them.
TPU thread is something different. I know your work there. I?m following the thread and I?m working on TPU, too. But just not as most you do, because I don?t think the answer is that simple. I?m searching and working hard for a TPU proof of principle experiment and none was identified as of yet, was it? So, following this line of thinking, yes, there is not much of a change since SM TPU area was started. But there are plenty of other benefits: at least people work and learn something there, in a decent and constructive manner. And I haven?t seen many attempts to sell vegetables to the gardeners?
If I have one little chance to get close to this proof of principle I consider we badly need, I?ll report on it, in TPU are. Meanwhile, I?ll be quiet because without this piece of information we lack, it is my belief that by adding section of coils, frequencies and many other variables, the chances to guess their correct combination (assuming that no other parts are missing from the setup) decrease exponentially, being essentially very close to zero.
Anyway, I don?t see much of the relevance in your message with what I?ve address. I don?t have anything against Bill, personally speaking. I would have helped him too, but he is not asking for any help here. Check these pages again, please, and count for how many times various people were telling to Bill basically the same I did, but he keeps perpetuating the same hypothesis of xxx.mV/hr->thousandsV/month, which is simply not true. Do you want me to take it as true? Do you want me to make others believe it is true? Do you want me to shut-up because there is much crap here anyway, so who cares? No Sir, I will not do it. And I speak up, exactly because this is an open forum.
And as about you, me and Bill, we are all grown people and we have to face the truth as it is. I?m almost 40 but what?s your point with that?
Finally, please keep your personal appreciations as of my person to yourself; I don?t recall that I?ve made assumption about your person. My messages are here, you may comment on them as much as you want. But my person is something different than my messages and I respectfully suggest that my person is not of your concern.
Respectfully,
Tinu
-
I just go home 3:00 pm Monday May 28 .
Well, well,well this is address to Tinu.
First I am extremely familar with how capacitors work. After living with them on a daily basis for over a year I totally understand them.
First if you had read the way the the motor charges you would under stand the following.
My pendulum system will charge a (meaning one) 25v 4700mf cap. to approx. 180mv in one minute. This is accomplished by a n45 cyc. magnet approx 1 long and 1/2 in diamenter swinging in and out of a coil.
1. Of course I know that you can not charge a cap to more than its initial input voltage nor economically more than about 60% of its rated value.
So where is my 1000'f of volts stored coming from?
I charge one number one cap to 180mv, and then number two cap to 180 mv then numer three cap to 180 mv and then numer ... cap to... get it now?
In other world lets say I charge up 2880 individual cap (2880 minutes in two days) to
180 mv each this in series would read 532 volts.
The caps are electrolytic caps and the voltage loss is around 10% so voltage loss do to leakage is manageable.
I realize that the total capacitance is very low because the system is in series. But the fact of the matter is that I have a lot of voltage to play with.
Also if you have really read the thread you would see that the core concept of this unit is that the kenetic energy stored in the clock spring will keep the unit functioning for 30 continous days. I need to generate 12 volts at 1 uf this will energize a motor , again I am using a 12v window auto motor (low speed high torque) that is connected directly to the windup key of the clcok to turn and wind the clock.
Now bare with me on this, each complete turn of the key will wind the motor to function for 3 days or 72 hours or 4320 minutes. Thus 12 volts generated will wind the motor every 3 days for approx. 1.3 seconds.
AGAIN!!!!!! The core substance of this unit is that I only have to generate power to reenergise (rewind ) less than 2 seconds per 3 days. As a point of interest if I run the clock for the full 30 days I would need 36 volts to completely rewind.
Here are the numbers for 30 days:
e= cv (squared)/2
c= cap in farads
v= voltage
e= 1 f (36)(36)/2
e= 1296/2
e= 648
The motor under the load of turn the clock
draws 12v at 4.5 amps or 54 watts. Thus the total number of watt seconds available is 54/648 or 12 secons of run time.
I see no reason to wait 30 days to rewind when i can rewind what I need to in 2-3 days.
I also have a bank of cap. I am playing with which consists of 213 ea. 25 volt 4700uf caps connected in parallel. Whay this 213 cap x 4700 uf = 1 farad.
Since I can run my system for thirty continous days when I connect the output of the coil (again which has the mag moving in and out) I can charge up the cap bank at the rate of about 1 mv/ min. this would cofme out to about 43200 mv at the end of 30 days or 43 volts remember I can total renergize the system with 36 volts. Of couse I would need 43200 caps to do this. Other than the fact it would cost me a lot of money this would indeed work. I can use the timing functions of the clock to individually charge the caps.
Again leakage is manageable. I have charged these caps to different voltages and over 30 days the leakage has been around 9-10%.
Get it now?
At my own schedule I will be showing a working device that generates enough power from itself to reenergize itslelf to keep running indifinitly. Is this a pmm ? of course not gears ware out I don't care about a pmm my interest is to do what has not been done before and that is to develope the first true ou device.
AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN the uniqueness of this device is that the system only has to be energized for just a tiny fraction of its run time to keep working indefinitly.
I will succeed!
-
In my haste to respond to tinu I need to correct something. The output of the mag swinging thru the coil will generate 185mv/min this is the maximum voltage output
per minute. Connecting this to the 213 cap bank which is connected in parallel will store only 185mv.But a lot of capacitance (1 farad) In order to charge up to a higher voltage my initial source voltage has to higher. I am limited to the number of mag I can swing through the coil due to the back emf created. I am working on a way the the clock in effect "lifts" the magnets and drops it though a series of coils to create the needed source voltage.
At this moment though I am working towards using the "large" voltage that I can generate and store in a series connection of caps.
Also this series connection can be configured into a "matrix" configuration to greatly increase its capacitance.
-
Bill,
Thanks for your detailed answers.
Now you indeed provide us with some figures, to analyze! Here is my opinion:
An equivalent capacitor of 1 Farad charged at 0.185V equals 0.0171125 Joules. This energy was stored over a minute and it was maximal, I understand. From this energy, one can estimate the maximum power the device can produce, which is 0.2852083mW. (Actually this is the averaged power, computed over 1 min. but it should be a close enough approximation of maximal power for any practical purposes). That level of power is very small but let skip this issue although I do not see much ways to increase it significantly. Let?s assume for now that the only goal is over-unity and not the level of powers involved. I can fully accept it.
Up to now, I have one important question:
Are you aware that after a discharge most electrolytic capacitors charge back up to approx. 10% of their before-discharge voltage? It takes many hours for an electrolytic capacitors to be discharged (short-circuited and kept that way) in order to read close to 0V. In some cases, it takes many days to properly discharge it, depending on the type of electrolyte. I?m asking because if you did not discharge the capacitors completely, it means that the above .185V is not correct and the real value is smaller, thus affecting in a significant way all the estimates one can do.
Assuming that the answer above is positive, you?ll get in theory:
1.02675J in 60 min
24.642J in 24hrs
and finally, 739.26J in 30 days.
I?m saying ?in theory? because in order to get this amount of energy, you?ll need a very large bank of capacitors, ideally one of 43200F, which is very far from practical. If you embrace the idea of re-winding the spring of the clock every 3 days, it will still be needed an equivalent capacitor of 4320F, which is also very impractical, to say at least.
What happens if you do not have such large capacitors? You?ll have to discharge some capacitors into others, to collect all the energy and in the same time to obtain a voltage close to that of the motor (12V, for instance) by rewiring the connections (from parallel to series or combined).
But in the case of dumping some capacitors into others you will lose a lot of energy! Basically, every time you discharge a capacitor into another one, you lose up to 50% of energy! Please check the math and remember that we are not talking here of loses of 3-5% but much larger!
Consider the initial state:
1F at 10V and 1F at 0V total of 50J
After dumping the first into the second, you?ll have:
1F at 5V and 1F at 5V total of 25J, hence loss of 25J and efficiency is 50% exactly. (In practice is even a bit lower due to the ohmic resistance of conductors).
Now, even if the above-estimated energy of 739.26J may be enough for re-winding the clock, although I?m not sure of that because no detailed data are available from your posts, by subtracting all loses, the final result will be, imho, way under-unity. Loses include capacitors leakages but also motor inefficiency and other Joule effects on various contacts and resistances.
Even more difficult than the above loses: it is a huge challenge to connect several capacitors in series in a proper way. You have to closely monitor the charge (or voltage) of EACH capacitor. Otherwise, the capacitor with the least charge (voltage) will be charged in reverse polarity by the others capacitors in the bank, when discharging the whole bank onto a load. Not only that the others capacitors will spend their energy to reverse-charge the ones initially least charged (instead of energizing the motor/load) but you may risk the last ones to explode. This is a huge challenge in itself and you?ll basically need voltage regulators on EACH capacitor. That would be extremely costly and surely not-practical from various reasons, including overall efficiency.
All in all, my judgment is very pessimistic, hence the reason of my first post above.
Maybe I over-reacted a bit and I apologize for that but it was due to the poor content of the 19th pages I?ve just read and due to my clear understanding of the phenomena involved, which again, imho, does not leave room for making the device workable.
Anyway, I wish you all the luck and hopefully you?ll discover something new.
Respectfully,
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
-
Well, my math above was greatly exaggerated: I wrongly understood that 1F cap will charge at around 180mV in 1 min. But now I see that only one 0.047F cap will charge at that value and not the whole bank of 213 caps (1F in total).
Therefore, the averaged power and the intermediate energies as well as the final energy shall all be divided by 213 to get the correct answer.
Then, it implies that the total energy collected in 30 days is not a respectable 739.26J but it is only 3.47J or less. This is very, very low. In fact, compared to 648J as needed for running the motor for about 12s, the maximum (= theoretical/ideal) value of only 3.47 Joules speaks for itself.
Tinu
-
I've done the same calculations myself a thousand times. Your thinking is very
straight line and not outside the box. There are ways to generate a 12volt source voltage to charge upa bank of 213 caps to 12 volts within 60 hours (4200) minutes.
At this point lets don't keep bantering about. You are convinced that the device cannot generate enough voltage to rewind itself within some fraction of a 30day or 43200 minute period. That's ok. I'll be posting videos very soon.
Thank you for your input
"In the absence of dark, light prevails"
-
Thanks Tinu and Bill. That was great! That's why I come back to this forum. Both spoke truthfully and in the end no one left pouting or crying. It appears that Bill must provide new data and Tinu is obligated to respond to this data. I'm anxiously awaiting.
Peter
-
I was tired and reading through some of the threads and I have to say this. Tinu, why do you care? It doesn't effect you what so ever, so whats the problem? You talk about it being strange with all the pages for this invention, but in actuality, you seeming so offended, and writing that massive post(freaking time consuming) is more strange than what you think is strange. It almost seems like that if he is successful that you will have failed at something or lost out. You arn't physicaly productive in conritbuting positvely or negatively to the invention(physicaly meaning an experiment to prove him wrong or right). Thus logicaly making it unimportant to show all that math, as math is never exact in real life. You cant use math to solve overunity, as overunity is pulling some unknown source into the picture. I don't need to know exactly how this works to see what your missing in your "argument".
-
HfH,
Now it?s me the one that I?m missing something from my ?argument??! And by asking fair questions on half a page that?s also too much in comparison with 20 pages posted in advance? Or maybe you think that an OU would be revealed in half a sentence?
How about the claim itself? Where is that ?unknown pulled source? you talk about?! Show it to me/ to us/ if you can see it. And in doing so, please remember that extraordinary claims always require extraordinary proofs!
The math may be wrong but it?s not mine and it?s all we (?humanity?, if you like) have for now. In fact, I have conducted similar experiments, like I said, and the math &physics stand. I?ll conduct some more exp and I?ll post the results here, if this is your greatest wish but for now let?s wait for more details and proofs.
Finally, why do I care? I care because if I didn?t I wouldn?t be here. It?s over-unity, remember?
I care because if one experiments in its garage it doesn't affect me at all. If he/she is posting about it, it doesn?t affect me either. But when it comes about claiming OU, that?s a completely different story! I also care because if a device like this is to be marketed in any way and it fizzles, I don?t want to live knowing that I was part of the story, by simply staying silence. And no offence to Bill but he is marketing his idea a lot, although his device is in a very incipient state and not proved to work at all to the very present neither to show, imho, many promises for the future. Current status is ?I will succeed. Bill?.
Tropes,
Many, many thanks for your fair understanding and support. I?ll surely respond to Bill and hopefully everyone will find the final outcome. For know, I don?t see other appropriate language but that of figures? unless one is expecting to watch a video of 30 days ;)
Great forum, everyone!
Have a nice day,
Tinu
-
Its Sunday night 9:15 Pm PST, I just got home and ready the replies on the site.
So here goes:
I believe that the answer to a working magnetic motor is the ability to utilize a power source to run the motor. I do not believe that a magnetic motor will run by itself. This is like trying to grab your shoes and lift yourself off the ground. Does it not strike all of us as strange that NO ONE has been able to build such a motor. I do not believe the Snyder or Argentine motor will work. I saw the Synder video like everyone else how hard is it to attach the motor to a stationary platform and see it work on its own?
Butch, I know you are shaking your head now, and I have the utmost respect for you as does I am sure
everyone else in the community but until I see a working Synder or any other motor I simply cannot
except it as a working device. If I am proven to be wrong -so be it, its ok but I am a real nuts and bolts person I simply want to see a real working device.
Enough of that
What I have in my motor is a way to create a electric current by passing a permanent magnet in and out of a coil. This is certainly not new and I do not claim it to be, Faraday is well understood.
The problem is how to keep this motor continuously running. For this I am using the back and forth motion caused by a pendulum from a mechanical movement of a clock.
Its so simple
With this process I can generate current for up to 31 days using a 31 day movement. I am currently using a 8 day movement. During that 31 days I will be storing the output via capacitors or work to directly trickle charge a rechargable battery.
Think of each permanent magnet moving in and out of a coil as one (1) power unit producing over a 31 day period x amount of energy. The more of these power units I have working the more output will result. Remember each unit is really totally independent of each other so "stringing" these together and connecting them in series will produce any voltage I need its only dependent on the number of units in use.
Its so simple
As far as re-energizing the movement to cause the device to continue to operate I need only to store enough power to turn a motor for under 10 seconds which will begin the 31 day cycle all over again.
Tomorrow I will begin building the next upgrade model will the n-45 2in in diamenter 1 inch long magnets I have which will be moving in and out of larger coils. The 2 magnets I am using now, and that show in the video are only 3/8' wide by 1/2". The greater amount of current that will be produced with the stronger magnets will be dramatic.
I can produce enough flow to in 31 days rewind the movement as well a plenty left over to light a bulb.
Talk is cheap I HAVE NO DOUBT that I can do this, after reading this I hope that you can understand how this device works.
Its so simple-
Producing a current continously for up to 31 days= energy
This unit is not area or input specific. It could work anywhere, in a closest, a basement in a cave it makes no difference. It does not require water(Hydro) the sun , wind or any kind of peto fuel to run and it can run continously producing a flow of truely FREE ENERGY.
ITS SO SIMPLY- SEE THE VISION!!!!
REMEMBER!!!!!!
I need only to string as many of the magnet/coil combinations together to achieve the necessary current flow.
This is very important- this unit it generating electricity and the power that is required to run it continously only has to be tapped once a month. All other magnet motors must be providing its own input from second one. There in lays the problem for that kind of motor. It simply cannot produce more than what it takes to run it-basic law of physics folks.
A clock winded up is nothing more than a mechanical capacitor which you are tapping for energy in very small amounts each day. To "recharge" the spring in this clock requires at least the energy it provided when it was running the pendulums and charging the battery. Using magnets and coils is just an alternative to get this energy out of the spring in the clock - no matter how big magnets and coils you're using. Even if it takes 31 days to get all energy out, before it should rewind itself, the 10 seconds required to rewind it requires as much as approx 270 000 times more energy pr. second, than the energy provided pr second during the 31 days.
So to simplify your device, and even get it more efficient is to forget about all the wires, battery, magnets and coils, and keep the clock only.
Br.
Vidar
-
hey group!
wow, what can i say, what a brain you have! i wish i were smarter .. but i do recognize one thing. i see mention that, Bill, your invention uses secondary oscillation as per Mr. Milkovic's idea. This is an incorrect conclusion but of course you did not make it.
Anyway, i just wanted to say thank you for not being a loser (like me), actually pursuing this amazing field and building something! =D
also i have to disagree with some of the other posts .. and i have credibility here as again, i say i am not the sharpest tack in the box ..
your design merely looks complicated because of the wires. if i had just a few more brain power i would know much about capacitors and what-not .. but i just do not care =P
okay, enough from this fool
-
Dear Mr. Bill Mehess,
I posted at this overunity.com forum recently. Someone referred me to your pendulum device. I read your information with interest. Lee Cheung Kin and I (Lawrence Tseung Chun Ning) had our PCT patent application information published on July 27, 2006 (PCT/IB2005/000138).
In our Patent Information, we described how we can extract or Lead Out Gravitational Energy via oscillation of the Pulsed Pendulum. Some information is available at:
http://www.energyfromair.com/beijing/taiwan2a.htm.
I posted heavily in the Steorn.com/forum and forum.go-here.nl under the username ltseung888. I also posted in this overunity.com forum. One interesting theoretical thread is:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2794.0.html
Some of our discussion backup material with the PCT Patent Office has been regrouped together in this thread (Thanks to Grumpy) as the file pendulum_OU.zip (613.23 KB):
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,919.msg17891.html#msg17891
I look forward to working with you as your device directly confirms our theory. We helped a Chinese Inventor, Mr. Wang Shum Ho to explain and demonstrate his invention in front of 5 Chinese Officials on January 15, 2007. Mr. Wang is now a vice president of General Magnetic, a RMB 13 billion Company.
Best regards,
Lawrence Tseung &
Lee Cheung Kin (who cannot read or write English)
-
:)
-
Hi group
I would like to update what I am doing as I have received a number of emails as to my progress.
I can generate enough energy to rewind the clock via my pendulum system but not in the time required.
It takes me approx. 12 days to generate the needed voltage to rewind but my clock can only run for up to 8 days.
I have come up with another application that I am very excited about and I would like to run it past the group to see if it is worth developing further.
One of the core goals of my device was to be able to make a motor that would generate electricity that was not what
I call to be "area specific" In other words it did not need sunlight, water, wind etc. to work. It could generate power
in any location. A dark room if necessary. Its location and setup being totally independent of its enviroment.
I have been able to modify my device to be able to run a LED continously.
This is NOT being presented as a ou device.
I can run the LED totally off the power generated by the magnets charging up a bank of capacitors. I am not using the pendulum system as I can now "drop" 9 magnets into 9 coils generating a much larger paulse than the pendulum method.
Dropping the mags into the coils also eliminates the back emf problems that the swinging mag. created.
I am still using the clock mech. as I have found a way to connect directly to the sproket from the main spring with a lever which will lift up the bank of magnets and in approx. 1 min drop them into the coils. The process then begins over and over.
I do have to rewind the clock manually every 8 days, this takes approx. 15 seconds. But during this time the LED has been on continously.
My bank of 213 4700uf caps have a voltage loss of around 3 mv per hour. But I can generate enough continous power to overcome this and keep the LED running. The LED has a forward voltage of 2.1 volts drawing 25ma.
I have performed countless tests with the following results:
When I drop the mags into the coils I can charge up the cap bank at the rate of 4 mv per minute. It would take approx. 500 min to charge it up to the 2 volts needed to run the LED. For the sake of saving time I charge up the cap bank via
2 1volt C cells. I then disconnect the battery and run the LED totally from the power generated from the energy
being pumped into the cap bank.
The LED within about 1 hour will drain the cap bank faster than the energy being pumped into it. But then the curve begins to flatten out. When the LED has drained down to approx. 1.644 volts (whick takes about 4 hours) it is draining the cap bank at a rate of
5-6 mv per hour. I can generate about 12 mv per hour and keep the LED lit indefinitly.
At 1.644 volts the LED is barely lit-but it is lit!.
I believes this technology is fully scaleable. A power generation system that could be used anywhere in any enviroment
with minimum human interaction to make it work.
I want to know what you think. I would be happy to put up a quick geocities website to show the device working.
Also this would be a open source project.
As always your input is appreciated, should I continue with this work?
-
You asked for opinions: No, do not continue this work. It is futile and silly. If you have no hope of OU what is the point? ::)
If the point is simply to spend time entertaining yourself by playing with pendulums, clock mechanisms, magnets, coils and LEDs, by all means continue. Just don't delude yourself by thinking you are doing serious energy research!
I had never seen such a plethora of bad non-science, wishful thinking, group mental-illness and just plain inexcusable technical ignorance stir up so much enthusiasm and cult-like optimism with absolutely zero tangible useful output energy result before I started reading these forums.
It all just bears out the inevitable fact that none of it actually works. Inventors have been making OU claims for as long as history has recorded. None...not one single one...has ever found useful practice and successful commercial sale. Hello? This should be a clue!
It's the same story every time: Glorious claims without any reasonable evidence...long drawn out discussions about elusive mysterious details...demands for huge investment of replicators' time and/or angels' money...fights over who owns worthless intellectual property...endless precisely-detailed yet fatally-flawed experiments and constructions with huge glaring "mystery parts" and purposely avoidance-based "measurements" (or lack thereof) and, finally, when all else fails...stories of the powers that be suppressing the great new device. Bullshit! Where are the working machines? There aren't any! Never were.
Bottom line: There is yet no magical energy box. The piper, so far, is always paid one way or another.
Serious investigators might best focus on systems that maximize the efficiency of conversion and storage devices and practical means for tapping into the abundant sources we have at hand (including geothermal, solar, hydrogen, wind, water, fire and nuclear reaction) and, foremost, on ways of accomplishing more and better results with less equipment, fewer conversions, less need for storage and transport of energy and materials and work in general.
The pretentiousness and complete folly expressed here and in other forums like this is on a par with the very seriously-debated dark-age religious argument: How many angels dance on the head of a pin? The answer is none. Why would they want to? They have all of creation to dance within!
-
To specifically critique your stuff, Mr. Mehess, here are my comments based only upon your last post:
"I can generate enough energy to rewind the clock via my pendulum system but not in the time required.
It takes me approx. 12 days to generate the needed voltage to rewind but my clock can only run for up to 8 days."
So...at best, your device could only be 66% efficient in terms of converting/storing energy. Rube Goldberg did better than that! Not a prayer of OU.
Remember...energy units include time units...power multiplied by time is energy. It is silly and betrays a badly non-scientific mindset to say that it generates enough energy but not for a long enough time. To be correct, you might say that it outputs enough power but not for a long enough time. Volts x Amps = Watts (power) x Seconds = Joules aka Watt-seconds (energy). This may seem like I'm being overly technical or getting hung up on semantics.
Science is a terse and exacting discipline. I can think of many times I've seen huge efforts at replicating insane devices on this website alone in which this basic relationship between voltage, current, power and time was quite obviously ignored or just not understood by the "inventor" or the would-be replicators.
People observe a voltage or current increase and mistake it for "excess energy" yet it's two steps away! First, it has to be an increase in the simultaneous product of voltage and current to be even a power increase. Maybe they actually get a power increase, meaning that EI product POWER is bigger coming out than going in...still a big step away from free energy! All you have to include to get that is any energy storage device...capacitor, battery, inductor, spring, pendulum, gravitationally-displaced mass, etc.
Example: charge up a big capacitor with a small low-power solar cell...this takes only a small amount of power for a bit of time. Now, short the cap with a screwdriver...BANG! Huge sudden power! Not excess energy or overunity! Yes...more power out than in for sure...but power ain't squat without time! Maybe you put in 3 watts for ten seconds (30 joules of energy) and got out 29,800 watts for one millisecond (29.8 joules of energy). That's impressive and probably typical and a lot better than your 66% return but it's just basic, simple energy arithmetic.
The energy you extract from the output of any electrical black box system will always be less than the energy you put in. Period. You can delude yourself by pretending that voltage is energy or current is energy or even that power is energy. But they are not energy. Energy is Power multiplied by Time.
All your system seems to be is a rather overly complicated, expensive and lossy way of storing and then converting mechanical to electrical energy. We already have plenty of those! Way too many!
"I do have to rewind the clock manually every 8 days, this takes approx. 15 seconds. But during this time the LED has been on continously."
"I believes this technology is fully scaleable. A power generation system that could be used anywhere in any enviroment
with minimum human interaction to make it work."
Ever heard about the guys that bought widgets for $1.00 each and sold them for $0.66 each? Well, they lost a little on each one but they made up for it by selling in huge quantities.
The suggested "scaling" for this proposed energy generating system of yours, in my humble opinion, sir, is best to approach toward zero as quickly as possible!
I believe you'd do a lot better if you just bought a hand-cranked generator with a flywheel or a battery. Your very complex electro-mechanical system as described would make Rube Goldburg proud or maybe even envious and is no doubt much less efficient.
-
Poor Humbugger, its obvious he got out of bed on the wrong side. Such a bad mood.
First I am not claiming ou as I stated.
I guess ALL research should come to a screaming halt unless ou can be achieved. No new advances, no new experimentation to at least look at something different.
Lets all go back to the dark ages.
Did I ask for investors-no
Did I make outrages claims-no
Did I explain how what I was doing worked-yes
Does it work-yes
Was there any compoents that were hidden and "where the magic happens"-no
Will I show a video-Yes
Am I looking for a patent-no
Is this open source-Yes
Please read the thread again and see what I am doing. If it is of no value so be it-let me know.
-
::)
It's not personal, nor does it have anything to do with my mood. You are obviously having fun playing and getting some ego strokes and encouragement from this forum. Nothing wrong with that. Just please don't pretend you are a scientific investigator or an energy researcher, okay?
Self-delusion, peer acceptance and a feeling of doing important work are common ingredients for success in our culture. Even when the actual useful achievements are non-existent and or negative. Perception of value is valuable in our culture.
I think you are probably a great guy and a fun person. I know for sure you have a lot to learn if you ever want to produce a useful energy invention. Science and progress and growth require one to laugh at how silly one's ideas have been and to appreciate that the only value of much early effort undertaken without understanding (blind experimentation) is to obtain the knowledge of how silly you have been so that you appreciate being able to reject similar analagous silly ideas in the future by merely thinking quietly to yourself for a moment rather than by doing hundreds of hours' work and writing up what, in retrospect, are embarrassingly silly ideas.
I'm just trying to help folks grow up to be real scientists!
What are you trying to do? If it isn't overunity then what? Really!
I'm guessing you are trying to have fun fooling around with techno-stuff ;D get some social feedback 8) and learn in the process >:(, all of which are just peachy goals. If it's anything more seriously science or engineering-related then allow me to burst your bubble and call you and anyone who is at all impressed with your ideas so far completely silly and foolish!
That will be my humble contribution to your collective scientific/engineering education...in the best spirit of science and learning and good humor, of course.
Remember...science is discovering the framework for practical reality, which is sometimes not what we are hoping for. A smart engineer is not afraid to think outside the box...but if he's going to be describing his ideas to other smart engineers and scientists, it will behoove him to actually think before expressing.
Learn the terms and , basic relationships and common language of your areas of discipline at least! Anyone who doesn't get that it's a huge and incredibly revealing joke when you said you were getting enough energy output but just not for long enough time to close the loop...well...they just don't understand the first thing about energy!
Can you admit you have learned something about volts, amps, watts, time and joules here? Can you look back yet and honestly say "I really do get the joke and it was on me"? Or is your hopeful hero status on the forum being called into question by an outsider newbie just too much for your tender ego to handle? Are we learning yet? Are we having fun still? ;D ;D ;D
-
I will post a web site by tomorrow morning and let the chips fall where they may. In the mean time KMA.
-
KYA? I assume you are suggesting homosexual anal osculation...Uhmmm...no thank you. I don't roll that way. Sorry you are taking reality so hard. It's really better to learn and laugh. Believe me, being self-taught and having worked directly with several rather world-famous inventors, I have learned plenty while being the brunt of my own jokes. You have to lighten up, Bill.
Regarding posting your own websites and chips falling...well...the chips have fallen long ago. It's picking them up and doing something useful with them that counts! By the way...try to pick up the fewest chips and, putting them together in the simplest way, accomplish the maximum benefit. That's the game. I fail to see what benefit posting more Rube Goldburg stuff on another site will have but carry on, dear sir. Do what you do with confidence and vigor. It's good exercise even if it's bad science!
-
Bill...
If you had a friend, a good friend, who was jazzed about building an alcohol fuel rendering plant on his farm and he laid out the following plan to you, asking you what you thought about helping him, what would you say to him?
The plan to get free electricity...there is a large pond of water and a big cliff rising above it where the farm is. He owns it all. His idea is to use an electric motorized pump to pump water through a four inch pipe up the cliff and then pour it over a waterfall with a paddlewheel which would drive a generator and a mechanical pump used in the process of distilling and refining the alcohol. The generator would be a little bigger in electrical rating than the 4 inch water pump motor at the water pond, so he figures the generator will run the water pump for free and then some.
He's excited that he's finally solved his problematic electric bill for running the process pump (now run for free directly off the waterwheel) which used to ruin the overall profit margin on his distilling operation. He wants you to help him pick out the most efficient and correctly-rated generator and pump motor and design for the waterwheel and any gearing required.
What do you do? Well, twenty five years ago, this actually happened to me. Boy was he hard to convince. It was really tough, because he had been working on his alcohol production facility for a long time and had a lot of money invested and tons of work before he sadly discovered that the electric bill to run the thing cost more than he was getting for the alcohol even though he got the corn, process water and stale bread base ingredients free.
He then spent a ton of time talking with his beer-buddies who encouraged him in his idea for the waterfall even to the extent of doing a lot of excavating and laying the pipe and pouring some concrete footings and a spillway and laying out a huge plastic tarp to prevent leakage into the soil, etc. This enormous project was done on the sadly mistaken belief that the power taken from a generator was simply determined by the rating and size (BIGGER MAGNETS). All his drinkin' buddies encouraged him, helped him do the work and egged him on.
He never asked anyone who understood these subtle things about torque and reflected mechanical load depending on electrical load (and vice versa for the motor) and conservation of energy principles and practical hard-reality matters like inevitable systemic losses. Nope...it was all in how the motor and generator were rated and the shape and configuration of the waterwheel, as far as he and his buddies figured. Of course, those minor details were left for the very end of this four year $250,000 project. That's when he called me.
Did he really have to build it to find out how it would work? Was he justified in cursing me out and actually slugging me in the chops when I told him it wasn't going to work? Was it worth losing a friendship over? Had his pals who encouraged and helped him really done him a favor? Was he right to think that even if it wasn't 100% or better efficient, that it would still be helpful and reduce his overall electric bill? Would it have been practical if he just put a hand crank on it to help out and make up for any small losses?
NO NO NO NO NO NO and NO. Think a lot and build a little. That's the lesson here. Ask some people who have built things before that worked and sold lots of copies. Run your ideas in front of people who might laugh at them; not just your cronies and drinkin' pals who are happy to help but know no more than you do. Getting ten more guys to agree that an idea might work doesn't increase the workability of the idea! Be pragmatic and practical. Know the rules before you play the game. This is a 100% true story.
The whole fiasco ended up costing him his farm, his marriage, about $259,000 cash and a huge amount of blood sweat and tears. He wouldn't speak to me for over a year. Talk about killing the messenger!
And it all started out as a fun hobby project. Larry is still divorced, runs a small limosine service and sings country western semi-professionally. He gave up on the alcohol plan. We're friends again, but sometimes I think he still resents me just a wee bit and suspects that if he had just spent another six months and another $25,000 he might be filthy rich now and still have his farm.
I remember that just before he slugged me he yelled "Kiss My Ass".
-
Humbugger, these are some of the best posts I've ever read on this forum.
-
Thank you. I fear I may have hurt poor Bill's feelings. I've spent the last year or so reading everything on the web regarding free energy. As a retired equipment designer who has had to deal with actual practical reality all my working life and who learned almost everything the hard way, most of everything I've been reading disgusts me. The blind leading the blind...the self-made gurus of long drawn out empty promises...the total lack of clear disclosure in most cases and the naive willingness and eager enthusiasm of the anxious replicators. Sometimes it's all too much for me.
I've never posted single word before today. I guess it all came out and I'm afraid old Bill was the unlucky recipient of my version of the hard truth. Lest you all out there think I'm just a negative trolling asshole, I should say that, well...maybe I am. I'm not "a believer", that's for sure. Maybe Bill was too easy a "victim" being that he does pretty much say exactly what he's doing, unlike most of the "mystery gurus".
My scathing critique was truly intended to help him and others see that stacking levers and pendulums and coils and magnets higher and higher in evermore complicated schemes and then talking at great length about them without really stating any particular goals or even using correct technical language to describe the energy flow is probably not bringing anyone any closer to "free energy" or any kind of technological learning or advancement. He's confused, I fear, about Power, Time and Energy, in general.
It seems like Bill also goes rapidly back and forth between claiming free energy ["I can produce enough flow to in 31 days rewind the movement as well a plenty left over to light a bulb."] and disclaiming OU ["First I am not claiming ou as I stated."].
I just wanted to make sure he understands the relationship between Power, Time and Energy. They are not terms that can be loosely interchanged or discussed usefully without adhering to their actual meanings. When I read that he had enough output energy but just not for a long enough time, I knew he was not understanding Energy and Power and Time the same way I have learned to understrand them.
Now he's seeming bitter and angry determined to prove me wrong by posting a video. Well, I'm not sure that he has yet stated what it is exactly he wants to prove and I'm rather certain, because of that, that he won't succeed in proving anything at least to me except maybe that he's taking his chase for energy guru status just a bit too seriously.
Sorry, Bill. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Scientists, at least the best ones, and design engineers, especially, have a barrel of laughs at their own expense. It's the best way to learn! I've had a million crazy unworkable ideas.
How good you are as a designer/inventor/creator/engineer/scientist often depends directly on how rapidly and effectively you can sort the wheat from the chaff among your own ideas so that you don't spend precious emperical time experimenting and building bad systems to find out they don't perform well.
Not knowing what you are trying to achieve always slows the process of judging performance. Often to a dead halt.
-
Well Humbugger, you certainly have given us some "food for thought" laced with wake-up pills.
Tropes
-
First let me apologize for the KMA comment that was done in the heat of the moment. I have been reading this site for quite a while I to have been dejected by the large amount of bad science that I have seen. The latest being the Steorn
fiasco.
The whole idea of this site is to present a form so that new ideas can be proposed. Concepts that were once thought
to be unworkable or even heresy are accept facts today.
I remember once in this thread some time back where a person stated that if they could get free energy they would not mind having to rewind the system periodically manually. Again this device is not ou. But because of that does it not have any value?
Again I can keep a LED running indifinitly and what is required is a 10-15 second manual action once every 8 days.
I see this if scaled up a power source that is not area specific. That's it no more or no less.
Ideas stand and fall on their own merit , in this group we keep proposing new concepts and new roads to travel.
This allows off shoots of ideas to come into play and maybe develop into something totally different from our original concept.
The Wright Brothers first flight was 120', hardly breath taking and at the time considered almost worthless. Thomas Edison went throught thousands of filaments before finding the one that would work the list could go on and on.
I will post the site by tomorrow morning, I don't like utube because on a site I can post some hard data.
I don't agree with Humbugger on most on what he said but he has all the right in the world to say it.
Lets don't keep bantering about on this its counterproductive and serves no purpose.
-
Humbugger, these are some of the best posts I've ever read on this forum.
Count me for it too.
But Bill was hit repeatedly. I did it first (check my posts on pages 20-21) and I did it hard.
Now it?s happening again.
I guess it was just bad luck.
Bill, you can?t just remove the dark.
For that to happen, light has to be brought in.
From my point of view, your experiments are welcome as long as you do not advertise a successful device while it is actually far, far from that.
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
-
My Theory of OU and Free Energy:
There ain't none to be had...
Believe me...I want to get all manic and excited one more last time in my life and throw myself fully into some insane project I just know will save the world and make me incredibly rich and famous.
I just can't bring myself to believe that perpetual motion or free energy or overunity or zeropoint energy is going to pan out as any kind of useful reality. Sorry!
I think it's all one huge group delusion fueled further by a multi-faceted yet disorganized scam and a quackery-laced fraud arena that detracts greatly from the hard work and creative energy it will take to actually solve the world's real problems. I would really appreciate being proven wrong. But it ain't happened yet!
HELP! I'm a cynical old pragmatist and I can't get up!
-
Bill...I accept your apology. I apologize for hurting your feelings. However, as a practical matter of fact, researchers, scientist and engineers must avoid falling blindly in love with their ideas or they are doomed to oblivion. Thus, it is recommended for good health and rapid progress that one be forced to eat crow immediately upon making a foolish statement.
And learn to laugh it off...don't react defensively. This is not an attack. Your oscilloscope isn't insulting you when it says 32V 128MHz Sine wave just because you expected or hoped for 74V 4GHz square waves! It's just being frank and honest!
Quote: "I remember once in this thread some time back where a person stated that if they could get free energy they would not mind having to rewind the system periodically manually". Don't you see how absolutely silly that statement is? It's no different than me saying "I really like to eat a free lunch and I don't mind paying for it".
Quote: "Again this device is not ou. But because of that does it not have any value?" No, the reason it has no value is that there are far simpler, easier, minimal-element, reliable, existing, cheap ways of accomplishing the exact same results. That's what makes it not worth pursuing further. It only gets worse if you scale it up.
I guess I have an unfair advantage here because I have spent the last 40 years evaluating my own ideas on how a given goal should be accomplished using technology. It is instantly obvious to me that your method has way more elements and is far more complicated than it needs to be to maintain a very dimly lit LED for eight days with only 15 seconds of hand-cranking effort or whatever. Therefore, I reject it as a practical, sellable, useful approach to the problem as defined.
That doesn't mean you couldn't sell it! I see you have quite a few interested folks right here. It just wouldn't be an approach I personally would consider for more than 12 nanoseconds. What I'm curious to see is how you "prove" it works for eight days in a few minutes of video!
Quote "I don't agree with Humbugger on most on what he said". I'm curious about any assertion I have made being incorrect, controversial or plain false. Can you be specific about what you disagree with me on? Other than matters of pure speculative opinion I may have expressed (obviously, you don't agree yet that your approach is silly...I understand that), is there any disagreement on my factual purport?
Quote "Lets don't keep bantering about on this its counterproductive and serves no purpose" My comments are meant to be fairly general and apply to virtually every device I've read about on this entire forum and the whole of the web. If that's what you are referring to when you say "this", then I would have to say that my "banter" is intended to be productive of reason and scientific critical thinking in general and definitely serves that important purpose.
If you don't want to talk to me any more, I understand completely. I wish you good luck and God speed in your experiments and endeavors!
-
Humbugger, these are some of the best posts I've ever read on this forum.
Count me for it too.
But Bill was hit repeatedly. I did it first (check my posts on pages 20-21) and I did it hard.
Now it?s happening again.
I guess it was just bad luck.
Bill, you can?t just remove the dark.
For that to happen, light has to be brought in.
From my point of view, your experiments are welcome as long as you do not advertise a successful device while it is actually far, far from that.
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?
I am with you on this Tinu, having read your posts now...one little correction though...you said a few posts back:
". Capacitors do not charge linear in tension. That is, for you to understand, if you get 200mv in the first minute, you get ALWAYS les than 200mv in the second minute, even lesser in the third and so on, so on. This is not a matter of ?what if?, to find a clever solution to it. This is the bottom line. ALWAYS. Period."
What you say is true when a capacitor is charged from a voltage source through a resistor. It is not true at all when charging a capacitor from a constant current source, in which case you do get a perfectly linear voltage/time ramp on the capacitor. This is how all analog sawtooth and triangle waves are generated! ;)
Just keeping the teacher honest! You will surely do the same for me sometime.
-
What you say is true when a capacitor is charged from a voltage source through a resistor. It is not true at all when charging a capacitor from a constant current source, in which case you do get a perfectly linear voltage/time ramp on the capacitor. This is how all analog sawtooth and triangle waves are generated! ;)
Just keeping the teacher honest! You will surely do the same for me sometime.
Of course you?re right!
And I thought for a long time that the statement will end remaining unnoticed. Not many pay attention to what is really written or if they do, fewer really understand and even lesser will bother to answer. I?m glad you did.
My rationale was:
a) given the state of learning at that stage, I thought it would have been too much for a first lesson;
b) coils (and circuit composed of passive elements, in general) does not provide the functional basis for building (or actually for assembling, by pure luck) a constant current source. Even the addition of some non-linear elements (i.e. diodes) is not going to be enough for building one. The use of transistors or other command elements was not mentioned?
c) there is an approximation, for high input voltage and very low currents & low voltage on the load, and in this case one large resistor is good enough for the cheapest approximation of a constant current source. But the emf of a small coil driven by a low-speed moving magnet is only a couple of Volts at max and the approximation will not hold above a couple of mV (at best) on the load. This was not the case either.
Did I make up for my previous quilt by omission?
Thanks again for your attention!
Tinu
-
Dear Bill,
I have just listened to your audio interview and now I see where your thinking went awry beyond this time-power-energy problem you've been having. Even though the interviewer tries to raise the issue several times, you boldly beat it down and insist that "only the weight on the pendulum" matters.
Have you no clue that the electrical load on the coil will mechanically load the pendulum as the magnet swings through it? If there is no load (open coil), then there will be no mechanical resistance offered by the coil as the magnet swings through it. At the other extreme, if you short the coil, there will clearly be a mechanical loading imposed on the magnet, as if it were going through invisible molasses rather than air.
The amount of this mechanical load is proportional to the degree of coupling between the coil and magnet (strength of the magnet and how close they are spaced and the ability of the coil to intersect all of the magnet's flux lines) and the electrical load placed externally on the coil.
Did you think that it was just as hard to turn the shaft of a standard rotary generator when nothing was plugged into it as when it was fully loaded to capacity electrically? Have you never seen or heard a motor/generator set "bog down and grunt" as electrical loads are added? There is nothing different about your generator, except it probably has a much lower coupling coefficient than a well-designed standard rotary unit, so you don't notice any loading effects. Try the old experiment of dropping one of your powerful neo magnets down a long thick-walled copper tube if you don't believe me...it won't free-fall! The copper tube is like a shorted one-turn coil.
Or take a big long-throw woofer with a huge magnet and a "high compliance" long-throw suspension...push the cone in rapidly with no load and then do the same with the terminals shorted. You will feel a big difference in mechanical resistance.
What you have described are six basic systems. First you have a wound up spring. These are quite efficient and have very low loss over time as energy storage goes...maybe even better than a super high quality low leakage capacitor. Still, you cannot get more energy out than you put in.
Next you have a complex multi-element system that converts rotary torque stored in the spring into pendulum swing. That's pretty efficient possibly, too, although certainly less so than the spring itself. Always you will get less total energy (work) out of the swinging pendulum than the spring puts into it via the mechanism.
Thirdly, you have your magnet/coil generator. No matter what magnet you use or how beautifully you couple the coil to the field and no matter the shape or orientation of the setup, you will NEVER get more electrical energy out of the coil than the mechanical energy it takes to move the magnet through the coil, which IS dependent on the electrical load (unless you stick an AC-driven coil or another moving magnet nearby). In this part of your setup you have several loss mechanisms, mechanical friction including wind resistance, back-emf of the coil's load path fighting the freedom of the magnet to swing through as described above (Lenz's Law) and less-than-perfect coupling between magnet and coil. The last two, happily, work oppositely. Tight coupling helps give you more forward charge per swing but also makes back emf worse; loose coupling eases back emf but worsens forward power generation for a given magnet and coil setup.
Fourth, you have your rectifier diode, a back-check valve to prevent the return swing of the magnet and the DC path of the coil from discharging your capacitor...a major lossy element if it's dropping 200mv while pumping your cap up by only 3mv each pulse...very big loss here!
Fifth, you have your capacitor which has equivalent parallel (leakage) and series resistances, both of which represent energy losses although they can be fairly small drains if you use exceedingly good quality expensive caps.
Finally, you have your spring-re-cranking motor. Very lossy most likely...probably 40-75% efficient at best.
So...where is the extra energy introduced? Well sir, it simply isn't. All you are accomplishing here is to play a shell-game using power, energy and time. You laugh on the the interview at how obvious it must be to everyone that anything charging a capacitor, even a little bit at a time, if left to do so for eight days or thirty days would clearly have the capability of pumping your spring-winding motor for a mere 15 seconds once a month! Yet if you use simple math and basic electrical and mechanical formulae, you will find, every time, that it takes more energy to rewind that spring than you got from unwinding it! Even if Lenz's law were repealed just for you, your scheme wouldn't be overunity.
That one very sad fact of life and your assertion that the coils' electrical loads do not mechanically load the pendulum (Lenz's law)...those are your downfalls in understanding your own invention. Relax...you share these very basic misconceptions with a huge crowd of other "inventors" on the web here.
I do confess to not having read each and every post in this thread, front to back. Maybe someone has already pointed all of this out to you and it seems to you I'm just rubbing it in. Sorry if that's the way you see it or if these sad revelations have been stated and understood previously.
It was truly heartbreaking for me to hear how enthusiastic and sure you were as you proclaimed how easy and simple and clever and new and different (and over-unity for sure) your invention was. Please don't fall prey to a horrible deep depression now, okay? Laugh it off. Live and learn. We all have to live in the same harsh reality eventually.
-
What you say is true when a capacitor is charged from a voltage source through a resistor. It is not true at all when charging a capacitor from a constant current source, in which case you do get a perfectly linear voltage/time ramp on the capacitor. This is how all analog sawtooth and triangle waves are generated! ;)
Just keeping the teacher honest! You will surely do the same for me sometime.
Of course you?re right!
And I thought for a long time that the statement will end remaining unnoticed. Not many pay attention to what is really written or if they do, fewer really understand and even lesser will bother to answer. I?m glad you did.
My rationale was:
a) given the state of learning at that stage, I thought it would have been too much for a first lesson;
b) coils (and circuit composed of passive elements, in general) does not provide the functional basis for building (or actually for assembling, by pure luck) a constant current source. Even the addition of some non-linear elements (i.e. diodes) is not going to be enough for building one. The use of transistors or other command elements was not mentioned?
c) there is an approximation, for high input voltage and very low currents & low voltage on the load, and in this case one large resistor is good enough for the cheapest approximation of a constant current source. But the emf of a small coil driven by a low-speed moving magnet is only a couple of Volts at max and the approximation will not hold above a couple of mV (at best) on the load. This was not the case either.
Did I make up for my previous quilt by omission?
Thanks again for your attention!
Tinu
Tinu...you had nothing to make up for! Your guilt was only in being so emphatic and saying Always and Never without qualifying by saying "under your particular set of conditions" or "in your application". We who try to teach must be careful lest our students lose respect or, worse yet, learn fallacies by misunderstanding the context.
-
@tinu
@Humbugger
Both of you have yet to show anything but armchairing...(Those that think they are above the rest, so they don't have to build). Before you criticize, maybe you should build something....anything. Of course, it will be easy to berate me with your unfathomable ignorance in this field. All you claim to know is IT CAN WORK. That is plain bullshit. You have no idea where energy come from or where its is going. You only know how to harness it in conventional ways. Please sit at the sidelines where you belong and just read.
Nas
-
*All you claim to know is IT CANNOT WORK
-
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.
-
@tinu
@Humbugger
Both of you have yet to show anything but armchairing...(Those that think they are above the rest, so they don't have to build). Before you criticize, maybe you should build something....anything. Of course, it will be easy to berate me with your unfathomable ignorance in this field. All you claim to know is IT CAN WORK. That is plain bullshit. You have no idea where energy come from or where its is going. You only know how to harness it in conventional ways. Please sit at the sidelines where you belong and just read.
Nas
Hi there Nas!
As a newbie I had no idea there was a rule (unwritten?) that said comments were only allowed by those who work exclusively with their hands. I have gotten pretty good at figuring out by using my head what might work and what certainly won't work before resorting to physical tinkering.
Just because I choose not to get out the soldering iron until I have developed a scheme that works on paper and in my head after being subjected to every possible "why won't this work" test I can think of...that doesn't make me ignorant and it certainly does allow me the luxury and right of only building things I'm pretty sure will work. I think it's a smarter approach, myself.
You know what they say about ten thousand monkeys randomly typing on typewriters...the real world doesn't write books that way because statistically, the odds are way too slim that a work of value will by chance occur. It might be fun for the monkeys and it might be fun for the publishers to watch for a while, but no great literature would come forth!
Anyone who truly believes they have discovered the keys to free energy certainly would not be dissuaded by a skeptic or two!
You are free to approach inventing any way you want. So am I. Please keep in mind, dear sir, that Bill openly expressed his ideas in some detail and then clearly and publicly requested input and comments from any and all of us; not just those with plans and soldering irons in their hands.
I think his ideas are not a valid approach to solving the problems he has claimed variously to solve or be trying to solve. I responded to his clear request for input and comments. I spent some time trying to show and tell and express exactly why I think his approach won't work for OU and won't work as even a good efficient clever way to, for example, light up an area with useful light by only doing a little bit of work once a month. This now appears to be his new more modest goal after essentially throwing in the towel on his initial LOUD and OBNOXIOUS and very public claims of achieving OU or at least knowing just how to do it real easy and simple.
OU is not real easy and simple to achieve, to say the least! It should be pretty obvious to everyone here by now!
I give all OU and free energy experimenters credit for being eager, enthusiastic and persistent, too often beyond any and all reason. Sad to say, so far, those excellent qualities have not helped anyone get any useful free energy. Keep on trying, by all means, as long as you dig it!
The word ignorant, by the way, does not mean dumb or stupid or uneducated. It refers to those who persist because of personal delusion and ego-attachment problems or normal, common "psychological momentum" in following wild goose chases well after the logical reasoning proving that no geese live down that particular road has been plainly offered. It is choosing to ignore common sense, reason and logical refutation or argument.
I say to you as I said to Mr. Mehess...tell me just exactly where I've given wrong advice or bogus information or pipe down yourselves and think about it before you continue to chase a given approach you happen you have "fallen in love with", as the physicists say.
-
:o 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
-
It's a needlessly complicated mechanism for converting mechanical energy stored in a spring to electrical energy in a capacitor, (at some loss.)
Why is this thing of any interest to anyone?
It's really interesting to go back and read the first page of posts at this point. There were plenty of comments that quite accurately foretold the ending of the Mr. Bill story which we can now all see clearly. I guess maxwellsdemon says it the best right there. Simple is better.
-
*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"
-
Is there something wrong with you? I think you need to take some sort of medication. I offered a olive branch and yet you continue this tirade. I wonder why it is even being allowed on this forum. Lighten up!
I am not going to respond to any more of your insults obviously you love to here yourself so go ahead and rant away.
-
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 Bill,
I back you up 100% on your excellent work. I am a moderator on another forum dedicated to Cosmic Energy Machines. Some of your information is available on that forum:
http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?t=16
We have the Lee-Tseung Lead Out theory that explains how the pulsed oscillation of a pendulum can Lead Out gravitational energy. We used the boat in calm water and good sunshine scenario to overcome the roadblock of "where does the energy come from".
Since we know that the gravitational constant g can be effectively increased or decreased by the Ms. Forever Yuen set up, I would like to propose the following improvement to your experiments.
In your original set up of using the pendulum to swing two permanent magnets to coils to generate electricity, do the following modification:
(1) Make the pendulum arm longer. Leave your set up in the original position.
(2) Put a permanent magnet at the end of this longer pendulum.
(3) Place another permanent magnet below the swing pendulum so that the two permanet magnets attract. This increases the effective gravitational constant g.
(4) The frequency of the swing will increase. Your clock should run faster. More gravitational energy is extracted or Lead Out.
(5) This will reduce the time required to charge up the capacitors.
(6) The permanent magnets will not lose their magnetic properties during the period of your experiments (They are rated to last >10 years).
(7) The energy and the time required to do the rewinding should be approximately the same. (This is an educated guess at present).
The additional effort in modifying your previous set up should be minimal but the results are likely to shock the World.
Regards,
Lawrence Tseung
-
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.
-
Dear Humbugger,
I am not sure whether you are one of the paid professional debunkers.
Please try to debunk the 'boat in calm water and good sunshine' scenario. You may consult your professors at MIT, Harvard, Stanford etc. first.
The use of the Law of Conservation of Energy as a roadblock to hinder the Cosmic Energy Machine developers has been removed.
You are encouraged to use the forum.go-here.nl for background and more detailed information. If you are not worried about me moderating your posts, post there.
Regards and have fun,
Lawrence Tseung
-
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...
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!
Humbugger
1) When was it removed and by whom?
Please read the Lee-Tseung PCT patent information (PCT/IB2005/000138) published on July 27, 2006 available for public viewing at http://www.wipo.int/pctdb. The inventors were TSEUNG Lawrence Chun Ning and LEE Cheung Kin.
2) ... Where are the working machines...?
One of the working machines is that by Wang Shum Ho. Please read http://www.energyfromair.com/beijing/wang3a.htm. The detailed description and component pictures are available. The device was demonstrated in front of 5 Chinese Officials on Jan 15, 2007. Wang is now Vice President of a RMB$13 billion (1 USD = 7.7 RMB) Company.
3) What can I do to help get us there faster?
Play the role of devil's advocate. Keep asking pointed questions. Detect any misconceptions, typos etc. Try to break the Lee-Tseung Lead Out Theory and the 'boat in calm water and good sunshine' scenario. (You will be better than the top professors at MIT and Harvard if you can do that.) We can leave Bill's thread and use forum.go-here.nl. When we have something significant, post on Bill's thread again.
I shall answer the other questions in the forum.go-here.nl. I have moderator privilege there so that we can organize and re-organize the information to our liking.
Regards,
Lawrence Tseung
-
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?
-
I'm sure bill if refining his capturing technique, and this would be why there has not been other statements. Hummbugger likes to stir the pot, tho what he says generally is truth but without the tact that most people have come to accept. He's generally right, but with a sharp tongue, and does not understand how to get his point across without pissing people off.
Jason
-
Hi Group
I'm still working on the device. Here is where I am at and I ask the help of the group to proceed further.
The basis of the design is to via a clock pendulum system to swing magnets through a coil to generate electricity. I use a 30 day clock pendulum. I am charging up 4700mf caps one at a time. My device will charge up the caps to 250mv in one minute. Thus in 1440 min. (one day) I would be able to charge up a series of caps to 360 volts. Of course the problem is that my total capacitance has been reduced by 1440. There in lays the problem.
Also in 30 days at 360 volts per day I could store as much as approx. 10,000 volts but agin at a greatly reduced capacitance.
The uniqueness of the device is that it needs to be able to rewind itself from the stored energy in the cap system.
I am using a car window motor (low speed high torque) that under the load of rewind the motor uses 12volts at 4.5 amps (54 watts)
It would take only 12 seconds of run time in a 30 day time period to rewind the clock to keep the device running continously.
In a 30 day time period there is 43,200 minutes obviously to charge up that number of caps individually is not really practical. One would have to charge up a smaller number and then "dump" them into another cap to charge up another sets of caps to a higher voltage rating.
Interesting enough I have a one farad cap system composed of 214ea 4700mf caps that when charged up one at a time exhibits a voltage drain in 30 days of less than 7%.
Anyway still clunking along on this. Thanks for the interest.
Bill
-
Well again the total required to rewind is to be able to run the motor for 12 seconds per month. 12 seconds will rewind the 30 day movement 9 complete revolutions which will totally rewind the clcok mechinism. To do this the following is required:
I would need to be able to store 36 volts in 214 individual 4700 mf caps (214 caps=1f.)
Formula is a follows:
energy in watt seconds= capacitance(in farads) x voltage squared all divided by 2
energy in watt seconds= 1f x 1296 divided by 2 = 648
Motor draws 54 watts under the load to rewind the clock so 54 devided into 648 = 12 seconds of run time.
Again the problem is how to use all this electricity I can generate and store
to run the motor.
Also I have just completed a new coil system for the device that uses 9 magnets into 9 coils instead of the 2 magnets into
2 coils. I can now generate about 1200 mv per minute.
In 30 days I can generate one hell of a lot of stored voltage. But agin the problem is that I need to work out a way to drop these individual caps into another bank fo caps to increase the stored energy (or capacitance) per capacitor. Lots of voltage though.
Bill
-
Hey Bill,
Good to see your still working on the idea. I'm currently working on a capacitor switching issue with a pulse motor. Once the switch is figured out, I would be happy to share it with you and all those that follow these forums. From what I've read of your new set up, you running a 12 volt motor at 4.5 amps. 12v * 4.5a = 54 watts , 54watts/60min = 0.9 watts per min, 0.9watts/60sec = 0.015 watts per sec, giving a total of 0.015 * 12 = .18 watts to run for 1 month. Quite impressive. Are you sure the motor is only drawing 4.5 amps while it is rewinding the spring, has this been measured.
Jason
-
I think you might be better off storing you voltage in a mechanical device such a flywheel to rewind you clock. I am currently running a motor at 30mA at 5 volts (.03amps * 5volts = .15 watts, which is slightly less then what you are consuming with your motor. The output from the collapsing magnetic field is anywhere from 200volt (at 1 micro farad (in 3 sec)) to 17volts (at 1.5 farad (in 240 sec)). Here is the link to the motor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDOm7BWC0dY&mode=user&search=
I believe that our work could be combined to complete this project. And even while I'm capturing this voltage a flywheel could be spun up to speed to rewind the clock mechanism.
Jason
-
I guess I'm a little confused as to what you are saying. Under the load of rewinding the 30 day coil in the clock the motor draws 4.5 amps (12 volt motor.) which is 54 watts your device is drawning .15 watts. Again my problem is that I can generate and store a lot of energy over the 30 day cycle. How do I get x number of kv down to say 36 volts per 50volt 4700 f capacitors.
In other words 214 caps each rated at 50v 4700f charged to 36 volts will rewind a motor drawing under load of 4.5 amps will run for 12 seconds. This will totally rewind the clock coil.
As I have said many times out of 2,592,000 sec. (# of seconds in 30 days) I only have to run the motor for 12 seconds to make this thing
work. That being defined as a device that will self charge under its own power. I have the voltage but not the current, possibly a converter system could be employed.
Like I said I will keep plugging away.
Bill
-
I'm in complete agreement, but it has to be shown with caps only. No Battery...people won't believe if a battery is involved because of battery chemistry. Me and you have talked on the phone several times but it was many months ago. I think I have made progress that will help your setup, and I am happy to explain this setup in person. I will send you a personal message or call you in the near future to set up a time when we can go over this beast (overunity) in person to see what we can come up with.
Jason
-
By all means lets do it. I agree absolutly no batteries. I use caps only.
Bill
-
Hi Bill,
Is your interesting concept still alive, or has it faded away?
Are you still alive and kicking? I cannot find your site anymore....
I found your pendulum concept very interesting.
Best regards!
-
HI Bill. I just read through the posts. First, I wanted to thank you for trying something new in an attempt at OU. Sometimes you just don't know until you try. And today we're no worse off than we were before you attempted this.
One thing I learned from reading your posts is to not get too excited about an invention at first. I'm working on one myself, like I suspect so many here are, and I'm going to let everyone look it over without defending it or myself, no matter how much I want it to work. And I have no doubt it's going to be difficult to not jump up in defense of my baby if I get her running. But the people here are wicked smart and I need their input more than I need to be right. So I'm going to let them at it knowing that whatever problems it has will come to light.
One thing that did intrigue me, though. Since most magnet motors have a gate or sticking point that has to be gotten around if we're to generate cheap electricity, I'm wondering if a wind up device could be employed to remove a stator from the gate and then put it back in rotation. It wouldn't be OU, but if it allowed the magnets to produce electricity it would be what I would call GTJD. (Getting The Job Done. ;) ) If I could wind a 30 day clock spring and get a magnet motor to run for 30 days I'd be fairly happy, so long as the magnet motor produced a usable amount of electricity. I have no real picture in my head about how to accomplish this. Just throwing that one out there.
Thanks again, Bill.