The Solution vs Hoax equation

[audiomaker]

Hi all,

A very long time ago (over 30 years), I set out in a rather generic fashion to create "Free Energy".  I use the term "generic" as I took the road many others here have...

I observed the repelling force of some cheap magnets and decided to make them go in a circle on a wheel (I used a record turntable as my foundation).

Soon after, I formulated in my head (as many children have), that you can simply hook up a generator to a motor and complete the loop by hooking the motor to the input of the generator.

Both of these seemingly logical (and unsuccessful) childhood approaches to "Free Energy" are the seeds of obsession, and that obsession has lasted most of my life.

Most of the people here will have a similar story.... some event, or realization that somehow this is possible.  Be it making something spin indefinitely using only the force of the components of the device, or creating a zero-load generator, or grabbing energy from thin air...  There are a lot of people who think about this, many who make experiments, and a fair amount of people who actually try to build devices that produce whatever our personal definitions of "Free Energy", or "OverUnity" happen to be.

The internet have given us all an acute awareness that no individual is alone in this search.

My question though is multi-part.

1. Based on how many devices we see "working" even on YouTube, does anyone believe that all of these are hoaxes, or asked in reverse "Does anyone believe "Free Energy" isn't being achieved by at least one, if not several people or groups of people?

2. Does anyone believe that people build these elaborate (and obviously expensive) machines because they are bored and desire to create a hoax?

3. If any of these machines are actually real, why would one continue working on "their" version instead of re-dedicating their obsession to helping to get that device 100% verified and in the public eye?

My observation is that someone will post a link to a YouTube video of some device operating and the group (err...us) will go "Well that's similar to MrX's device", or "Tesla had one in 1860" or some other form of analyzing it's viability.  It's WORKING right?

These video's get passed over by us like they are whims of fantasy, and by some cosmic irony... by the group who's primary obsession is to believe they are entirely possible.

It's like building a model airplane is the goal, then you see 10 video's of people flying their model airplanes around and go "that's neat....ok...back to work on mine". Why?   

I am somewhat perplexed by this and I would be really appreciative if the members of the board could "get me in the loop" as to the current status of alternative energy.

All the Best

[TinselKoala]

My opinions, from the "skeptic's corner"....:

1. I don't believe I have ever seen a "free energy" or "overunity" device demonstrated on the internet. I have seen lots of honest mistakes, I have seen people deluding themselves and others, I have seen some hoaxes, I have seen one or two genuine frauds or attempts to defraud and I have seen lots of people trying hard to develop their ideas into improved working models and failing and finally fading away.

2. Yes, I believe that is the case. Some do.

3. Exactly. They don't do that, so their devices aren't real. Or the other way around: they try to do that, but can't, because their devices aren't real.

I don't quite get your model airplane analogy. Model airplanes work, the principles are understood, and there is plenty of room for your own unique design that will probably work too if you apply the understood principles. You see a bunch of people flying theirs around and you are _encouraged_ in your own work and will see your tail-in-front, wingflapping aerodyne flying around someday too. At least you know that it is possible and if it doesn't fly you have misapplied some principle or neglected something important.
Free energy devices aren't like that. For many people they are expressions of a vision or a dream and have the force, for that person, of Divine Revelation. So they are absolutely sure that their scheme, their ideas, will work, and when they build a machine that doesn't work they blame the machine not the idea. We, looking at all this from our own obsessions and our own filtered viewpoint, say....well, Tesla did that, or whatever.... and we go back to our own obsessions just as you say.

Bottom line: In my opinion nobody who has claimed to present an OU device on YouTube has actually proven their case, and in my certain knowledge, some of those claimants -- some of the ones who claim actual working devices that are overunity --  are hoaxers, frauds, liars, or deluded and/or not knowledgeable about the basics of their own subject.

Why are we here? Various reasons.... some are acting out their visions, some their obsessions, some understand that "big science" has its own priorities and might not be working on things that are right "under its nose"... and some understand that there is a vast "Wheelwork of Nature" in fact all around us, loaded with energy... not free, not created from nothing, but sort of like a deep underground water table,  from which all our real, usable energy springs. It's my personal fantastic delusion that someday, someone tinkering around with coils and wires and sparks and such will accidentally on purpose manage to hook into that Wheelwork of Nature, and then we'll have attained a primary goal, an important one that might change everything.

By insisting that claims be supported with factual evidence, by insisting that real data be gathered correctly, and by insisting on proper analysis of data, I personally think that I might be helping people... some people..... to avoid wasting time by going down dead ends that are known from the start, or going down paths that are only circles leading back to the beginning again. And every once in a while I come across a promising idea with people doing good work that I can help to perform or understand, or I come upon a ridiculous deluded idea and a real fraudster, and that's when it gets the most interesting for me.

[audiomaker]

Thank you TinselKoala for that very eloquent and genuine reply.  I bet it can be hard to live in the "skeptics corner" on a board such as this.

So your opinion is that 100% of the videos showing machines that seem to be running in a closed loop, and in some cases powering other devices (ie...light bulbs) are frauds, hoaxes, or mistakes.

That's quite interesting to me, and the fact that you are the first responder to this thread is also interesting, as many who likely don't share your view have read my question without responding.

I have seen quite a few... dozens or more maybe... devices that appear to be achieving closed loop motion or the generation of electricity on the internet.  The quantity of those on YouTube alone is what prompted me to ask the question this thread is based on. In fact, some of those are even "pinned" on this board.  It is those numbers that made me choose the name of the title.  The title is a question of probability.

While I don't live in "Skeptic's Corner" myself, I am trying to view this topic without bias, and I must say that these appear to be some very awkward attempts at hoaxes or frauds if that is the case, and so many of them.

As I write this, it reminds me of UFO sightings.  There have been so many and the "witnesses" are so diverse, and often appear to have no motive to lie.  While taking nothing more than their word, a 60 year old policeman standing next to an out of town driver he was giving a ticket to (ie...had never met before), both claiming what they had seen together, and with no apparent motive to lie.
It's quite convincing.

Something else I'd like to state while I'm here...

I was a sound recordist for the film industry for well over a decade.  I recorded the voice of the actors during filming.  This job meant I had headphones on for close to 10hrs/day listening to the actors while filming, the actors when not filming, and the crew while setting up the shot.  Often I was in a separate room "off set" so I had no visual reference.
A side effect of that profession was that I unknowingly became very good at hearing when someone was acting.  Acting is a form of lying.  There are subtitle differences in the way someone speaks when they don't believe what they are saying.

While this is certainly unquantifiable, you can take or leave my "expert opinion" that a great number of the people in these videos believe what they are presenting unless they are the greatest actors on earth.

So when you combine this with the sheer number....add good video (as opposed to blurry shaky UFO video), and consider the apparent lack of motive, it begins to approach the standard of "evidence".

Unlike UFO videos though, one has to look at the quality of the witness.  It takes a certain degree of intelligence to machine parts and build some of these devices.  I am also a machinist and machine shop owner, and I can tell you that I would find it quite odd for some of the parts I see, and the work I know went into them, to be produced with a hoax as the foundation (possibly a fraud....but how many perpetrators of fraud are saying "careful...there might be some machinists looking at our fake parts")

My opinion is that if all of these are hoaxes, or fraud, that they must be one of the most remarkable groups of people one could assemble.  A team of incredible actors, combined with some darned good machinists, combined with a lot of money, combined with enough scientific background to make it look convincing to other people genuinely researching the field... and to what end?

Odd indeed, in my own mind at least.  Why would anyone do this?  Better question is "why would so many people do this?".

When I attempt to separate my logical thinking from my "obsession thinking", I still end up with this equation that doesn't make sense.

Even at that, my own personal observation is that hoax or reality, when a device is presented, there is little effort made to validate the result.  This I attribute to the individual obsessions of the people in groups like this where each person... at some level.... desires to be the first to create such a device therefore a working device is a disappointment to them on a very personal level and ignoring it provides a means to continue with their own obsession.  This was the point of my less-than-adequate submission of the model airplane example.   What I failed to include was the premise that model airplanes...in the example... had not ever been proven to exist.

While I do have my own opinions on the answers to all of these questions, the point of this thread was to get the opinions of others.

That said, for all the reasons I've just outlined, it seems just as likely to me that at least a few of these machines are real, as it does that unrelated people and groups would go to these extents to fraud, let alone hoax.  Even from a skeptic's mind it must seem improbable  ...no?

Thoughts?

[TinselKoala]

Well, my main thought right now is to ask you for an example. Can you give me a specific link to a YT video that you think shows a genuine overunity device? I'll look at it and tell you my opinion.

You've stated some of your qualifications so let me state some of mine. I've been working as a quasi- independent consultant for around 12 years, investigating claims of overunity and other anomalous physics devices. I started out as the lab manager for a private individual's operation called ISSO, with branches in Palo Alto and the operation at the Miles Davis Anomalous Propulsion Laboratory in San Francisco, and one of my first accomplishments there was to debunk an antigravity machine that claimed to use mercury ignitron tubes to create weightloss in an isolated apparatus. The sponsor had already funded these claimants to the tune of about 1.5 million dollars US, and my involvement began when they were trying to get another grant renewal to the tune of 1 million US, IIRC.  They brought their apparatus over from Romania (I believe), set it up in a draftfree enclosure, put it on their custom balance beam with data logging software, and used the remote control to turn it on. Sure enough, it lost weight, several grams, very clearly above the noise in the measurement. Turn it off, the weight gradually returned to normal. There was no possibility that the readings were wrong or faked; there was no possibility that outside fields or anything of that nature were happening (I constructed a sturdy lab table of wood, with vibration damping and no metal fasteners of any kind, etc etc).... yet the device was a hoax or mistake, and during a walk around the park at lunch I figured it out. The clue was their balance construction: the pans were not pivoted like all real balances are, they were just platforms bolted to the horizontal beam. Therefore, any shift in the center of mass of the device would cause the distance from the balance's fulcrum to the CofM to change.. and of course this shows up as a weight change. We proved this simply by turning the device around 180 degrees on the platform and re-running the test. It _gained_ weight.
At this point we confronted Roznyay with this data and asked him if he knew about this. I still remember his guileless face and words: "Sure, we noticed this but we didn't understand, so we didn't report it."
Finally by rotating, testing, rotating, we found an orientation that was "null" where the measured weight did not change.Then with Viktor's permission we took off the covers. A bank of power resistors used as the ignitron load was mounted right above the tube itself, and the combined heat of the tube and the heating of the resistors themselves was warping the terminal strip to which they were attached and this strip was bending like the leaf of a bimetal thermostat, shifting the weight of the resistors from side to side, depending on temperature.
Needless to say, they did not get their million dollars and went away mad.... but they still manage to have some presence after twelve years, making similar claims based on poor analysis and apparatus that fools them.
Another major project for me has been water arc claims of OU. I worked with the main claimant himself, running his experiments and building his apparatus, for about two years at the lab that was supporting him at that time. Here we are talking about someone who commanded a Panzer battalion in WWII, became a physics professor after the war, emigrated and is now emeritus professor of physics at MIT. He had peer-reviewed papers published in real scientific literature concerning his overunity claims, he had a mathematical argument that looked right, he had the force of his personality and his credentials... he had years of experimental data and had support from lots of other sources... and he was also wrong, was using the wrong model and never actually got any OU performance from any of the hundreds of different experiments we built, ran and analysed for him. His most endearing trait was, when a trial did not produce numbers that he liked, he would simply discard that data set, blaming the apparatus or the staff for it not working.
By the time his theory fell apart he was claiming that water arcs produced invisible, cold, fast (supersonic) fog droplets of nanometer scale that could penetrate inches of water without disturbing it at all, only to erupt violently at the water-air surface. When we showed him the high-speed videos of the vortex ring of cavitation bubbles that actually was responsible for that effect on the water, he simply denied its reality completely.
That's what happens when you have 20 years of a fulltime career invested in an idea: you defend it past the point of ridiculousness trying to hold onto your life and your self-image, even in the face of incontrovertible proof that you are wrong.
I'm also a licenced aircraft mechanic, A&P if that means anything, a qualified machinist with my own Sherline mini machine shop and was the primary machinist for the operations described above using "real" fullsize tooling; I've been an electronics hobbyist since way before Radio Shack split off from Tandy (used to have to go into leather stores to find the RS section in the back), and I have university degrees in a field that involves constructing formal mathematical models of real-world processes, including neural network programming. I've helped prove that several devices that people have exhibited here were hoaxes, like the Mylow HoHoHojo motor and others. And I am still working on my own obsession which involves some of the ideas of Nikola Tesla, although I believe that all energy must be paid for and that standard physics is true, as far as it goes. I've got working devices sitting all around me right now that many people probably think aren't real.... but they are. I've made over 350 videos dealing with these topics in one way or another and they are all viewable AD FREE on YouTube.

Anyhow, enough about me and you. What is an example video that you'd like me to opine upon?

[evolvingape]

You have raised some interesting points audiomaker so some of my thoughts if you want them...

I agree with TinselKoala's post. I also attempt to refute TinselKoala's points and facts etc, or I used to do so, before I got bored with his accuracy. I did the same thing with Cheeseburger, FTC, .99, Milehigh, Picowatt and a few others before they made the trusted advice list, at which point I spent less time validating their information... so little time so much to do, choices must be made...

I sit firmly in the "skeptics corner" as you put it and 100% of the devices I have seen on the internet have failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they are overunity devices. Most do not even attempt to try despite the claims and that tells you all you need to know about them. If they did perform as claimed it would be simple to prove... would it not?

I don't approve of many of the video's posted on this and other "community" sites, it's more about traffic, money and ego than it is about credibility, unfortunately.

The majority of people don't know what they are looking at and cannot evaluate accurately due to a lack of knowledge and experience, so for the majority the hoaxes are not awkward but very convincing, hence the wishful donations for "evaluation and development". A nice little earner for some...

Most people fail the very first test, attempting to refute yourself by all possible means. I have junked more designs than I have released because I was able to refute myself and deem the device not fit for purpose. This does not mean the investment of time was wasted, it was actually essential to achieve a final viable design.

There is a massive control network that is completely beyond oversight and extremely well funded operating covertly as we speak. Why I know this I do not want to say, and the handful of people who do know why I say that, please keep it to yourselves.

There is more than enough opportunity within known physics for innovation and integration, I believe I have theoretically proven that concept using known technologies and processes.

A large portion of this community does not study history, the available material, known physics principles and laws that all our machines operate on, or even the manufactured technologies and materials available off the shelf. They instead spend a lot of time speculating on pie in the sky and in some cases could easily refute themselves by a visit to Wikipedia. Probability of success in this scenario is very low, but the possibility of getting lucky is always there.

Do I believe that the "Wheelwork of Nature" can be accessed ? Yes I do. The photovoltaic solar panel is a COP = Infinity device with an efficiency of around 15% at best currently. Unless you understand what COP and efficiency mean, and why they are not the same, you will have little chance of understanding what you are trying to do, which leads to error.

Some of my designs for example "may" exceed unity by exploiting phase change through the four fundamental states of matter. Solid, Liquid, Gas, and Plasma, no laws violated and using understood principles and processes... time will tell.

The RotoMax HHO Hybrid for example is designed to be a phase change engine eliminating backpressure almost completely, something thought impossible. Imagine my delight at relatively recently discovering in the history books and museums the Pulsometer steam pump, a known working machine invented more than a century ago. It operates on similar phase change principles to my hybrid, validating my theory arrived at independently, in my mind anyway. Experimental evidence to follow in the future either validating or refuting the theory.

This community has a lot of issues to address moving forwards and it will probably be impossible to prevent people posting cr@p, but you can always ignore it, like I do with 95% of the content after a preliminary analysis indicates it to be based on error of some sort.

And never forget the lurkers... skilled individuals with a sound knowledge of the sciences and / or skill sets developed over a lifetime, their own machine shops or resources and motivated to make the world a better place... all of them waiting for a clear direction to invest their energy for the greater good. You will hear about what they have achieved when they choose to release it... until then they are wisely completely off the radar and untraceable... a leaderless army waiting in the shadows...