Why is overunity that hard to achieve?

[Hoppy]

Hi all.

I'm trying to understand why overunity is so hard to achieve, or better yet what the problems in achieving overunity are? I've built 2 Bedini motors, one SSG and a window motor. Since I am a newb at electronics, I experiment with the same question over and over again: "what if I did this, would this give me the right combination?".

I know that there are some laws against creating free energy, like the conservation of energy etc, but I've read somewhere that Bedinis motors violate/bend this, due to the fact that they utilize flyback EMF, and this is a change in the system, so that it does not follow the law of conservation of energy.

But what if I were to build a window motor, that has nice torgue and connect something like the coil setup of a VAWT (vertical axis wind turbine) on it. I know that the watt output of the coil setup depends on the speed of the shaft, windings, wire gauge etc, but what if I were to connect 2-3 even 10 such coil setups on my window motor, all in parallel. Would Lenz's law be the limiting factor when I try to utilize that output? What if I were to connect 2-3 or even 10 Muller dynamos on it, virtually disabling Lenz?

I have seen a few people that claim to have built a selfrunning Bedini motor. Wow, I mean this must conclude that a device exists that can power itself and stay running forever (not counting tear and wear). So if such a device exists (and is mechanical hence it has a shaft), why not hook up a geny on it and let it do some work? Or is this the same paradox with the Lenz's law that when a geny is hooked up to the selfrunner, it takes more energy to run the geny and we're back to our starting point?

Hope someone can answer me these newb questions.

My advice would be not to take Bedini's work too seriously insofar as his claims are concerned. Many people have had fun building his various devices but performance claims are not supported by detailed experimental data, mainly because Bedini teaches that the radiant energy responsible for charging his batteries cannot be measured by conventional EE meters etc and can only be ascertained by the long winded process of load testing the batteries. Most experimenters who have carried out this laborious procedure either automatically or manually and meticulously recorded data over many load test cycles will find as I have that there is no free energy stored in the charged batteries. The batteries will invariably improve in capacity over many charge / discharge cycles but this is as a result of the breaking down of sulfation deposits, which effectively cleans the battery plates by removing the sulfation deposits from the lead plates.

I have found that in all experimental cases, the output energy (both electrical and mechanical) is always less that the input energy - underunity. Bedini confuses the matter by referring to the 'Coefficient of Performance' (COP) as being >1 in certain situations. Here he is referring to the percentage ratio of input energy to output energy, where the input energy is defined as a ratio of the energy sourced from the grid (payed for by the operator) and the energy provided 'free' from such sources as solar or wind. In all cases where 'free' energy is input to the device, the COP will be overunity. The two extremes are: a) In all cases where all of the input energy is paid for by the operator, the COP will be <1 and b) In all cases where all of the input energy is sourced  'free', then the COP will be infinity. This has lead some people to assume that his devices can be overunity in the true sense that total output energy exceeds the total input energy.