Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)

Started by madddann, March 26, 2014, 09:42:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 24 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hope

Quote from: PIH123 on May 16, 2014, 12:47:45 PM
Reply #797 on page 54.

You are questioning where he admits an error on
"Yes the mistake that I made and acknowledged further in the thread is that I failed to account for the integration.  Faster speed yields a higher di/dt, but T is proportionally smaller."


and reply 797 contains
"Actually the one thing that I overlooked is that the coil looking like a perfect inductor will identically integrate the rate of change in flux with respect to time, which should lead to a constant induction for a given magnet starting from a fixed distance.  Retracting the magnet in the opposite direction to its initial position relative to the ring reverses out whatever current was induced by bringing the magnet closer to the ring."


MarkE strikes again? and now counters his arguments with his Sybil seconds?  lol

Hope

Quote from: MileHigh on May 16, 2014, 11:28:24 PM
That sounds to me like you are playing the "fake" card and the "real" card at the same time.




Yet we digress another moment, lol.

Hope

Grav,  real or fake is that the question or the sum?   We know for certain it does not work as of yet,  so I for one would like to find a solution to the non working part.  When one day we do find solution for OU there will be a solid understanding developed we will call it a science of course.  Then that science will be applied to many previously discarded devices and they will be perfected into COP > 1.   This device or a past or any it does not matter.  What matters is that we work together sparking each others thoughts and DOING with builds and simulations or whatever it takes to get us there.


In a way trolls provide some positive aspects of letting us know we are on the right track or near it.  It always encourages me to see them appear and the harder they bark the more I know we are getting closer to a working device. On thing is for certain, if COP > 1 exists everyday we work toward it, it is one day closer we are to discovering OU.


One thought I would like to have you all remember is that in many past (thought to be working) devices there were connections to either and earth sink and/or a air sink (meaning we collected or connected to a reservoir).  So where would we place an antenna in this circuit and/or ground?

T-1000

67 pages, lots of buzz and fighting, almost no replications.. what people are doing here?

To make small scale mechanical toroidal resonator as per spec + window pulse motor attached does not take so much resources, so if someone wants to prove their points in this thread - build it first ;) Otherwise the posts in this thread have no value...

verpies

I for one would prefer if all arguments with MarkE on the public forum were kept on the scientific level, without Ad Hominem remarks and psychoanalysis.

IMO opinion it is fine to refute what MarkE states with scientific arguments, logic and empirical evidence but anyting more than that is unbecoming of scientists ...even if he is really paid by MiBs ;)