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 109 Guests are viewing this topic.

TinselKoala

It occurs to me that we are nearly in the realm of the Theory of Signal Detection (TSD) here, in the classic Shannon model.

Consider: in the "real world" the QEG either actually works as a Free Energy device , or it does not.
In the laboratories of the researchers, the QEG research can produce OU measurements, or non-OU measurements.

If the QEG Does produce OU in reality, and the researchers DO detect measurements that indicate this, that is a "HIT". (technical term from TSD.)
If the QEG Does produce OU in reality but the researchers DO NOT detect it, that is a "MISS".
If the QEG Does NOT produce OU in reality, but the researchers DO make measurements that indicate OU, that is a "FALSE ALARM".
If the QEG Does NOT produce OU in reality, and the researchers confirm this fact by measurements that do not indicate OU, this is a "CORRECT REJECTION".

So there are really 4 elements in a TSD matrix to consider. What data would produce a HIT, what data would produce a CORRECT REJECTION. People who do the research we are interested in will always tell you what a "HIT" will look like in terms of data. But they seldom consider what a CORRECT REJECTION would look like.
And let's not forget that the Data that indicates "HIT" is the same data that would indicate "FALSE ALARM"... the difference being the _actual reality_ of the QEG's overunity output -- the measurements are the same. Only "bulletproof" true experimentation can tell the difference, in this paradigm.

Right now we are seeing FALSE ALARM data from the QEGgers. We need them to imagine what CORRECT REJECTION data would look like.

PCB

Quote from: MarkE on July 17, 2014, 05:46:21 PM
Sterling Allan recently interviewed Randell Mills for about an hour.  After listening, my opinion of Mills could not be lower.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxheTNCDqQk  He offers lots and lots of BS far beyond the hydrino fantasy.
I have listened to the interview a few days ago. Mills was definitely pretty animated, but I think its due to excitement that after 20 years that he might have something that actually works. Let's wait until the next demo before making any judgments. He is definitely right about going the concentrated PV route in my opinion. Once he gets the firing rate up to about 2400/min he should be able to do a "self-runner". He really does not have to do that of coarse as power-in and power-out are easy to measure here. If there is one technology I'd drop some money into it would be this one, more so than Brillion Energy. I took a long look at the math they have produced some seven or so years ago and I think it hangs together.

PCB

Quote from: TinselKoala on July 17, 2014, 07:24:33 PM
It occurs to me that we are nearly in the realm of the Theory of Signal Detection (TSD) here, in the classic Shannon model. 
Now you are taking my language. Shannon's Rate Distortion Theory baby. Heady stuff!

MarkE

Quote from: PCB on July 17, 2014, 07:27:39 PM
I have listened to the interview a few days ago. Mills was definitely pretty animated, but I think its due to excitement that after 20 years that he might have something that actually works. Let's wait until the next demo before making any judgments. He is definitely right about going the concentrated PV route in my opinion. Once he gets the firing rate up to about 2400/min he should be able to do a "self-runner". He really does not have to do that of coarse as power-in and power-out are easy to measure here. If there is one technology I'd drop some money into it would be this one, more so than Brillion Energy. I took a long look at the math they have produced some seven or so years ago and I think it hangs together.
Mills expressed Mark Goldes' like funny and appalling ideas with respect to his cold electricity generation.  The last time I checked even the best triple junction PV is way below 100% efficient.  That means that a significant portion of the claimed luminous energy converts to heat.  All of a sudden that heat and pressure that Mills claimed was a non-factor becomes a big factor.  One can drive tremendous peak power levels into confined spaces without problem as long as the average power level remains within the capacity of the cooling system.  Mill's 10MW toaster is completely silly.   BLP's history is one of BS beginning with Mill's debunked CQM ideas.  His math has been torn to shreds by SMEs.

Dave45