How does one conclusively prove the validity of an overunity device on a video?

[AB Hammer]

Absolutely not, & rightly so, without the definitive proof of math, or a working wheel that can be first dismantled to see the mechanics & then be independently replicated by others & validated, IMO.

Evidence & facts trump opinion, speculation & belief.

I have to disagree with you to a point Fletcher.

Definitive proof of math without a working wheel is not proof at all. The math is for those who can't believe their eyes to help them get a grip on it's reality. To disassemble is not needed as long as there are the parts for another wheel to assemble in front of them and it works the same. This also covers the independent validation. Not to mention that as soon as the video is out. Duplications will happen all over the world. The problem is when this happens there will be a lot of credit thieves out there for the people around them most likely will not know of the original wheel displayed.

Alan

[gmbajszar]

Higher than energy efficiency.

Overbalanced unity (perpetual unity) is a machine.

Now you can watch and believe it for yourself that this higher than E is possible and real.

It will change our world as we know it. What you see in the video is real.

[Pirate88179]

Replications people...this is the ONLY way to do this.  Since this is an open source site, that should not really be a problem.  Even if only 2 or 3 people replicate a "working" design, then, the word is out and it is very hard to argue against it.  If indeed a design really works and is replicated, the design will go viral and no one, or entity can stop it.

So far, no one has done this.  I look forward to when it happens.

Bill

[CuriousChris]

Its easy

First you explain exactly where the energy comes from. Then you provide explicit plans.

At least anyone who doesn't believe you has something to ponder.

But if you cannot explain where the energy comes from, Give up! You are only fooling yourself you will not fool many others.

[Lancair-ES]

I feel that there has been a big confusion between being a sceptic and being a realistic person. We all know that achieving overunity isn't that realistic.
Sceptics are people who doubts the validity of overunity, or think that things are possible in theory, but very hard to achieve in practice.
Realists are people who knows that the validity of overunity are false, and consequently cannot be done in practice.


There are more realists that sceptics in here I think. I am a realist, not a spetic (in my opinion    )