Did Meyer not know what already existed, or was it non-overunity

[F6FLT]

...This is the same reason why two wires with the current in the opposite directions, repulse, as Ampere discovered.
...

See explanation from relativity: chapter 14.8.2 page 236 (pdf).
The discussion would be much more interesting if you knew what you're talking about.

[ayeaye]

See explanation from relativity: chapter 14.8.2 page 236 (pdf).
The discussion would be much more interesting if you knew what you're talking about.

I have read the theory, why do you assume that i have not?

"Thus the contraction factor for electrons is greater than that for the positive charges"

Don't you see that it's the same, whether we see it as contraction, or just see that a flow of electrons go pass to the opposite direction. When we walk opposite to the crowd, we meet more people than when we walk in the same direction with the crowd, that explains it, and that's saying the same, just with another words. When we walk opposite to the crowd, we can just say that then we meet more people. Or we can say that the crowd walking in the opposite direction is contracted relative to us, and thus more people are near us at any moment of time. That's saying the same, but the latter is a rather weird way of saying it. If you like tell a policeman that the crowd was contracted relative to you and thus there were more bad guys among them, and this is why one hit you, he likely will not understand and may think that you maybe smoked pot which may make a person to see things contracted.

I'm sorry but, it's not interesting to talk with you, as you evidently cannot think and pretend to understand more than you really do, and you evidently don't want to be a pleasant person. I don't know why but you should understand that this makes talking to you not interesting.

When we try to look at one moment of time, and do calculations based on that, then we yes have to use additional constructs such a contraction, and this enables us to do calculations. But that may not be the best way to model it. It can be modeled dynamically at many moments of time.

The difference of the things that can be described as relative, is that simple modeling at one moment of time doesn't show what happens. Such things have to be modeled at many moments of time with some time interval, this will show what happens. Like my explanation of induction with a floating duck and a blower here  https://overunity.com/18033/modeling-induction-with-a-rotating-blower/ , this is by its nature relative as well, thus we cannot understand it when we see what happens at one moment of time. But we can understand it when we see what happens at two moments of time, with a small time interval.

[F6FLT]

The right method, ayeaye, not the left one !!!   

[ayeaye]

The right method, ayeaye, not the left one !!!   

Now you showed your ignorance. You ridicule me without even saying anything about what i said. This is lame and ignorant, i'm sorry but, nothing else to say. You lost.

Tells lame joke, no one laughs, "You guys just need to get on my level."  http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/355vsc

The rubber ducks have a hole at the bottom, so they were soft, when squeezed. Yet in spite of that, they float on the water. I have no rubber duck, i found that i have a rubber fish though, which is almost the same. But i don't have a hair dryer, these cost $6 in eBay. Someone who possesses the necessary items, may replicate my experiment    https://overunity.com/18033/modeling-induction-with-a-rotating-blower/

Hope you don't ridicule Meyer. One ate a wrong food in the restaurant, one did something, and thought about consequences later, isn't it funny? After that, his buggy was mysteriously lost, but one has to omit some details, to draw desired conclusions from the facts.

[postingsite]

If the Meyer device did generate excess output( self-sustaining although using water ), in recent times it seems likely the source may have been in the electrical-circuitry rather than electrolysis -
   - an amplifying-transformer by using thicker-wire ( more turns ? ) on the secondary-coil / output-coil
   - or a resonance effect, by fitting ( interlocking, like cog wheels ) the wave-pattern of one electric-circuit/generator with the wave-pattern of a second identical electric-circuit/generator
   - I don't know if alternating current was in his design, if it was, that could ( ? ) have been the source
   - I don't know if a rotating-generator was in his design, the now common known methods using this may have been the source
So, maybe this device was an electrical-amplification-device generating excess output, with the electrolysis component added to make the device appear to be dependent on a limited amount of water that had to be re-filled when used, which would make it more marketable, and easier than fitting electric-motors to drive cars, if most cars can modified to run on hydrogen