Has anyone here constructed an overunity system that works?

[ramset]

Don
Pull up a stool ....and have a think ....


Nice to read your thoughts, and your "switchy thingy "
Topic ( new thread https://overunity.com/18956/ultra-switch-development-group/msg561023/#new




  Here it's
The itch you just can't quite scratch ... regardless a PHD
Or ....?


As  Confucius use to say
"The person who knows all the answers
Has not been asked all the questions !


Thanks for your comments


And yes the pool in the open source community is very
Deep ( with talent and resources


And not limited to place or geography!


Respectfully
Chet K

[partzman]

Most people claim that a simulator will not exhibit OU due to the fact that all the components and equations fit the classical electromagnetism model.  This logic stems from the idea that classic electromagnetism can not produce OU but this is simply not true as can be proven by the attached simulation.

This sim utilizes RLE (Reduced Lenz Effect) plus a transformer design that has a low coupling factor, a high ratio of primary to secondary inductance, and a constant current inductor.  The low secondary inductance along with the low k factor means the primary inductance drop is minimal during the time the secondary is shorted.  This results in a large portion of the primary inductance charging energy to be returned to the supply during the primary collapse when the secondary is shorted and the current in L5 is frozen or clamped.  This is the source of energy gain for this device under classic electromagnetism!  The one criteria for this operation with this present design is the relatively high DC supply voltage.  Also the shorted secondary L2 reverses current direction during the cycle.

Referring to the sim, the net input energy taken from Vs is 26.877uJ.  The charging of the primary L1 stops at 10us and the energy in L1 is then returned to Vs while at the same time, the gain in current in L5 is clamped at 112.36ma.  With a starting current in L5 of 100ma, the energy gain is (.11236^2)-.1^2)*.025/2 = 32.81uJ.   

The cycle ends at 19.91us where the current in L1 is zero but there is +107.14ma remaining in L2.  With a starting current in L2 of -100ma, the energy gain is (.10714^2-.1^2)*.0015/2 = 1.11uJ.

Therefore the COP = (32.81e-6+1.11e-6)/26.877e-6 = 1.26 .

Regards,
Pm

[solotraveler]

Hello,
My answer would be definitely yes. As with all before us and all of you, where did we go wrong? Why couldn't things have been done better? Now, the conclusion is, we do not know much about electricity at all. Electricity and nature are two completely different things then our understanding to date. Anyone trying to achieve something like OU for example, firstly must throw away and unlearn false teachings.
When we started in the late 1800's to work with electricity, the understanding was very poor and basic. Many flaws were part of the development of our equipment, which were left unchecked until today. Anybody willing to go through the process of learning through the nature of electricity, to build a proper coil in a few easy steps, could throw away the false and begin with the new.
Best Regards

[solotraveler]

If I was asked what my idea would be to build an OU motor, the answer would be:
First, throw out everything you know about electricity. If, for over 100 years, we cannot see that a different direction must be taken, then the information given to us is totally useless, therefore stop trying.
Second, all the research must include knowledge of how electricity creates matter from 2 spectrums - red and blue and uses 4 octave pressures. Better still, it uses 4 multiplication efforts to compress matter. Walter Russell would be an excellent start concerning this subject.
Third, which is just as important, is common sense. To build a motor and use only one side of the coil, as is used today, is not practical whatsoever. Now we can see that it didn't take us too far. Learning how electricity actually works, one could add a few small details that would improve efficiency. I have given you, in my opinion, a good starting point.
Best Regards

[pauldude000]

As the title says, has anyone here constructed an overunity system that works? If so, are there instructions to reproduce your build? I'm asking because it would be nice to hear from someone who has personal experience of a system and can verify that it works and produces more energy that it consumes.

Trick question. First, there is no such thing as overunity, there is just outdated and easily debunked notions of what constitutes COP=1. Basically, when the standards use inefficient and wasteful methods of measurements, and ignore all evidence that such is the case, as well as all of the examples of perpetual motion in nature, then it is easy to say that this or that device can't possibly work, even if it does. Examples in nature? For a device or system to qualify for perpetual motion, it must start and remain running without additional power entering into the system for over 100 years to qualify. Remain in motion for over a hundred years, lets see electrons spinning spatially around an atom for an undefined eternity, but if that motion is too small, then consider planets circling around stars, moons around planets, stars around galactic centers, everything around the universal center, objects flying into space away from stars, etc., etc., etc.


Perpetual motion is definitely more common than intelligence, that is for certain.


However, the bias doesn't stop there. It must be in VISIBLE motion (doesn't matter if work is being performed that isn't obvious, as expenditure of energy is required of many things to KEEP them from moving, which is measurable by the lack of motion over time, such as is demonstrated by magnets, etc., not as potential energy, but an active constant force. This type of action I call negative acceleration. It includes the forces of gravity, magnetism, strong and weak forces, etc., etc.


As far as the measurement of COP, currently the method is measured using brute force to vibrate molecules to produce heat, arguably not necessarily the most efficient. That is like saying the best way to get power out of a car engine is to dump as much gasoline as possible into the carburetor -- extremely wasteful. Also, anyone with a fleer could tell you just how much energy they are wasting with the brute force approach as well (any heat loss is wasted energy not being used to heat the molecules in question). Also, why heating molecules with a nonthermal form of energy, such as electricity, somehow demonstrates power efficiency is daft anyway.


But hey, who cares if something is logical, right?


As to working forms of overunity, those are cases where someone found a more efficient way of doing something. You might research the water hammer, as one instance. A means of heating water efficiently.


Numerous forms of resonance have been used to achieve apparent overunity, which shouldn't be a surprise in a Relativistic/Quantum/String Theory universe. What physics understands of the concept of resonance can be written in a very small notebook indeed. A small amount of energy at the right resonant frequency can shatter hard crystal glass, for instance. True resonance tends to be self-reinforcing, absorbed into a media where it remains and then becomes additive if the source continues, getting stronger and stronger, or slowly dies off if the sources stops, sort of like a reverb resonant tank for an electric guitar, except that those use brute force as well.


The big problem is that once someone finds anything, they generally have no clue where the energy is from, use a garbage description to make an easily debunkable claim, then get discredited for the crime of not saying "I don't have a clue what is happening," since MOST devices/methods are discovered by accident -- someone tinkering with something new and discovering something really interesting that doesn't line up with what they thought they knew.


.We live in a universe where engineers exist to design and make things work, and part of their job is to get rid of anything really interesting, so to speak. If a circuit developes noise (signal that is not supposed to exist) then their job is to make whatever is unwanted go away. Anything that is undesirable is a "design flaw."


Ultimately, it is a question of A. What exactly is the system in question? and B. Is that system open or closed? If the full system is known (battery connected means nothing -- it has to include all potential energy sources to be accurate, known or unknown -- which becomes problematic) it is truly a closed system, then the conservation law of thermodynamics applies. If it is an open system, then said law NEVER applied to it to begin with! I have yet to find a truly closed system, and I have looked hard, despite the fact that engineers try hard to design them that way. It is actually hard, if not impossible, to actually design a perfectly closed system in which no outside source of energy whatsoever affects said system.


Pick up a portable radio if you want to see overunity, lol. Every time you receive squeals from various sources such as sunspots or tornadoes, to the crackle pops that come from distant lighting, know that energy has entered the system that did not come from the batteries, rofl.


Paul Andrulis