Overunity is impossible! (and why you shouldn't care)

[NerzhDishual]

For instance, I know a place where they give out to you money for nothing, all day long, regardless of the amount you ask for. But I?ll talk about it later.   

I know a place where money it made out of thin air on a daily basis.
It is called a bank.

Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave with them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your slavery, let them continue to create deposits"

- Sir Joshua Stamp, President of the Bank of England in the 1920s.


Best

[Moab]

here we go again. Go find a mirror. that machine you see standing there with your face on it is overunity in motion. next eat a snickers bar and do some labor like running. That snickers bar has been converted into far more energy than any other machine can convert it. doing far more work in less time than physics says is possible. Its like not seeing the trees because of the forest. not possible? really? Its funny to me the machine that is overunity cant understand that it is. Physics are mans invention, flawed and fallible. Nature is of supream design and has ben doing its own thing with its own set of laws and principals at work for billions of years. Who can you trust?

[shruggedatlas]

That snickers bar has been converted into far more energy than any other machine can convert it. doing far more work in less time than physics says is possible.

What are you talking about?  Physics says this is possible.  Have you not heard of e=mc^2?

Anyway, you guys should not pounce on the OP too much.  Until someone comes up with an OU device, he stands correct.

[Esotericman]

Thank you everyone for your responses!  I knew the fastest way to get y'all talking was to appear to blatantly slander what you believe haha!

Let me clarify some things:
Unity refers to the efficiency of a system.  As we know, efficiency is defined as the ratio of output to input.  Unity, as Z said, is when the ratio =1 (100% efficient).  I have no trouble asserting this fact, any more than asserting 1+1=2; it is not a theory, it's an identity.
But keep in mind the system!  The reason motors are not (generally) 100% efficient is not due to any 'loss' of energy from the system- it doesn't just dissappear!  Energy just changes form.  A motor therefore gives up heat energy from the coils to the surrounding air, and from all bearing surfaces due to friction; gives up kinetic energy in the form of vibrations transferred to the surrounding air (ie. sound); gives up electromagnetic energy in the form of radiation; and generally some small amount is lost to galvanic corrosion at some point in the circuit; plus what ever other forms of parasitic loss I missed.  All the energy is accounted for, as long as you consider all the means by which it can exit the system.

The same is true for energy entering the system!  Check out this video for a great example of what I'm talking about http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBygG9oN9gY
At first our definition of the system is limited by what we see (or don't see)- and consists of a flywheel with magnets attached, sitting on a table.  With that definition, it is plain to see that this is overunity...
Until you expand the system to include the power source   Its like looking at the wheels of a car without considering the engine! 
So Jack if you think your motor is running on an unknown energy source, then for God's sake you've got to rule out the known ones!

Alcohol looks just like water, but "miraculously" it burns!  You have to expand the system!  Uranium is just a rock until you consider all the energy that went into creating such an unstable element, the gravitational forces that made it clump up, and ultimately become a part of the earth.  Magnets are just rare metals, until you consider the intense electromagnetic field of the molten prehistoric earth that allowed the metals to combine! 
We're trying to find energy sources that will last billions of years.  Why can't you accept the possibility that it has taken just as long to store it?!

Consider today's primary fuel source, fossil fuels.  They have been baking in the earth as long as 1200 million years (origin of photosynthetic plant life)!  Can you imagine the energy that went into that!?  We're just really bad at extracting it.  And that timeline is just a drop in the bucket when you consider the universe may be over 14 BILLION years old.  I mean- imagine how much energy went into CREATION!  to give you a low estimate, take Einstein's E=mC^2 and in place of m, insert the total mass of the universe....  Now, let's take it even further.  Protons, Neutrons, and electrons are the building blocks of elements, so their existence must predate atoms.  Imagine the energy in there!

*Now here's a wild concept for you.  A hydrogen atom, without an electron, is a Proton.

!!!

That means when you stick a 9V battery in water, you will produce Protons!  Granted, they're only around until they find an electron, but still!  Isn't that mind boggling!?  A subatomic particle... in a jar on your dining room table.  Now combine that with magnetism which is, basically, the bond that holds atoms together, and there is a ton of potential energy around! 

Your Free Energy devices are somehow extracting some of this energy I'll buy that!  But that energy got there somehow.  If you accept that, and accept that it must therefore run out eventually, you accept that it is not perpetual, and now you're working within the realm of scientific possibilty.




A photocell is just a sheet of glass, until you point it at the sun.  Gas is just stinky water until you burn it.  Water is just refreshing, until....

[Moab]

That snickers bar has been converted into far more energy than any other machine can convert it. doing far more work in less time than physics says is possible.

What are you talking about?  Physics says this is possible.  Have you not heard of e=mc^2?

Anyway, you guys should not pounce on the OP too much.  Until someone comes up with an OU device, he stands correct.

Show me!

E=MC^2 is an equasion not a machine.

I know the nay sayers are always far smarter than the engeneers who design and build it. This is expecially true where nature is the builder.  Stick a fork in me I'm done.