The Problem with Overunity. A different approach.

[laci]

@shruggedatlas,

  Of course there is something seriously wrong with our (the average OU researcher's) thinking and outlook.

I wonder if it ever occurred to you that, being an experimenter (gadget builder) would indeed qualify you, or anyone of us to find overunity. You still do not get it.
 
Why don't you look for maverick - dissident - theoretical physicists? There must be some, with a new theory contradicting the 2nd law of thermodynamics or anything; then, try to build a gadget that "proves" this new theory, and pronto: you have your overunity device complete with "adequate proof". you only need to get it accepted.

The trouble is that to consider theory, or theoretical approach is so far outside your vision, so alien to you - and so far removed from the average gadget builder that it beggars belief.

This one-sided approach is so sterile; it positively hampers progress. Very depressing.

  laci

[hansvonlieven]

G?day all,

Here is another example of how fossilised the thinking is at times here in the forum. I keep getting mail from experimenters telling me how they are trying to come up with overunity devices that prove Newton and CoE wrong by using simulation software like WMD2.

Can you conceive of anything more idiotic?

Simulation software uses the standard mathematics and physics of the day. As such the calculations are based on the laws of conservation of energy and Newton?s laws of thermodynamics. These are GIVEN PARAMETERS! Now how on earth could you prove a violation of these principles with software that does not allow for it?

It is like trying to show yellow on a black and white monitor. The signal might well be in colour but the monitor, because of its inbuilt limitations, can never show it.

We need to break out of this way of thinking.

Hans von Lieven

[BEP]

A couple of examples that make me grind my teeth, every time.

Why do folks speak about the magnetic and only measure the electric? Do they assume they know what the magnetic is doing based upon scope shots of the electric? Iron filings are a very bad and limiting way to display a mag field. A scope is much worse when you only measure the electric.

PM motors, wound coils, scope shots all have one thing in common. So far they are the flatlander's view of a 3-D world. They will all be useless in a new solution until people can see past the fifth postulate and stop circumsizing themselves with that razor idea.

How can people think a potential would turn on one axis? Do they think there is a shaft pinning it? I mean, Really! We say we know the world isn't flat. Do we still think a potential is flat?

And then there is that 'forest for the trees' concept. Folks are so busy looking at a localized magnetic field they actually think the magnet is the source. The thing is, it IS the source of the field - not the flux. If you continue your precious field line drawing outward you will find ALL the lines wind up pointing N/S no matter which way the magnet is turned.

Every time I see the term 'RMF' it is like someone dragging their front teeth across a chalk board.

--Now there is a concept that could be translated a dozen different ways 

[resonanceman]

I  would  think that  we would  be much more likely  to get something worthwhile  done  if  we  more people   spent more time   actually  doing  something and less time  whining  about  how  stupid  everyone else is .


If   you have knowledge that  others   here don't have ........and you are  just sitting here gloating  about  your  wisdome.......your knowledge is wasted .

I have  almost  no  training  to build  electronic   devices .......  I am learning .    I am trying .

Will   sitting here  feeling superior  help  your  children or grandchildren  pay  there  energy  bills?

Will   talking about  how   wise  you are  end global  warming?

The  problem is not   language ........the  problem is what  you  choose  to talk about .


gary

[hansvonlieven]

@Gary,

You re totally missing the point here. Most of the people here in this thread that have joined this discussion have built devices, are building devices and and share their technical expertise in other threads.

If you don't believe me look at my own postings, they are on a number of subjects and voluminous.

There is nothing wrong with examining critically the way we think and the language and underlying philosophies that are dominating our behaviour. It is just another avenue of exploration and just as valid as building machines.

Hans von Lieven