"Free energy" and "Overunity" We need a definition.

[Pirate88179]

Ok I agree decompose is not the best word to use there ..
Maybe the point would be that the earth battery would use all the available free ions in the materials and cease to operate over time.

Could not the same thing be said of the silicon in a solar cell?  If given enough time, I am sure they would break down too right?

Just to be clear, with my experiments on the earth battery technology, I have not observed any decomposition or breakdown of any of the materials involved.  Of course, this has only been in use for about 1.5 years so, not a long term observation by any means.  I would think that if some serious decomposition were to occur over a long time, I would see some evidence of it at this point....maybe not.  I dug up my electrodes a little while back and looked at them under my microscope and could see nothing anywhere on the surfaces.  Since this is not a galvanic reaction, I didn't really expect to see any but, to be fair,  I can only guess at what they will look like 10 years from now since I don't really know.

Bill

[captainpecan]

Ok I agree decompose is not the best word to use there ..
Maybe the point would be that the earth battery would use all the available free ions in the materials and cease to operate over time.

What you describe sounds like perpetual motion.  Are you suggesting that free energy = perpetual motion?

I get what your saying for the most part, I kinda view it differently, but hey, that's what we're here for.  I believe what you are saying is that as soon as you get more "electrical energy" out of a device then you put put in, it becomes over-unity. The excess energy, over and above the energy used to make it, becomes the "free energy".  And I think you are saying that in order for it to be free energy, it must be permanent and never "disolve" or not be able to be replenished...

Is that close to your views?

[TechStuf]

Even a cursory inspection of the "laws" of thermodynamics reveal a level of assumptive arrogance that is typical of what passes for 'wisdom' among mankind.


Take for instance the first 'law' of thermodynamics.  One 'assumes' that energy can neither be created nor destroyed....yet most believe in 'big bang' cosmology.  If energy cannot be created, then our universe was always here, nullifying the big bang theory.


If however, one subcribes to the statements:


"let there be light"

and

"It is He who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom, And by His understanding He stretched out the heavens."


Then one may gain hold of a greater understanding regarding 'Free energy' or getting more out than we put in.....



TS

[captainpecan]

One way to think of it the way I see it.

Picture a bowling ball resting at the top of a steep incline.  At the bottom of the incline is a bunch of glass glasses.  Now if you were to exert a tiny little push with your finger on those glasses, they may move a tiny bit. Nothing great.  But if you were to exert the exact same little push on the bowling ball, it would roll forward, begin rolling down the incline picking up extra energy from gravity, momentum, and whatever else.  Now what happens to those glasses when the bowling ball hits them...  They all shatter!

With this example, the exact same amount of force was put into touching the glasses with your finger, as was put into touching the bowling ball with your finger.  But the energy the bowling ball exerted was much different.

Now, with this example, the extra energy that bowling ball gained on it's way to the glasses was free energy.  "Available" energy that it gained along the way.  You did not ad this energy.  It entered the system by other means.  Although you ended up with much more force hitting the glasses than you put into pushing the bowling ball, it is not over-unity.  If you only figured in the amount of force you exerted, and compared it to the amount of force the bowling ball exerted, then it surely would show over-unity.  But that would be an incorrect way of figuring it.  Over-Unity is measured by all forces entering the equation, compared to all forces leaving the equation.  So if you compare the force that was exerted on the glasses and whatever else it took to make the bowling ball stop, with the force you exerted on the bowling ball, and all the forces of gravity, and momentum, and any other energies that made the bowling ball move...  You end up with exactly Unity!

Free Energy... yes...  Over-Unity.. no...

Perpetual Motion may be possible, due to a system being at exact unity, except for one thing.  The little word "forever" that is added to it's definition.  Perpetual Motion machines must run "forever" without ever stopping.  We have not invented a way to eliminate all forms of friction and resistance, so even if you were to get a device to run for 500yrs before it stopped, it is still going to eventually wear out and stop, thus meaning it is not perpetual motion.  I really wish this term did not get associated with "free energy", as I believe this is one of the reasons that "free energy buffs" get so much ridicule.

[captainpecan]

Take for instance the first 'law' of thermodynamics.  One 'assumes' that energy can neither be created nor destroyed....yet most believe in 'big bang' cosmology.  If energy cannot be created, then our universe was always here, nullifying the big bang theory.

To be honest, I think they will say the universe had "Potential" energy before the big band... lol...  That little word potential energy is kind of the answer to most any energy phenomenon we cant really explain.