Newsflash: Overunity is impossible

[Charlie_V]

You guys are confusing stored energy in resonance with over unity.  The devices (swing, tuning fork, etc) are storing energy.  You put energy in and if you keep adding, it will store up to some maximum.    Thats what resonance is, the objects are storing the energy within themselves.  If you damp the system, you can take that energy out.  Air resistance and friction are just forms of damping. Without them, it would store the energy indefinitely. 

The swing and tuning fork are examples of single resonant systems.  Allcanadian mentioned a system with two resonant objects coupled to each other.  The effects in such a double system are much cooler because you can store more energy and cause the amplitudes to be much more powerful than you could in a single resonant setup. 

[allcanadian]

Let's do a simple thought experiment, place two pendulums--two small swings and two tuning forks fixed at the base and put them all on a table top. Set one pendulum in motion---what happens to the other one? Answer--nothing. Set one of the small swings in motion---what happens to the other one? Answer--nothing. Strike one of the tuning forks---what happens? Answer--the other tuning fork starts to vibrate!. Many here are confusing things having similar motions as being the same thing when they simply cannot be. In the next thought experiment we will place a tuning fork attached at the base to a table top, this table is fixed at each corner with rubber feet so it can resonate freely within the space occupied between the rubber feet. If the tuning fork is resonant with the table top a wave like motion will occur in the mass of the table top, the sound produced by the table top will be very loud compared to the tuning fork. Now if the table top producing a great deal of sound has done nothing other than store energy then why is the motion of the tuning fork not dampened in proportion to the magnitude of the sound generated by the table top? Why does the table top seem to be dissipating a great deal of energy as sound while the tuning fork would seem to be losing very little energy?. It seems very much more likely that resonance is not the storage of energy but is a condition of mass, if energy is stored then it must come from somewhere so in the example above why is the motion of the tuning fork not dampened relative to the table tops apparent gain in energy?
Regards
AC

[The Observer]

Hello all,

Let's get back to the Acoustic Guitar vs. Electric Guitar (not plugged in) example.

Agree?  that the Acoustic Guitar is much much louder than the electric with same string same strum...

            If you don't agree with that then we have a problem.

Essentially what you have is the Acoustic guitar has 2 "tuning forks"( the string and hollow body) and the electric has 1 "tuning fork" (the string).

              Ok, you should all be familiar with this equation that I shall use to prove that more energy is present.

                                    ------------>      sound intensity = sound power / (4 pi R2)        <------------

            When standing a distance of 10 feet from the experimentation area,
                                        the acoustic guitar's Sound intensity is 100's of times greater than the electric guitar's Sound Intensity..

            Because (4 pi R2) is exactly the same... that is we are standing at the same distance  "R" from both guitars during each experiment,
                               
                                           and since Sound intensity is proportional to Sound Power,

                   This means that....tada----->      Sound Power (Acoustic Guitar) > Sound Power (Electric Guitar)

It is a short proof... and one that cannot be argued with by speculation.

Stick this in your pipe, smoke it, and tell me if you feel anything?

Have an excellent day,
   
                                         The Observer

[wizkycho]

to all !
first

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6697.msg155148#msg155148

to explain

universe (it's many basic quantum mechanisms) has frictionless "bearings", magnetics,gravitycs...even such known bearings accelerates the system !!! have you ever heard of such bearings !!! well universe has it. therefore can establish ideal resonance (source media flowing to destination...back and forth)
with ultra infinite Q factor, and beyond.

There are mechanisms beyond Energy that sustains its Source-Destination flow.

So if FE-OU device is properly build all of the inbalance is sustained in FE-OU setup itself, we will be using only flow(its change), nothing is depleted or used, ever...

...this is not theory or make belief. it is experimentally proven...hey unbelivers wake up:

- electron current flows indefinetly in superconducting elements (at certain temepratures), electron has mass !!! and there are many !!! (although small)
it is like unvierse has mechnaisms to make things hotter (fuller of energy flow) in certain conditions. It doesn't allow particles to fully rest and stop in fact when universe kicks the ball it can't stop...it has this magic bearings.
- when entering planet orbit, mass is accelerating (at certain angle) in the same time energy is not invested !!! The curvature path acelerates mass and mass preserves this speed exiting planets orbit !?! Is Gravity=Energy ? certanly not , but gravity is static how can it "produce" acceleration of mass. Gravity and Magentism can make the flow and if we do not desturb it and put it right nothing is depleted and we have Free Energy for eternity...and than another mile.
Although mass was acelerated due to gravity effect, this acceleration (gain in energy) did not lower gravitys force. it still has same gravity strenght !!! absolutely nothing is depleted or even taken a smallest bit, but energy is gained !!!
- same with magnet. steell ball entering magnetic field (distanced enough from magnet) goes through that mag. field changes vector, accelerates and makes ball make longer path (s) than it would make with only small push without magnet. by making ball making longer path (s) magnet did not lost absolutely non of it's initial magnetism, but ball
certanly gained energy.
.
.
Wiz

[Charlie_V]

Now if the table top producing a great deal of sound has done nothing other than store energy then why is the motion of the tuning fork not dampened in proportion to the magnitude of the sound generated by the table top? Why does the table top seem to be dissipating a great deal of energy as sound while the tuning fork would seem to be losing very little energy?. It seems very much more likely that resonance is not the storage of energy but is a condition of mass, if energy is stored then it must come from somewhere so in the example above why is the motion of the tuning fork not dampened relative to the table tops apparent gain in energy?

I think the answer is because the table is acting as a resonant cavity.  The impedance of the tuning fork and the table are greatly different but they share the same resonant frequency.  So the small amount of energy that is received by the table is stored within the table.  The waves reflect internally within the table and add to each incoming wave before it dies, so the amplitude grows very large (much larger than that of the tuning fork because of the mass).  Larger amplitude produces greater sound.  There is probably a small feed back that occurs and causes the vibrations to not die as rapidly.  However, the sound is the radiative part of the energy and this is what slowly destroys the oscillations (otherwise it would ring like this forever).  Resonance IS a condition of mass but it is how the mass stores energy.  What happens if you dampen the table, will it cause the tuning fork to also dampen - or atleast to not vibrate as long?