ENERGY AMPLIFICATION

[that_prophet]

oh yah, it takes soooo much torque to turn a 100 cm circumference pulley
+ three 10 cm circumference pulleys

this works, please build it
it is so simple to build
we can change the world
http://free-energy.yolasite.com/


this is a Gift from our Father in Heaven
Please take Jesus into your heart and become Born Again NOW
(the generation that shall not pass, will pass before 2020)
http://doorschristmustpassthrough.yolasite.com/

If you would like to know where this one_christian_warrior is coming from
Please view http://beliefstoliveby.yolasite.com/

If you would like to know where that_prophet is getting to
Please view http://fire-starter.yolasite.com/

Not again.

"why do you even need a prototype, when it's _obvious_ that it works? "

Not to anyone who has ever actually studied anything about lever arms, moments, torques and so on.  A simple analysis that could be done by a clever high-school kid who paid attention in her pre-calculus class shows that your proposal is a non-starter.

You have made these claims before. They weren't true then and they still aren't true. If you think otherwise, get someone to bring you some parts and tools and build your own test system. When you can _demonstrate_ that your system can do what calculations say it cannot.... then maybe someone will pay attention to you and your overunity wheelchair. Until then, the math -- and all practical experience -- says you are wrong.

[TinselKoala]

You are wrong and when you say "this works" you are lying, because it doesn't. There is ONE WAY for you to prove otherwise: BUILD IT YOURSELF AND PROVE ME WRONG.

[Tito L. Oracion]

Once a week? Yeah right. You really need to learn to understand what you are talking about before putting your foot into it

Lets do some simple math shall we?

How much weight would you need to lift to power the average household for a day?

If you use on average 18Kwh of electricity per day (fairly typical) that's less than 1kwh per hour (if you use a clothes drier and electric hot water it will probably be greater).

That comes out to 64Mj of energy (per day)

Now a 1 kg weight has about 9.82j of potential energy when lifted 1 metre (m*g*h = 1kg*9.82m/s*1m)

Simple math shows that you would need to raise 6.5Ktonne 1 metre to supply a days worth of power, assuming a 100% efficient conversion of potential energy to electricity.

That may astound you ( I was surprised myself ) but remember the higher the weight the more potential energy it has so we can reduce the weight by increasing the height.

But this tradeoff doesn't mean you can use less energy by lifting it higher, we use exactly the same amount.

So how high would I have to lift 1Kg weight for it to have enough kinetic energy to power a house for a day?

The formula is the same as above, we just change a couple of things. j=m*g*h
To calculate for height we change it to h = j / (m*g) = 64Mj/(1kg*9.82) = ~6,500,000M or 6,500Km

Of course its much harder in the REAL WORLD were I live, in your world I am sure this is a trifling problem.

I have attached an excel spreadsheet for you to play with.

Now I will leave it to you how high or how much weight you need to lift to supply your weeks worth of energy.


NOW HERE IS THE REAL LESSON SO DON"T IGNORE IT>>>>

Do Not Trust what I have said above. FIND OUT YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!

Sorry to shout but this is the most frustrating thing of all. People on this forum DO NOT THINK for themselves they hear someone sprouting absolute BS (like solar panels suck energy from the sun) and stupidly do not question it.

QUESTION EVERYTHING!

hey buddy, many times there are many computations that don't conform with the actual things ok.
so don't be so sure to what you are computing.
co'z I experienced that already.
if you only knew that we don't actually need weight to power up a house.


WE ONLY NEED SIGNALS TO POWER UP A HOUSE OR A 1.5 BATTERY OR A 12V BATTERY OR A 9V BATTERY etc!.
OFF COURSE YOU WON'T BELIEVE ME CO'Z YOU WANT PROOF ISN'T IT. 


BUT IF YOU WILL JUST ANALYZE WHAT TESLA SAYS ABOUT 10 WATTS OF CAPACITOR ENERGY IT IS UNLIMITED
IF YOU ONLY KNEW THE RIGHT ARRANGEMENT.   


AND IN THAT SENSE THAT MEANS TESLA IS ALSO TALKING BS ISN'T IT?
YOU TRUST WHAT I HAVE SAID ABOVE. FIND OUT YOURSELF!!!!!


most of the people in this forum believe that they know something deeper than others but they don't know they are just at the first level.


WELL, I'M SHOUTING AND I MEAN IT!!!.


solar sucking energy from the sun?, Well in that case its just depends to others understanding and knowledge about the solar action.
well, if we will just analyze it, most of our energy comes from the sun and the sun freely gives it, activating everything.
for unknowlegeable people yes they think that solar sucks energy from the sun.
and for me i understand them co'z we all past in that level.
and if you don't understand them, you are not very far from them. right?, yes right buddy.   


i don't want to quarrel with you buddy, just answering.
and I understand you also.
 

[Farmhand]

The Tesla Quote below explains his words if you read it.

To put it simply.

Power = Rate of energy delivery.
Energy = Energy
Activity = Oscillating energy. 
Rate of Activity = Oscillating Power.


If we apply 240 v DC to a 1000 Ohm resistive load for 1 second we deliver energy at a rate of 57.6 Watts and also deliver 57.6 Joules of energy.

If we take the same 57.6 Joules of energy in a 1.152 Microfarad capacitor, the capacitor would be charged at 10,000 volts, then if we discharge that capacitor into the same 1000 Ohm resistive load we deliver the 57.6 Joules of energy for a small amount of time at a rate of just under 100,000 Watts. Big power difference (Rate of energy delivery) but same energy (amount of energy), get it.

If we discharge the capacitor into an Inductive and capacitive load we get the same (or a bit less) 57.6 Joules of energy initially oscillating at a rate of power determined by the L/C/R, Which is activity. If the L/C and R Are small the rate of Activity (oscillating power) can be enormous, but the oscillating energy is only 57.6 Joules or less as it dissipates in the resistive portion of the LCR and radiates energy the oscillating energy is lost.   

Power is not Energy
..

Source of Information
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm

Counsel

Speaking of your not having perfectly undamped waves at that time, you were referring to that character of circuit?

Tesla

Yes, but with another kind of circuit I could, of course.  The advantage of this apparatus was the delivering of energy at short intervals whereby one could increase activity, and with this scheme I was able to perform all of those wonderful experiments which have been reprinted from time to time in the technical papers.  I would take energy out of a circuit at rates of hundreds or thousands of horsepower.  In Colorado, I reached 18 million horsepower activities, but that was always by this device: Energy stored in the condenser and discharged in an inconceivably small interval of time.  You could not produce that activity with an undamped wave.  The damped wave is of advantage because it gives you, with a generator of 1 kilowatt, an activity of 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, or 5,000 kilowatts; whereas, if you have a continuous or undamped wave, 1 kilowatt gives you only wave energy at the rate of 1 kilowatt and nothing more.  That is the reason why the system with a quenched gap has become popular.

I have refined this so that I have been able to take energy out of engines by drawing on their momentum.  For instance, if the engine is of 200 horsepower, I take the energy out for a minute interval of time, at a rate of 5,000 or 6,000 horsepower, then I store [it] in a condenser and discharge the same at the rate of several millions of horsepower.  That is how these wonderful effects are produced.  The condenser is the most wonderful instrument, as I have stated in my writings, because it enables us to attain greater activities than are practical with explosives.  There is no limit to the energy which you can develop with a condenser.  There is a limit to the energy which you can develop with an explosive.

A common experiment, for instance, in my laboratory on Houston Street, was to pass through a coil energy at a rate of several thousand horsepower, put a piece of thick tinfoil on a stick, and approach it to that coil.  The tinfoil would melt, and would not only melt, but while it was still in that form, it would be evaporated and the whole process took place in so small an interval of time that it was like a cannon shot.  Instantly I put it there, there was an explosion.  That was a striking experiment.  It simply showed the power of the condenser, and at that time I was so reckless that in order to demonstrate to my visitors that my theories were correct, I would stick my head into that coil and I was not hurt; but, I would not do it now.

...

[Tito L. Oracion]

Counsel

Speaking of your not having perfectly undamped waves at that time, you were referring to that character of circuit?

Tesla

Yes, but with another kind of circuit I could, of course.  The advantage of this apparatus was the delivering of energy at short intervals whereby one could increase activity, and with this scheme I was able to perform all of those wonderful experiments which have been reprinted from time to time in the technical papers.  I would take energy out of a circuit at rates of hundreds or thousands of horsepower.  In Colorado, I reached 18 million horsepower activities, but that was always by this device: Energy stored in the condenser and discharged in an inconceivably small interval of time.  You could not produce that activity with an undamped wave.  The damped wave is of advantage because it gives you, with a generator of 1 kilowatt, an activity of 2,000, 3,000, 4,000, or 5,000 kilowatts; whereas, if you have a continuous or undamped wave, 1 kilowatt gives you only wave energy at the rate of 1 kilowatt and nothing more.  That is the reason why the system with a quenched gap has become popular.

I have refined this so that I have been able to take energy out of engines by drawing on their momentum.  For instance, if the engine is of 200 horsepower, I take theenergy out for a minute interval of time, at a rate of 5,000 or 6,000 horsepower, then I store [it] in a condenser and discharge the same at the rate of several millions of horsepower.  That is how these wonderful effects are produced.  The condenser is the most wonderful instrument, as I have stated in my writings, because it enables us to attain greater activities than are practical with explosives.  There is no limit to the energy which you can develop with a condenser.  There is a limit to the energy which you can develop with an explosive.

A common experiment, for instance, in my laboratory on Houston Street, was to pass through a coil energy at a rate of several thousand horsepower, put a piece of thick tinfoil on a stick, and approach it to that coil.  The tinfoil would melt, and would not only melt, but while it was still in that form, it would be evaporated and the whole process took place in so small an interval of time that it was like a cannon shot.  Instantly I put it there, there was an explosion.  That was a striking experiment.  It simply showed the power of the condenser, and at that time I was so reckless that in order to demonstrate to my visitors that my theories were correct, I would stick my head into that coil and I was not hurt; but, I would not do it now.


POWER IS CAPABLE TO MAKE ENERGY.


POWER IS LIKE MONEY, MONEY IS NOT ENERGY BUT IT HAS POWER TO MAKE SOMEONE MOVE. 


POWER IS ALSO LIKE GASOLINE OR DIESEL, THEY ARE NOT ENERGY BUT THEY ARE CAPABLE TO MAKE EXPLOSION WHEREVER YOU WANT AND CREATE ENERGY.


ELECTRICITY IS NOT ENERGY BUT IT IS A MOVEMENT OF ELECTRONS, AND AS THEY MOVE, ENERGY IS DONE.
EVERY SINGLE ELECTRON HAS ITS OWN MAGNETIC PROPERTIES LIKE A MAGNET
VOLTAGE IS AN OPEN HIGHWAY FOR AN ELECTRON TO MOVE AND AS THEY MOVE THEY BUILD ENERGY.


ENERGY THEREFORE IS THE MOVEMENT OF SOMETHING INTENDED BY SOMETHING OR SOMEONE.