Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[xenomorphlabs]

While experimentation has its merits and fun, have we actually given any thought at how (in a conceptual level) we could achieve overunity?
I have given some thought and i believe it could inspire experimenters or at least to find my way of thinking interesting.. so i begin.
...
We can imagine our OU device as a black box, that has a battery as a kick-starter and then its operation to be self sustained, outputing generous amounts of energy in the form of heat, radiation or electricity etc while it takes no fuel and its operation can be indefinitely prolonged as long as machine is maintained.

How can be that? Obviously the energy will not come from battery.. but from a source. This source could be,
- nuclear energy (of any special material, mineral etc)
- ambient energy (thermal, EM radiation, zero point etc)
- magnets
- electrets
etc

In the genre of OU alleged devices as Kapanadze, we can be sure that in the above contex, an initial chemical energy stored in a bettery is transformed to electric this in turn to a magnetic field or electric field, that in turn via an unknown mechanism will produce an electric or magnetic field with greater energy content that the initial pulse / stimulus. Excess energy is harvested and outputed + maintains device operation. ok so far.. but how?

I have given some thought from time to time and i present some concepts as:

a) An magnetic "transistor"
Imagine a material (e.g. ferrite) that under normal conditions is magnetically conductive. Imagine upon an application of a field or stimulus this to become non concductive. Absolute nessecity is the stimulus energy to be lesser than the magnetization energy of the whole magnetic circuit. This way, a permanent magnet can be used as an inexhaustible battery.

b) Magnetic "booster"
More or less in the same spirit, imagine a material (eg. ferrite) that upon it is wound a coil. Assuming the coil is passing I current and creates a feeble magnetization. Imagize to this coil to be applied a Field or Frequency that boosts ferrite's magnetic strength (hence energy content) by altering its permeatability. But this is not anly so... it has, furthermore this core to be "self-supermagnetized" without requiring additional energy input (to overcome the excessive new state self-inductance).

c) Coil "screening"
Imagine a coil that interacts with another coil via a magnetic material (e.g ferrite etc) but, their interaction is not linear and at best not reciprocal at all. Thus a coil can have a low self inductance, creating a B1-field of E1 content and this in turn via some mysterious screening mechanism to charge a matterial (that is wound another coil) with B2 field of E2 energy content. Prerequise is E1<E2.

On the counter part, extra energy could be theoretically extracted by harvesting excess E-field.

a) "Super-capacitor"
Imagine a capacitor inside a black box device that has 4 teminals. Actually its 2 capacitors one controlling the other. Imagine that the controlling cap has a capacity of 1uf and can be charged at 100volts, while in the same time the "controlled" capacitor has twice capacity 2uf and reaches 100volts. Assuming their voltage relation is linear at least, then we can harvest excess energy.

ps: quote of a fellow experimenter...

Good thinking, too often experiments can be seen, where the question of how
extra energy can come into the system is not asked.
OU always means that there is a non-linear process going on in relation to an input variable.
Ferroresonance for example has been shown to exhibit this non-linearity.
Same as LC resonance, but that in most cases requires significant thought on extraction methodology or
no effect can be noticed.

[Enfolder]

Excellent now we got something to get and test. I hope this is the same stuff...

It should be, at least as far as I can determine without samples.

I have ordered some of this material and plan on having an XRF done on it to determine the
metal content, then compare that with historical analysis of record.

Since metallurgy is one of my interests, this seems to be the best way for me to contribute at this time.

My plan is to make several cores, one being a control ( left as it comes from the foundry ), and subjecting the rest to various annealing temperatures and quenches. This will modify grain size and structure.

Each core will then be tested and results compared and shared.

Conditioning the cores during the annealing process is on the table, but I need to finish the first round of tests before adding in more variables.

[znel]

post deleted

[verpies]

So  Verpies do what you want to do  and put all of the dirt on me.

Wesley,

It is not my intention to "put dirt on you", nor have I done it.
Also, I have never used AdHominem remarks or been rude to you - unless criticizing your science is rude in your book.

I am not your enemy - I am a serious scientist with serious questions.
If you appreciate the scientific method, then you should appreciate my constructive criticisms - not take offense at them.

Notice, that so far you ignored most of my technical suggestions and questions
and you did not technically rebut my valid constructive criticisms,
and you avoided responding to my messages from my very first post to you in this thread despite my apparent knowledge and experience in EE (yet you devote considerable time to individuals with little technical background) and you still avoid clarifying issues that I had identified in your Yoke tuning procedure. See Reply #9510

As a scientist, I expect you to be unambiguous/precise and objective.


My criticisms of your results still stand:

1) To date, nobody besides your team has shown a successful tuning of the Yoke device (even with an identical ferrite core).

  a) Your tuning procedure (Reply #9372) was imprecise and remains unclarified till this day, despite my efforts to point out the ambiguities within it and to rephrase it in proper English, for everyone's benefit.  See Reply #9510

2) Your claims about the input power consumption of the Caduceus Tube device (acting as a load to the power supply) were wrong. They were the result of the false premise that subtracting power consumed by a power supply without a load from the power consumed by a power supply with a load, constitutes the power delivered to a load. This premise is not always true because the variable power dissipated by the power supply itself is unaccounted for.  This is an objective statement and not a matter of my opinion. Truth is not subjective in science.  I can prove it empirically (and anyone else can) with the attached shunt power supply circuit, Re: Reply #9223 and Reply #9256

3) The crucial In/Out power measurements in the Yoke and Tube devices are missing, despite the availability of proper test equipment on hand:

  a)  A 2-ch multiplying oscilloscope was available near the Yoke device and Caduceus Tube device, yet the power measurements were not done with it. (BTW: In my previous post I was not referring to the "Lithuania experiment" when I mentioned that "the lack of power measurements was frustrating in itself considering the fancy test equipment you had at your disposition").  Although this is also frustrating in respect to the Tube device, I was writing about the Yoke device then.  Please be precise when you read my statements.

  b) Access to paint cans and photodiodes in US and Lithuania (which is not a primitive country) was easy.  You do not need to be a "wealthy man" to buy a $5 photodiode.  Despite this, no effort was made to measure the brightness of the light bulb scientifically.  Instead it was unscientifically eyeballed and recorded with a variable aperture camera.

  c) In over a month there was plenty of time to make valid input power measurements with a 2-ch oscilloscope, because one such measurement takes only 5min.

Would any reasonable person believe, that in over a month, you did not have 5min to hook up an oscilloscope and a resistor to make a crucial power measurement ? 

[DreamThinkBuild]

Hi Wesley,

I just want to say thank you and I appreciate all your efforts.

Hi Baroutologos,

"have we actually given any thought at how (in a conceptual level) we could achieve overunity?"

What we need are two systems that interact mutually but not coupled exclusively, a fully decoupled system. The source must never be influenced by the load of the output(s). It would be absurd if every time we put a heavy load on a solar panel that the earth slows down.