Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Yu oscillating Generator ---- Overunity YOG Model

Started by WattBuilder, September 14, 2009, 03:19:15 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

WattBuilder

@Onthecuttingedge2005,

LOL …….. Yes I cannot escape those fields no matter where the YOG is in the galaxy.   :D

I was referring to MileHigh’s error of rotating 180 degrees against the resistance of the array’s magnetic field.

Howard 

Quote from: MileHigh on October 31, 2009, 08:41:36 PM
Plus the only reason that you would have an apparent "gain" for each half-swing if you rotate the magnet by 180 degrees is because you are "forgetting" about the amount of energy you would have to expend to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees against the resistrance of the array's magnetic field.  It's a no-win situation.

MileHigh

@Poynt99,
The resistance at the entry point is not a problem any more when the proven results are a positive gain out the other end.

I view it as an efficiency factor. That will only increase the magnetic energy captured. 

Gain is gain.

Howard

poynt99

Indeed, but the resistance is there, and equates to some loss each half cycle.

All you need to accomplish now is to generate and store enough excess energy each half cycle to power your magnet rotator and you're off to the races.

;)

.99
question everything, double check the facts, THEN decide your path...

Simple Cheap Low Power Oscillators V2.0
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=248
Towards Realizing the TPU V1.4: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=217
Capacitor Energy Transfer Experiments V1.0: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209

synchro1

There's a self running Galvanic pile pendulum oscillator that has run continuously in a vacuum jar in the British Museum for nearly 150 years! Let me point out that Mile high sounds like an outrageous Gadfly or a Clown when he alledges that the servo magnet rotates inside the array. My advice is for him to get his eyes checked. Also, the resonant tank circuit, can be wired with the capacitor in series with the inductor or in parallel. A linear solenoid has two wires leading from the coil. One coil wire goes to the positive pole of the capacitor, and the negative pole of the capacitor goes to the negative pole of the battery. The other wire from the coil goes to one end of a reed switch, and the other end to the positive pole of the battery. When the switch is closed by the trigger magnet, a power pulse travels from the capacitor to coil to magnetise it, and is reinforced by backup current from the battery. When the switch opens, the power from the collapsing magnetic field is recaptured by the capacitor which has a Farad balance with the induction Henry's from the coil, and is ready to recharge the coil again. This is called an LC feedback resonant tank circuit, and works with pulse coils. Howard is using a very inefficient stepper motor, which consumes much more power.

winsonali

synchro1 good work we all should be constructive and let Howard work hard

MileHigh

Howard:

You have to try to avoid the temptation to taking leaps of faith into the unknown.  In your clip where you "demonstrate gains" you never considered the shifting weight causing the increased swing amplitudes until myself and several other people hammered the point home until you acknowledged it.  If nobody said anything you would still be self-deluded in thinking that you had "proved" that you were on the right track.  By the same token, Poynt99 agrees with me that it would take energy to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees at the end of each swing.  This is not an error, it simply has to be for things to stay in balance.  You seem to be assuming that I am wrong without testing this yourself.  With some careful experimenting with a perfectly balanced magnet on a rotating axis you should be able to prove this yourself.  Why are you saying that I am wrong?  What is your reasoning?  You can't just assume things.

Synchro1:

Enough with the name calling, try discussing things where you make rational points that you can back up.  You are putting words into my mouth when you state that I allege that the servo magnet "rotates inside the array."  I never said that.  Also, forget about trying to describe a circuit in text, it simply doesn't work.  I will repeat what I said to you before; if you have an idea for a circuit, post the mechanical and electrical schematic and explain how it works to everyone reading this thread.  I don't buy what you are saying at all, you are just in a spin zone.  You are alleging that you have a more efficient solution for rotating the magnet by 180 degrees at the end of each swing?  Then bring it on, schematic diagrams and a full explanation of what's going on referencing your schematics.

It is incredible seeing the "two cultures" in action yet again.  People like myself and Poynt try to be flexible and offer a wide latitude in our understanding of your statements when we make our rebuttals to the points that you and Howard make.  You guys being the "believers" will focus in on a narrow point made by myself or Poynt99 and ignore the context and offer no latitude in your understanding of our statements before you make your rebuttals.  If you can't make a logical argument then you start name calling.  You also simply ignore all relevant points made by the "other side" that you can't rebut or don't understand or are unwilling to consider.  Such is life.

The "Rickoff" example is a very good one with respect to the viability of this project.  He built his wheel because of the Mylow affair and long after Mylow was proven to be a fake he continued building.  His language early on in the project was overconfident, he was convinced that he was going to have a continuously spinning wheel if he found the "magic Mylow configuration."  This was a stillborn project from the very beginning and it is a shame to see it all end up being nothing more than time, money, and mental and physical energy being poured down the drain.

I know that Howard is not going to stop, so that's why I suggested that he give himself a year before he calls it quits.  Life is short and I am sure that there are better things that he can do.

MileHigh