Overunity Proof at what point ?

[spoondini]

After you complete your unit, and if it accellerates continuously - the world will need to face you, not the other way around.  It will not require explanation, a straight forward demonstration will do the trick. 

Good luck.

[kmarinas86]

All that you have to do is make something that self-runs.  You don't need to drive a load or do anything dramatic at all, just so something that self-runs.

It would be heard worldwide but not the whole world will know. A self-running device might have shock value to someone who is knowledgeable of current physics. The general public will just find it "interesting" or "nifty" at best, but will find no instant gratification by watching it. Even a demonstration "staged" in public would attract attention. That has been done before many times. Newman is an example of that. That is still not good enough. Attention to the device will have to be ON FIRE. Why? You will need people who are outside science, engineering, or even mechanical hobbies to be clamoring support for your device. I conclude this from my observations of the Newman's campaign for his energy machine. Obviously the demonstrations should be spectacular. Yet even "spectacular" will far short if it not just plain obvious and in your face. IT HAS TO FLY -> NO wires beneath. Anything less looks gimmicky or easy to squash -> Not proof.

It could be small enough to fit in the palm of your hand or weigh two tons, it doesn't matter.

This interests engineers, not the numbers of people necessary who create the demand which create the market for these things.

It could be electrical or mechanical, it doesn't matter.  If you do that you don't need to spend a cent on advertising at all, the story would make the front page of CNN dot com for months.

True. BUT the amount of "free advertising" equivalent has to be in the billions. To think that this will be demanded worldwide as a result of the same level of publicity received by the Heene balloon family is extremely naive. It is hopelessly orthodox to rely on a few dozen tv news segments to spread awareness of this kind of thing. The reason is simply because if it manages to only go that far, it is too esoteric to attract much attention from big AND small investors of the world. If you are OK with allowing free energy ONLY to a few, than I am not for you at all.

In the Bedini "story" there are various references to Bedini making self-runners but the device couldn't produce any useful torque or electricity, and John Bedini shelved the device and moved on because it was "not practical" or whatever the alleged quote is.

Bedini never made it to CNN, FOX News, etc. The absence of widespread use of the Bedini device is NO COINCIDENCE.

I have seen many free energy experimenters make reference to this in their postings and seemingly accepting that as a fact of life and leaving it at that.

That is just totally crazy because like I said above, producing any kind of self runner is by definition a free energy device and the news would be bigger than the moon landing in 1969.

B.S. It doesn't even take a mention of "free energy suppression" to show why people would not automatically know. Even in the absence of suppression, the truth is that most humans are not "energy nerds". To inspire them, you need shock value. It sounds sinister, but it is often underlooked as a barrier to communication. If only technicians or scientists care, then it is not news. Joseph Newman derived shock value in the public by his character, and to technicians through his machines. The truth is that the reaction by the public must be much more laudable than that by the technicians.

The fact that John Bedini "moved on" is just completely outrageous and totally ridiculous.  If you tune your collective noses you should be able to smell that something is not right about the Bedini story - alleged Men in Black and the whole enchilada.

Or perhaps the general public simply doesn't care. I know why. The Bedini apparatus doesn't operate with splendor observable to the average person. Many people who are in the "free energy" movement are out of touch with the people outside that movement in that they think that just because their "machine technically" works that someone from outside will care. You have to defeat the "energy nerd" stigma.

For people who are creative enough to develop a free-energy device, they are almost NEVER "left-brained" enough to discover the tact needed to take a device into mass production. There is at least one exception, Randell Mills.

Howard you are up against the fact that you can't extract any energy from magnets, they are as dead as proverbial doorknobs.  I know that you don't believe that, you are just going to have to prove it for yourself.

True. Pure magnetic motors are a pathetic waste of time.

The real message behind this posting is just try to find your Holy Grail - and we are not fudging with the definition here - wind and solar and hydro and geothermal don't count - only the real thing counts.

Imagine any device that you could put inside a transparent Lucite cube that runs by itself, and only by itself.   That means it does not run on external thermal energy, or external sound energy, or external vibrational energy, or external light energy, or external electromagnetic energy, or external wind energy, and so on.

That is too much to ask for. If your energy source is intangible, you will not inspire the world into replacing fossil fuels with your devices. Your only outlet of hope is to claim that your converting mass into energy, and unless your output is spectacular, you cannot prove it.

Put something that can run itself inside a transparent Lucite cube of any size and then you have something.

Something boring (midly interesting at best) to anyone who is not a "techno geek".

[kmarinas86]

There some problem with people working on this field , ALOTS dont have enought knowledge, thinking out of the box mean you need to know where the box is first.They try to find anomaly without first learning what is "Normal", total non-sense IMO.Second thing is equipment, without good equipment they will never find anything even if its in front of them.

Sensible comment.

IMO people focus too much on schematic and not enought on theory.If you dont know what is the theory about the source you try to catch, there no point at all to work on schematic,its like building a nuclear reactor without knowing first how uranium will be used inside it, total non sense. When you know the theory, you know how to prove it, if not , you will have to learn a bit more but at the end will are able to tap it if the theory was correct,Like a radio receiver, if you build it to tap X frequency, you will succeed, else , only the noise of deception.

Exactly.

[kmarinas86]

double post