What is over unity?

Omnibus · August 17, 2010, 11:03:41 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on August 17, 2010, 10:58:33 AM
You're losing me Omnibus. Over Unity relies on the measure of more energy being dissipated at a circuit than is delivered by an energy supply source. There is no known 'FORCE OF DISPLACEMENT' that I have ever learned about. The forces relate to electromagnetic forces, gravity and the strong and weak nuclear force. These are known and accepted by mainstream. What is not yet acknowledged or understood is the force from Dark matter resulting in Dark energy. That is yet to be incorporated. I know of no other forces. Not anywhere.

So you don't know that displacement under the action of a force is work, correct?

Omnibus · August 17, 2010, 11:05:20 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on August 17, 2010, 11:00:51 AM
If there was no latent energy in the resistor then E would NOT equal MC^2. Are you proposing the Mass does not have energy? That would be a really exotic branch of physics to develop.

So, you think the resistor is losing mass when current passes through it, is that it?

Omnibus · August 17, 2010, 11:06:05 AM

Quote from: Low-Q on August 17, 2010, 10:58:53 AM
No, it's not an opinion. It's the truth as long you haven't been able to prove anything yet. When it comes to you, I know it doesn't help to repeat this 100 times, because you have already decided that you're right, and are too scared to rethink your "prove of over unity". I know you are wrong, and that is good enough for me, but I find it very refreshing to argue with you once in a while

Vidar

Don't repeat 100 times your opinion, it will not become truth that way.

Rosemary Ainslie · August 17, 2010, 11:13:51 AM

Quote from: Omnibus on August 17, 2010, 11:05:20 AM
So, you think the resistor is losing mass when current passes through it, is that it?

NO, not at all. I know the resistor is NOT losing mass. I'm reasonably satisfied that in the standard transfer of electric energy there is little - if any - change to the atomic structure of the resistor. The only thing that changes is the integrity of its bound condition. For that matter, nor do I think that there's changes to the mass from the supply - be it a motorised generator or a chemical cell. The difference in the cell is only ever in the re-arrangement of the molecular structures in that cell which vary the distribution of charge and the location of those molecules. But the mass is entirely conserved - give or take some minor evaporation of some of the liquid - or the escape of some of those gases.

Omnibus · August 17, 2010, 11:20:50 AM

Quote from: Rosemary Ainslie on August 17, 2010, 11:13:51 AM
NO, not at all. I know the resistor is NOT losing mass. I'm reasonably satisfied that in the standard transfer of electric energy there is little - if any - change to the atomic structure of the resistor. The only thing that changes is the integrity of its bound condition. For that matter, nor do I think that there's changes to the mass from the supply - be it a motorised generator or a chemical cell. The difference in the cell is only ever in the re-arrangement of the molecular structures in that cell which vary the distribution of charge and the location of those molecules. But the mass is entirely conserved - give or take some minor evaporation of some of the liquid - or the escape of some of those gases.

So, mass is conserved but chemical bonding changes (re-arrangement of the molecular structures). In other words you treat the resistor as some kind of fuel. Take coil, for instance. When a limp of coil burns mass is conserved but various changes occur with the bonding. That's pretty trivial. This isn't overunity.

Let alone, no such re-arrangement takes place whatsoever. That's unfounded to no end.