What is over unity?

[Omnibus]

You haven't answered my questions.  And you continue to use spurious excuses to dismiss my work.  But I've learned to expect that from you Omnibus.  You do not know how to argue your statements - only how to state your opinions.  They're boring, with respect.

Your work should be dismissed out of hand because you have demonstrated complete lack of understanding of the basic principles of science. I guess those who helped you do the experiments should be encouraged to continue them until it is understood as to whether or not the overunity effect is real. This is my conclusion from the exchange we had so far.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

You don't know what work and its relation with force is. You don't know what chemical bonding is and how it relates to conservation of mass and the structure of the atom. You don't know the difference between fusion and fission. You don't know wht amalgam is. You don;t know what the nature of electric current is. Is that enough?

You're using big words such as dark matter before caring to acquaint yourself with the basics of physics and chemistry as i noted above.

You're claiming overunity which you have no background to sustain.

Your posts, especially the most recent once are a demonstration of glaring gaps in your understanding of basic chemistry and physics as I repeatedly pointed out.

You should know your deficiencies and should not bother experts with your irrelevant banter because it harms everybody who cares about overunity to be taken seriously. Colleagues associate thouse who study overunity with people like you and try to avoid them like the plague. Honestly, I don't blame them. One only has that much time on Earth to waste it with straightening out confused people who don't even want to listen.

Omnibus.  Find yourself a mirror and then read this post aloud.  You're addressing the wrong person.  LOL

[Omnibus]

Omnibus.  Find yourself a mirror and then read this post aloud.  You're addressing the wrong person.  LOL

Persons like you aggressively pushing their confusion should not be tolerated because it hurts everybody who cares about overunity and its acceptance at large. There are several other elements in this forum who are also pushing either their incompetence or their zealous activism to destroy overunity research. This should be nipped in the bud.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Persons like you aggressively pushing their confusion should not be tolerated because it hurts everybody who cares about overunity and its acceptance at large. There are several other elements in this forum who are also pushing either their incompetence or their zealous activism to destroy overunity research. This should be nipped in the bud.

Omnibus - I get it that you are very much a proponent of clean green and that you subscribe to the validity of Over Unity - here defined as the more energy dissipated at a work station than measured to be delivered.  That's a really good thing.  And there would be absolute consensus on this on these forums.  But you are sadly deluded if you think that this can be obtained within the framework of known classical paradigms.  Just mutually exclusive concepts.  Sad but true.  If you could prove this to be false then I'd be very interested.

What I was pointing to and what I began to think you were realising is that the ONLY thing that changes in the transfer of energy is the 'bound state' of the atoms.  NOT the atoms themselves - except obviously in the condition of extreme heat where spontaneous fusion or fission can occur.

But it seems, sadly, that you're not prepard to entertain new concepts.  It's indeed sad.  You here reflect the attitudes of Professors that I know so well - and it's the result of entrenched belief rather than healthy exploration of scientific principle.  What is entirely predictable is the need to dismiss new thinking out of hand and to do so with the assumption of authority.  You do NOT have that authority.  It has not been given to you by anyone on or off the forums.  And it is your 'type' that does more harm to these needed paradigm shifts than any active resistance to Over Unity results.  There is the understandable need to diminish what knowledge I do have.  I'm well used to this.  But I find it as offensive as the Medieval assumption of witchcraft and their unhappy solution to the problem. 

I really need to spend my time better and trust that our many readers here may be less dismissive than yourself.  I've said it before.  Give us a full account of your credentials - give us your name - and then, indeed, your opinion may carry more significance.  But in the final analysis - precisely because you evade the argument and precisely because you rely on broad sweeping judgements - I'm unfortunately ONLY familiar with your opinion.  And that opinion is boring because it's so, so predictable.  And it's that much more offensive because it carries the protection of your anonymity.  You remain nameless - not even the courage to put your real name to that opinon.

EDITED

[Low-Q]

@Omnibus: Should we ask for your answers to Rosemarys questions a 100 times too?

Why can't you simply answer them, instead of trying to lead us into subjects that has nothing to do with the subject that we are trying to discuss?

I'll bet you will answer this post too with something (nonsense) you can use against me, because all you do is to say things out of the context to mislead people into deep water so you can reestablish your position above them.

Please answer the questions, and keep your nonsense somewhere we cannot see it.

Vidar