Because gas and electricity costs so much money now, I've been drawn to reading about alternative energy on the internet. I became convinced that it is possible to harness energy much more efficiently than what we have been doing, from reading Lee-Tseung lead out theory and also watching videos of Milkovic's mechanical machine.
I have also come across Newman's machine. Although I don't understand how it works yet, I am convinced based on the videos that I have seen on youtube.com that it probably is the real thing.
Hence, I am interested in either buying one of these machines or buying the parts in order to build it myself, after I understand how it works. My goal is to reduce my electricity bill.
So I ask the good people of the forum that I have just joined, what is the best way for me to accomplish this goal? Has anyone had success in doing this, reducing their electricity bill via a Newman machine?
Thank you,
Craig
Hah..hah, reducing electricity bill vith the Newman machine!
Newman machine = Mix of nonsense, misunderstanding and scam.
National Bureau of Standards (NBS) test results of Newman motor:
http://www.ncas.org/nbsreport/contents.html
Do You know, Newman motor is also a weather machine! ;D
http://www.rexresearch.com/wells/wells.htm
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4341.0.html
If features of the Newman motor would be like Mr. Newman claims, it would be exellent for running electric genererator. (Newman claim: It get over 8 times mechanical output as electric input.)
But this claim is not true. It's only deliriums of mad man or pure scam... :(
You are not alone in wanting a working Newman Machine.
The proprietor of this website is also trying to build one:
http://josephnewman.com/
http://www.phact.org/e/dennis4.html
QuoteJoseph Newman in 1984 claimed to have a free energy machine based on alternative physics. Like many perpetual motion inventors, he sued the US patent office. Many people wrongly measured the true power output of this machine, (they didn't realize you must specially calculate power for non sinusoidal current consumption). He now refuses to ship a unit for testing. Ten years ago, inventor Joseph Newman gave a open week-long demonstration in the Super dome in New Orleans. Over 9,000 people attended from across the country (including Dennis Lee who reportedly wanted to join his ideas with Newman. ) Newman is suing some former investors he claims are trying to steal his invention. I give more information. Evan Soule of Newman's organization offers a rebuttal
Some sites, which drop you back on the surface of the earth from the clouds!
http://www.randi.org/jr/03-22-2000.html
http://www.phact.org/e/skeptic/newlee.htm
http://www.phact.org/e/skeptic/newman.htm
http://www.phact.org/e/dennis19.html
http://www.phact.org/e/skeptic/biss.htm
http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/fnrg.html
I joined this forum to talk to believers, not skeptics. Are there any believers out there?
Hi cafeinst,
The Newman motor is low rpm high torque and high efficiency. This thing will do work for cheap but it is an expensive motor to build (to do actual work), it has to be heavy to do it and the commutator has to be used as it was designed.
These are the limitations that keep it off the commercial markets of today. His smallest and latest motor weights in at 400 lb.
I would look for solar if you have a little to spend and wait for what is still eluding us.
Define your specific needs and see if the Newman motor is for you.
Take care,
Michel
Hi cafeinst,
I am a believer, but that does not mean I believe everything that I read. If a Newman machine gets so much more out than in why can't anyone produce a self runner? Now some give really esoteric reasons that the output shaft cannot be used to power the input source. But Newman insists that the output can pump water and power cars. If you can use the output shaft to pump water you sure can use it to drive a generator that charges the batteries.
The truth appears to be that no one has done that because no one can do it ... at least not with a Newman.
Here is a comment and also a question for all skeptics:
Comment: I've watched youtube videos (from amateurs building Newman machines and running them on very little energy) and seen with my own eyes that the Newman machine actually does accomplish more work than is put in. I think I understand why this is so, as I believe that the Newman machine is really the same thing in principle as the Milkovic machine, except that the Newman machine runs on EM force while the Milkovic machine runs on gravity. Obviously, the Milkovic machine accomplishes more work than is put in, so there is no reason why the Newman machine shouldn't do this too.
Question for skeptics: Why are you skeptics so dismissive of the Newman machine? Do you have a problem with the principle behind the Newman machine or do you have a problem with its practicality?
Re cafeinst,
As I said before the Newman motor does not run on free energy, it may produce some but not worth the time.
If you really want FREE ENERGY, check out the Stubblefield cell or the TPU thread where I think we are on the sent now so to speak and is theoretically plausible.
Take care,
Michel
Free energy is not bemf which Newman use to propel his motor instead of charging sources.
The Newman motor theory formula:
E=mc2 (L)
L is the coil.
Work with this formula.
Michel
Hi cafeinst,
Your question about skeptics made me look in the mirror for a bit. Here are my reservations about the Newman Motor. Some of them are emotional.
It feels like Newman can't be trusted. That's emotional I know, but it does feel that way.
Mr Biss diary of his dealings with Newman are, I think really telling. Stephan has been in touch with Mr Biss and would disagree with me. This is also an emotional response on my part.
As soon as I saw the Newman machine on Youtube I started looking for a wire and bearing supplier. It seemed that this machine is the real deal. But the nagging question would not go away. If this thing really gives that much extra energy, (or power or whatever) how come none of the Youtube builders ever made a self runner? How come Newman hasn't? I will ask that question again: How come Newman hasn't? If you can turn a several hundred pound shaft with a pack of small batteries you MUST be able to take power from that shaft to replace the batteries. It would take much less time to convert a "working" Newman into a self runner than it does to build the Newman itself.
The self runner issue is important because of the claims made about it. Many OU type devices claim to pull only small amounts of power from the vacuum or wherever. There is a need to investigate these, understand where and how the gain occurs and exploit it. With the Newman we constantly hear claims exceeding 10 times more out than in. Creating a self runner should be a no brainer.
I think Newman himself believes his own press. That may be why less cynical people than I are drawn to him.
Quote from: willitwork on August 19, 2008, 04:43:38 AM
Hi cafeinst,
Your question about skeptics made me look in the mirror for a bit. Here are my reservations about the Newman Motor. Some of them are emotional.
It feels like Newman can't be trusted. That's emotional I know, but it does feel that way.
Mr Biss diary of his dealings with Newman are, I think really telling. Stephan has been in touch with Mr Biss and would disagree with me. This is also an emotional response on my part.
Hello willitwork!
I share the same sentiment. Although I like fiddling with the Newman machine and I share as much optimism to make it work more efficiently as much as the super techno enthusiasts here like Stefan and the others, I really don't trust Mr. Newman.. Honestly.
You could say that I have more faith in the other YouTUbe guys like ray0energy, STARK, kmarinas, zeropointprophet who do the Newman machine, and at the same time show unbiased information at the results that they're getting (be it good or bad results), instead of claiming unlimited speed and power that the original inventor is doing.
Hint:
If you are using low potential, you are not running a Newman motor. You are running a magnetic motor.
A Newman Motor uses HIGH VOLTAGE.
The motor will turn like a Newman motor but it is NOT using the "Newman Effect". E=MC2 (L)
Michel
G'day Michel,
Can you send me a link or some further detail on the "Newman Effect. E=MC2 (L)"?
I have definitely been viewing this through low voltage eyes.
thanks
Hi willitwork,
Most physicists are unaware that Einstein's famous equation was originally written by Einstein as EL = mc^2.
http://www.josephnewman.com/Einsteins_Equation.html (http://www.josephnewman.com/Einsteins_Equation.html)
The rest is in his book. The speed of light in a coil. High voltage.
Take care,
Michel
Cafe,
this guy is using solar to power home and car.
Huge initial investment, but he is off the grid.
solar & hydrogen combo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEdQRVQtffw
SM
Dear Nomen luni,
You are correct to distinguish between skeptics and debunkers. Based upon my experience, the debunkers have had both a positive and a negative impact on progress. Debunking started out as a good thing, debunking paranormal stuff. Houdini was an example and the Amazing Randi has continued this tradition.
However, the debunkers have a tendency to go too far. There is a power of laugher and mocking, which is in the arsenal of the debunker. It is possible to metaphorically destroy demons by laughing at them. (I say metaphorically because they really don't exist, if anyone didn't know this.) However, it is also possible to destroy great ideas like the airplane by laughing at them too. The idea of an airplane was mocked for a few years even after the Wright brothers' flight. It took a lot of strength and fortitude on the part of the Wright brothers to ignore the mockers and do what they did.
The NBS test report was a governmental scam as I have always said and
it was proven by numerours engineers, that the NBS did test the Newman machine
wrongly by shorting out and suppressing the BackEMF pulses, so
the batteries were not recharged and no electrical overunity energy was measured.
The NBS persons did not understand the machine.
That can be read in their test report and their
circuit diagram.
The main OU energy in the Newman machine
are in the Backcurrent spikes, which they did suppress.
The OU energy comes from the oxidation of the graphite from C to CO2
via the sparking and releasing these oxidation electrons into the
circuit to recharge the battery.
A dissimular metal electrode commutator is needed from
copper and graphite and the spark is the "electrolyte"-
This way the commutator forms a galvanic cell ( additional battery) which is
put into the cuircuit, so it recharges the main supply battery during the sparking
via this oxidation process.
As this is some kind of DIRECT CARBON CONVERSION to electrical
energy, it is very efficient.
NewmanÂÃ,´s explanations about gyroscopic particles and E= M x C^2
in this context is NOT the key factor.
It is the graphite oxidation process, which delivers free additional electrons into the
circuit and which charge up the supply batteries.
That is the whole secret of the Newman motors.
I have worked quite some time on this to understand it...
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: hartiberlin on September 11, 2008, 04:41:15 PM
... The main OU energy in the Newman machine
are in the Backcurrent spikes ...
The OU energy comes from the oxidation of the graphite from C to CO2
via the sparking and releasing these oxidation electrons into the
circuit to recharge the battery.
A dissimular metal electrode commutator is needed from
copper and graphite and the spark is the "electrolyte"-
This way the commutator forms a galvanic cell ( additional battery) which is
put into the cuircuit, so it recharges the main supply battery during the sparking
via this oxidation process.
...
It is the graphite oxidation process, which delivers free additional electrons into the
circuit and which charge up the supply batteries ...
Am I reading this right ...
The materials of construction play an active part in the back emf process?
I know that when a spark jumps, it leaves a layer of Carbon on the contacts. Wouldn't this be enough by itself (on any material) to function as the source of the oxidating electrons (C to CO2) for the back emf?
I am going to imagine a commutator wheel made of graphite and a steel paper-clip as the springy part.
Is it right, does the back emf travel better FROM the graphite to the steel, or should it be the other way around?
Does this mean that a conductive axle should be used? I am trying to find one that isn't influenced by magnetism too much, such as brass or aluminium.
Is it the same graphite that is used in pencils? and if so, how would you stop it from wearing down so quickly on a commutator?
Thanks for reading,
I will understand a short answer, especially if I am barking up the wrong tree.