Quote from: Doug1 on November 05, 2009, 08:04:17 AM
So in a model of ou. The energy your working with would have to be a limited supply and show a growth or gain like an expanding displacement while it is performing work?

Yes, exactly.

QuoteIf it was powered by a full charge battery it would have to >remain fully charged< while charging a second dead battery while doing work such as running a motor or a heater?

Yes, that would be one example of an OU device.  Another would simply be to keep the original battery fully charged while running a motor (thus running said motor indefinitely), or even to just charge another empty battery to full capacity before the original battery is drained (and then be able to switch the batteries ad infinitum) - or at the very least, once the machine is running, connect the output energy to the machine input and remove batteries entirely, creating a self-running machine.

QuoteI would imagine a person would just run a bigger heater that could use up all the power and just end up with a lot of heat from one battery and dispense with the second one in practical use. In that event would'nt you be back to fighting the argument that it is just more efficient because you did not store the excess but put it to use instead?

Practical use doesn't matter - what matters here is the demonstration that a device actually qualifies as an overunity device. 

To do so, all you need is to get more energy out than you put in.  That's all.

QuoteThinking of the phrase; "Perpetual motion machine".
A Perpetual motion machine is still a machine. Machines
wear out and break down. So Perpetual Motion is about
generating more excess energy out then what was put into it.
Over time the net excess energy should be able to grow
arbitrarily large.

Lol, Keely once answered to someone asking about a perpetual motion machine, that to make a perpetual motion machine, it extremely simple. It just has to be in balance. But such a machine would be completely useless, as it only would run itself. One couldn't derive energy from such a machine without stopping it. What we want, is a machine out of balance, with which work can be done.

QuoteTo do so, all you need is to get more energy out than you put in.

Unfortunately. I think the definition is not that simple. For what exactly does it mean: The energy you put in. It can very well be, that the amount of energy is always the same, but a special machine is reversing the entropic direction. Then it derives some kind of energy and accumulates it. So is this also put in? Strictly spoken, yes! So IMHO all, even very strong, what is currently called Overunity machines, actually don't output more energy, than they use. They just transform different states of energy. Some maybe unknown.

You could define it like that. That it outputs more energy, than the "paid" energy you put in. But in this definition every solar cell/wind generator etc. is an OU device. So IMHO it is actually very difficult to exactly define it.
I personally would define an OU device, a device which violates the 2nd LOT, that it has negative entropy.

Quote from: Shanti on November 05, 2009, 04:39:46 PM
Lol, Keely once answered to someone asking about a perpetual motion machine, that to make a perpetual motion machine, it extremely simple. It just has to be in balance. But such a machine would be completely useless, as it only would run itself. One couldn't derive energy from such a machine without stopping it. What we want, is a machine out of balance, with which work can be done.

actually if a PM were possible you could get energy out of it by switching it on a pulse mode, lets say it was a PM wheel hooked to a generator, switching from self run to generator and then back to self run again, you get pulsed energy out so long as you never continuously draw from the source to let it run down all the way. you could use it to charge caps and stuff.

Jerry

Quoteactually if a PM were possible you could get energy out of it by switching it on a pulse mode, lets say it was a PM wheel hooked to a generator, switching from self run to generator and then back to self run again, you get pulsed energy out so long as you never continuously draw from the source to let it run down all the way. you could use it to charge caps and stuff.

Lol. I think you didn't get what Keely understood by the term "perpetual motion machine". He just meant a machine which runs forever. And this can easily be done. Just rotate a wheel in a magnetic bearing in a pure vacuum and it will rotate forever. But you will never get energy out of it, as as soon as you do this, it decelerates the wheel... Pulsing doesn't really help here...

What he meant, that you need to get a disbalance to get work, is IMHO best explained by Walter Russell. You need to create a polarity, a potential difference. Tesla already saw in this a possible way to create such a machine was to create such a potential well, if it is was somehow attainable. And it is.
All flows are dipolar in both directions. Sensitive people even can see them as red and blue in complete darkness (see Karl von Reichenbach).
Unfortunately our science today only knows the discharging part of this dipolar flow. So all the machines are built on this principle. This is why Schauberger exclaimed: "Ihr bewegt falsch!". We have to use the compressive/generative flow. I think it is quite funny that science doesn't believe in this generative flow, for as long as they believe in the 2nd LOT they will never discover what gravity really is.

A simple example of such a potential well is the good old orgone accumulator of Wilhelm Reich. Purely passive, but it easily violates the 2nd LOT. Namely inside the accumulater the temperature is always higher than outside and 2nd if you place e.g. some wax/paraffin on a wall inside it will start to charge itself electrostatically.
Poor Reich didn't have the real knowledge how this exactly worked, therefore the orgone accumulators are a bit inefficient. But Walter Russell easily describes how these things works and so also how e.g. one can build a drastically stronger accumulator. And then you don't have to pulse anything to get OU...

Yet another question.
  How do you figure out the losses of a electro magnet transformer? Or the losses in the same sense inside a electric motor's cores? If anyone is building to over come the loss wouldn't you need to know what the loss is? If power consumed refers to total power used to perform the work where is the measure of loss due to the item in question being operated.
  How was the standard set for watts= hp?