The paradox of overunity

[Ar-el-es]

Gravity machines, when working such will be made, will be true OU machines (unlike solar, wind etc. machines, as I explained). So this is the main focus of our fight -- to ensure engineering conditions for such machines, which are possible to exist in principle, to find their concrete engineering expression of a working device.

I have explained the above more than once in various forms. Now, what part of it do you not understand?

Now this is where it gets confusing again. I thought you said that any device that derives it's power from an outside isn't a true OU device? A gravity wheel doesn't fit that definition which is why I'm trying to clear this up. I still don't see why you would classify a gravity wheel as such and exclude all of the rest even though in principle they all recieve their power from an outside source. If it's because you think that the gravity of Earth is an unlimited source of energy? I wouldn't be surprised that the devices does effect the Earth's gravity much like how dams have affected the speed of the Earth's spin. I really hope this isn't the case and logically I don't see it happening but we still don't understand gravity enough to say that it wouldn't.

Even Gwandau's post, which seems to have gone unnoticed, kind of picks up on that.

Hey dear participants in this energetic discussion,

I believe we are out in real deep waters here.

How on Earth would it be possible to ascertain that there is no pre-existing energy reservoir fueling the OU device?

I mean, just the fact that we do not detect any presence of an energy source does not
prove that there is no source.

What is not known does not exist???

To prove the total absence of a source, you need to know everything there is to know about our universe which of course is impossible,
and most certainly for a primitive species like the human race, who just have started fiddeling with the uppermost top of the iceberg of knowledge.

So the present level of this discussion seems a bit futile.

Gwandau

@Ar-el-es,

The most interesting thing in the link you gave: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5707.msg129890#msg129890 is that @xpenzif is one of the contributors. His contribution of $3,500 is the third largest. I don't understand how these things happen. Remember, he was selling his screw motor on ebay for around $70 which him being a poor college kid would have helped him. And, suddenly, $3,500 donation. His parents must have helped or there is something else. I wonder if Stefan did actually get the money or this was just a pledge.

I recently arrived at this forum less than a week ago so I don't know anything about the guy but I do find that awfully strange. I'm not sure why you brought that up unless it's somehow supposed to make me look foolish? That's why I copy and pasted the part that I posted because that's the section of the prize's requirements that makes this whole discussion somewhat confusing.

[Omnibus]

@Ar-el-es,

First, om the gravity machine. please understand that gravity is not energy. Gravity is force and force is not energy. Once that sinks in, you would be able to understand why I consider gravity machines as true OU machines.

On @xpenzif. I don't know where it came from that by being amazed at @xpenzif's pledge it somehow meant that I was aiming to make you look foolish. What is this all about? The @xpenzif story is just like the onging @Roobert33 one. @xpenzif's motor was called a "screw motor" because the rotor was made of rows of flattened screws. As in the current case, even more so, everybody jumped in to replicate it and vids of replications were flowing one after another every day (to no avail). At one point @xpenzif took down his vid just like @Roobert33 did, although the former stayed a bit longer. Then, it popped up on ebay and somebody bought it for somewere around $70 and nothing more was heard ever since from anyone. The idea, however, is pretty interesting and it should be explored further alongside the current one as well as Sjack Abeling's (which is a purely gravity wheel). There was another good idea earlier, that of Walter Torbay from Argentina, and that should also be looked into more, although it is quite a bit more complicated to replicate. In a word, @xpenzif is one of the legends in this forum and his appearance in Stefan's list of pledgers is a real surprise. Again, I wonder if Stefan really got that $3,500 from him or that was just a pledge? Soory if there was any mixup on that issue.

[Omnibus]

By the way I just finished reading Keith Richards' book 'Life' and besides learning that one of his early dogs was called Syphillis he, turns out, has had a rock group of his own (outside of The Rolling Stones) called X-pensive Winos. So, now it becomes clear whereoaur own @xpenzif got that cool handle (I like it better than the name of the group).

[WilbyInebriated]

First, om the gravity machine. please understand that gravity is not energy. Gravity is force and force is not energy. Once that sinks in, you would be able to understand why I consider gravity machines as true OU machines.

i, like the rest of us i'm sure, would surely enjoy seeing your designs for a "gravity machine" that doesn't use gravitational potential energy (which, as a form of energy appears by all evidences to be subject to coe). once that sinks in...

[Omnibus]

i, like the rest of us i'm sure, would surely enjoy seeing your designs for a "gravity machine" that doesn't use gravitational potential energy (which, as a form of energy appears by all evidences to be subject to coe). once that sinks in...

Like I said, don't bother, it's over your head.