Arguments against Muller design

[kmarinas86]

The following set of statements are various ways of expressing the second law of thermodynamics:

* With each energy conversion from one form to another, some of the energy becomes unavailable for further use.
* Heat cannot flow from a cold object to a hot object on its own.
* It is impossible to convert heat energy into work with 100 percent efficiency.
* You cannot break even.
* It is impossible to build a machine that produces as much energy as it uses. (This type of machine is called a perpetual motion machine of the second kind.)
* The entropy of the universe tends to a maximum.

The following set of statements mention facts which the second law of thermodynamics overlooks:
* Thermal energy is less than, not equal to, the amount of energy available for work.
* Thermal energy that is derived from matter consists of energy existing mostly in the infrared and visible frequency ranges. These are all but just a tiny fraction of the electromagnetic energy that actually exists.
* Energy tends to travel from hot to cold, but another, and more advanced, way to put that is that energy tends to travel from high to low frequencies. This is due to scattering of photon energy.
* The highest frequency energy is sourced from (and sinks to) where the mass-energy density is the highest. This occurs mainly in nuclei.
* The increase in entropy in the universe is due to optical scattering/divergence/concavity.
* Any entropy-reversing process will involve some sort of optical alignment/convergence/convexity.

[Pirate88179]

After reading the forum where the "proof" for fake is posted I consider it even more fuzzy than the so called "fake" videos.

Besides - Offtopic:
I don't get why some harsh words fell in the overunityresearch.com forum about the way overunity.com is moderated. I personally think that Stefan makes a very good moderator job in here by means of being very patient and open for ideas. I also appreciate a lot, that Stefan does not play "god" in here, even though it's his forum. In most other forums you have 1-2 moderators adding their comments and warnings to any 'pups in the gravel' just for the sake of feeling superior to others.

Not so in here (except you behave really really bad for a long time) - in this board you get: Freedom.

When I first registered in here, I expected many things to be moderated more strictly or some outdated disproven topics to be removed already. But it was this tolerance and openness (aside from the fact that many competent and skilled people are in here too) which kept me in here. As a consequence I've learned lot's of things, and others will too. This relaxed way of moderation may attract disproven or dumb devices as well but they will diminish over time anyways.

I agree with you about the moderation here.  I have been a Moderator on many topic areas now for about 3 years and, I can tell you that most of my duties involve re-sizing photos as to not mess up the page width.  I have seen posts that blast Stefan and this forum and yet, they go un moderated.  This is a credit to Stefan and how he runs this place.

Now, we do not put up with spam bots and obvious flame wars.  But, really, the moderation here is, I think, the best it can be.

Bill

[hoptoad]

I agree with you about the moderation here.  I have been a Moderator on many topic areas now for about 3 years and, I can tell you that most of my duties involve re-sizing photos as to not mess up the page width.  I have seen posts that blast Stefan and this forum and yet, they go un moderated.  This is a credit to Stefan and how he runs this place.

Now, we do not put up with spam bots and obvious flame wars.  But, really, the moderation here is, I think, the best it can be.

Bill

Indeed. I agree. Hat's off to Stefan 

[i_ron]

Ladies and Gentlemen


I have now been convinced that these videos by RomeroUK are fakes, and I want to thank wattsup for persisting and having patience with me as I worked through the evidence.    I just did not want to accept they were fake and wanted to give Romerouk the benefit of doubt, but facts are facts.  This has really been a test of gullibility, and I have failed.  But that's OK, I'll be more critical next time, I hope!



How they were faked.

1)  Video 1 was faked quite easily by supplying the output rail directly from the input.  I should of acted on my instincts earlier when I noticed that his output voltage was the same value as his input voltage. 

2)  Video 2 was faked by taking these same wires supplying the output rail (wire-X), down through the table cap to a hidden battery, just like wattsup has shown.

3)  Video 3 is not proving anything, it's just a spinning rotor.

snip

Sincerely,

EM

Good post EM, doesn't seem to be many other options.

Having built this (and many more over the years) and seeing first hand the night and day difference between romero's and mine this work by wattsup and others is the most logical explanation yet, that I have seen.

People want to believe... look how many still supported mylow, even after the string was shown. There were many a heated battle calling down the "non-believers". Same thing again.

"You will only get it after months of tuning" has been used over and over by Bedini and Hector, et al, to distance themselves from the angry mob.

Ron's rule, "When exact information necessary for a replication is deliberately withheld... then the chances of it being a scam go up exponentially"

Ron

[4Tesla]

Yep.. if it was a real ou device, others would have been able to replicate and get ou from it.. this fine tuning stuff is bs.. there isn't anything special about the RomeroUK build that it would be impossible to replicate.  I don't like it when people lie about having a self-runner!!  RomeroUK = Mylow II