Over Unity (how to get there}

[Qwert]

@QWERT

IF YOU HAVE READ MY FEW AND PREVIOUS POSTS HERE, THEN PLEASE UNDERSTAND WHY YOU NOW ALSO HAVE I STRIKE IN MY LITTLE BOOK.
I DON'T  CARE IF IT IS BECAUSE, YOU WERE FOOLISH ENOUGH TO TAKE THE TROLL BAIT, OR WHO STARTED THE INSULTS ETC.

"WHEN YOU WERE MORE DRUNK"

                                                     FLOOR

Thanks for your efforts, Floor, but I don't catch what you mean in this post. I understand that you want to replenish trolls like me, but I don't feel like a troll at all: I make errors. In fact, I wasn't drunk yesterday though it looked like I was; so, I rather admit that I was. I'm still learning. What I write in this forum is from my observations in this forum, and this time I admit that I made a mistake in my judgement. I have this "veeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrry bad habit" (sic), that I admit IMMEDIATELY for my wrongdoing whenever I catch myself on such one. Sorry once again. In fact, I don't have my own opinion on Overunity, my effort in this forum is to catch obvious contradictions and/or lack of integrity in other's posts.

[Floor]

@TechStuff

Thank you for your post


As to which came first the chicken or the egg (energy or matter) I lean toward the idea that the universe is essentially an energetic event, out of which matter has emerged, not the other way around.  Although matter is returned to energetic form frequently / constantly.

Sub atomic particle are not really matter, in they way that atoms are matter. There are some rather distinct difference in the characteristics of atomic and sub atomic nature.  Hence the name change, electrons are not atoms, they are sub atomic.  By definition any atom is a form of matter, and the atomic level is the limit of matter. Below that are patterns of energy that are called sub atomic "particles" for lack of a better word.  But they are not particles in the sense that a gain of sand is a particle, nor even in the way that a single atom is a particle.

In my view of things, time, at least as we experience it, "begins" at the atomic level.  There may be some thing,  we might call it an analog of time, in which sub atomic nature functions or exists.  Though in my view, again,  I think it is more correct to say that "our time" is the analog of the other.

I ten to think of energy as emerging out of patterns of probability or some analog or type of information, and then matter is formed out of energy.

Of course I could be wrong about this.

                                              thanks again

                                                 Cheers
                                                      floor

[Floor]

@Qwert

Thank you,

for your thanks for my efforts.

i did not say that I "want to replenish trolls".
I did not say "trolls like you"

You have said that you are "sorry" I would gratefully accept an apology, ( I am looking for peers not judges nor enemies ).  But unless one says also, what an apology is for, it is no apology at all. How else are two people to know that they are understanding one another. 
Please understand that I do wish to embarrass or replenish any.

Your " effort in this forum is to catch contradictions and obvious lack of integrity"  I'll grant you that there may be a time and place for such efforts, and  I may at some time even be grateful for those efforts.  However this is a topic I have started, and I will do any policing that I think is needed.

Please consider, that you may have more to offer the forum than you have given your self credit for.  Please also consider the time it has cost me,- just in making this reply to you.

I will gladly, if you wish it, remove the "strike " against you if you state what your apology is for.


                                            Sincerely
                                                 floor

[tinman]

@Floor

Your very first word on this topic-!opinion!
The first words in your document-! over unity!

So i give my opinion on overunity,and you insist im off topic?
I do know the ruels of forum conduct very well,and have broken none.
I have explained to Qwert as to what was ment by my post,and things are sorted-no animosity there.

As we all have different ideas as to what overunity is,i was merely asking what OU was to you,so as i could stay on topic.

But anyway-enjoy.

[Farmhand]

Hi Floor, i've come up with many idea's for free energy but no one is interested because the power density is low but we must begin somewhere. Everyone want to build immediately a 5 Kw device without even understanding what Over Unity is like You, Tinman and I, as well as many others of course.

We already have devices that are cheap to buy simple to make and can make use of waste heat, it's called a Peltier module and using the Seebeck effect we can take some waste heat and produce electricity. Or we can take some extra cold and make electricity, any temperature differential can be used.

No if we take say a 95 % efficient induction motor when at the rated load but get only 80 % with less load and some waste heat is produced the temperature differential can be utilized.

We can sit a plate in the sun and using the shade it makes to keep water cool we can create a temperature difference between the plate in the sun and the water, - free energy.

Basically in my opinion 98% of these claims of "over unity" are for notoriety or for scamming money for for wasting peoples time (distraction) or for furthering an agenda.

Nothing is any more over Unity than a solar panel or a wind turbine in that they harness fee energy from the environment,

And to go one further, no one can show me a truly closed system that does not radiate or emit heat sound or vibration energy, not one singe closed system. I challenge anyone to show me a entirely closed system on the bench. it cannot be done. any completely closed system would be 100% efficient by definition and could neither be under unity or over unity.

The big leveler is when people claim over unity and they get told they have an open system then asked what the efficiency is between our input and utilized or used output.

All systems are open. When I use my small alcohol burner inside in winter it is 100% efficient it heats what I want heated and it also heats the room with waste heat and adds moisture to the air.

How is this idea, we take a bunch of Peltier modules and attach them to the underside of a solar panel with a thermally conductive compound then we use a large heat sink under there in the shade on the other surface of the modules, this should have three effects,

1)  It should cool the panel.
2) It should increase the panel output due to staying cooler.
3) It should produce an electrical output by trying to equalize the temperature differential.

The idea's are endless but most environment energy harnessing will be low power density unless we harness the power of a waterfall or lightning strike.

Basically the energy is free but the tools and equipment cost money, this has always been the case.

I've shown or told so many that are dismissed or misunderstood or get convoluted or are impossible to explain or people purposefully confuse the situation or misrepresent me and my idea's idea's I am kind of burned out. I make threads to explain something and it gets blown to pieces by people wanting to make it about over unity or trying to misrepresent me to say that I am trying to claim over unity or trying to make claims that I am not actually trying to make.

I am all for free speech but the way I see it the repeat OU claimants should be banned and any engineer or trained person seen to be misrepresenting experimenters or deliberately misleading people should also be banned.

When a idea is presented or something explained I see many educated folks rush to deny things and inject a lot of unnecessary complication in order to baffle with the BS and misrepresent what was said or claimed.

I say give them warning then ban them and ban all the perpetual OU claimants as well.

Then maybe we can make some progress towards designing and building things to harness free energy better. Too much extremism on both sides. This is an experiment and discovery forum not a formal physics class. We do not all need to know all the maths ect. If any engineer needed to be an engineer to see that Thanes acceleration under load is BS then they ought to be ashamed of themselves.

It does not always take a trained person to spot an fake and why it is so.

I suspect many have burn out as well. It comes from the endless fake OU claims (extremism) and from the folks denying all and misrepresenting people to defame them (extremism) as well. The folks in the middle have had about enough and the Moderators need to act or all will be lost as far as these forum/boards go.

Too many fake claims and too many smart alecs putting false words into honest experimenters mouths. Begone distractors, and I mean from both extremes.

I debunk stuff myself, and it is necessary due to all the fake claims. Now I feel I must try to prove things to engineers and if they get caught in a tight spot they usually say things like, the amount of frequency difference is minimal and inconsequential bla bla, even though they may have just been proven to be wrong or mistaken. I admit some do retract but rarely.

I say two obvious fake OU claims or links claiming to show OU and Banned. Also two misrepresentations or two instances of putting words in to others mouths to discredit them and banned.

There are many idea's but I am not going to risk sharing because it would likely end up with me spending hours trying to explain and defend myself. I refuse. When the site is rid of extremism I'll share more. Same goes for all sites I use. Many of us are likely holding back due to the sandwich of extremism we are inside of.

Cheers