The Bessler Wheel, mystery solved.

[LibreEnergia]

Unfortunately the world doesnt run by that specific program of yours, otherwise there would be no OU aaa but there is.

Ok so the unaltered program show over power, what are you debating exactly ?

It is obvious from that statement that you don't know the difference between power and energy. Like most on here this lack of understanding gives rise to false claims of OU with monotonous regularity.

[TinselKoala]

" I have overunity! "

Great, congratulations! Please prove it, by providing credible data from a _real object_ that supports your claim.

" No. Not yet. I am waiting for (insert some future date/event) here. But I have overunity! Because volts. Leverage. Negative resistance. Scalar gravity."

OK... that sounds a little strange, here's why, so you really should prove it.

" No. You are stupid if you can't understand my overunity. Split positive, convert gravity, leverage, you idiot."

Er.... (lists qualifications and more reasons why it can't work as described)....

" Your qualifications and experience are irrelevant because I HAVE OVERUNITY. Bessler. Bedini. TESLA, ffs. "

Well..... prove it then, by providing a demonstration of your actual apparatus.

" NO. You people are all too stupid and I don't have to prove anything to stupid people. I don't need to show you no stinking badges. Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish."


How many times have we heard some variation on this theme?

[Pirate88179]

And, more often than not, Sterling backs their claims...at least for a while until it is obvious to all that the device does not work at all.

Bill

[mscoffman]

Except for one thing. Gurangax has already created several perpetual motion machines in wm2d, which seems to contradict your point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zplmhei761s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPkZhh3LVPo

I think this guy has discovered a very interesting principle here.  I would like to see a real live running wheel taking advantage of it, though.

These two links are good examples. In reality this lever would be evolving as
the main wheel rotated into/out-of the plane of screen. Also it very difficult
to visualize just how conservation of angular velocity is going to affect forces
as this weight moves towards and away form the axis of rotation. This is the
reason the designer at least needs to have a 3d simulation tool. Since we can't
all sit around a conference room table putting our physical hands on this thing.
It would be best if someone could copy out key data. To actually prove this, we
would all need to build this in our minds; one subsystem providing energy
and also using some of it. The only way I would be wrong is if this total
device is extremely simple. Also these subcomponents are not self sizing,
some one is going to have to adjust this into operation, much easier in the
simulation rather then actually building trials of it.

:S:MarkSCoffman 

[mscoffman]

" I have overunity! "

Great, congratulations! Please prove it, by providing credible data from a _real object_ that supports your claim.

" No. Not yet. I am waiting for (insert some future date/event) here. But I have overunity! Because volts. Leverage. Negative resistance. Scalar gravity."

OK... that sounds a little strange, here's why, so you really should prove it.

" No. You are stupid if you can't understand my overunity. Split positive, convert gravity, leverage, you idiot."

Er.... (lists qualifications and more reasons why it can't work as described)....

" Your qualifications and experience are irrelevant because I HAVE OVERUNITY. Bessler. Bedini. TESLA, ffs. "

Well..... prove it then, by providing a demonstration of your actual apparatus.

" NO. You people are all too stupid and I don't have to prove anything to stupid people. I don't need to show you no stinking badges. Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish."


How many times have we heard some variation on this theme?

In a perfect OU world.

What people seem to not understand is that any voltage reading to some random
waveform is only going to an estimate to a number. The very best measurements
are only going to be approximations in these situation. RMS is not something from
mathematics or electronics, it is from Statistics.

I want my approximation to be converting the desired waveform into DC by a high
speed bridge rectifier, filtering until the Voltage and Current signals have no AC
riding on them. Then feeding the signal into a modern ~95% efficient high voltage
DC to AC power inverter. Now I can measure near perfect wattage by DC voltages
and DC currents with a 1000:1 current shunt so I use my DVM the way it was
designed to be used and multiply the two numbers with a calculator. Plug in my
KillaWatt meter into a AC outlet producing absolutely pure sine waves.  Show
that my wattage numbers nearly match one another. Letting the Inverter eat
up any Power Factor corrections by combining them into its efficiency numbers.
Then light N incandescent light bulbs with no high voltage fluorescents, completely
devoid of negative resistance stabilization effects as my DC to AC inverter is already
stable. Then plug in driver source so that it produces a nice stable self running
infinite loop.

Then be able ignore the negative vocalization of all OU critics as the day is very
nearby when we can simply cast our vote with best educated beliefs from our own
individual pocketbooks.  Ah...Justice at last.

:S:MarkSCoffman