Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

Started by synchro1, May 07, 2014, 01:25:54 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Farmhand

Forest your post makes no sense to me. If you are trying to tell me we can dissipate energy as output then still have it in the system
then you're wasting your time.

Power is not energy.  C.O.P. > 1.0 means more energy out than we put in.

Now How much energy is input and how much energy is output over the entire period from startup to shutdown ?
If you don't know then you can hardly determine the efficiency. Energy is energy and power is the rate of energy application
dissipation ect. To get an efficiency figure we must compare "real" power in to "real" power output or compare energy input to
energy output. There is not enough information given to make any determination ourselves, we are only getting what we are told.

I still say that we are not shown the entire story, and until we have it we can only speculate, nothing is proven.

The power dissipated by the load is output (real power) and the power returned to the grid is reactive power. Reactive power is not used as by definition reactive power is unused power returning to the grid, any power dissipated by a load is real power by definition.
..

hartiberlin

Farmhead , you have not understood the principle.
Surely WITHOUT switching the quarter waveforms in polarity it will not work.

Only if you use the trick to switch the polarity of the caps in the circuit every quarter wavelength or so it will work that you have many negative input power curves.

Look at the red MATH traces of the posted device .
But you are probably not used to interpret these waveforms.
Quote from: Farmhand on July 10, 2014, 05:55:07 PM
Forest your post makes no sense to me. If you are trying to tell me we can dissipate energy as output then still have it in the system
then you're wasting your time.

Power is not energy.  C.O.P. > 1.0 means more energy out than we put in.

Now How much energy is input and how much energy is output over the entire period from startup to shutdown ?
If you don't know then you can hardly determine the efficiency. Energy is energy and power is the rate of energy application
dissipation ect. To get an efficiency figure we must compare "real" power in to "real" power output or compare energy input to
energy output. There is not enough information given to make any determination ourselves, we are only getting what we are told.

I still say that we are not shown the entire story, and until we have it we can only speculate, nothing is proven.

The power dissipated by the load is output (real power) and the power returned to the grid is reactive power. Reactive power is not used as by definition reactive power is unused power returning to the grid, any power dissipated by a load is real power by definition.
..
Surely without a good block or circuit diagram it is hard to grasp.

I hope that they will post something like this pretty soon....
Stefan Hartmann, Moderator of the overunity.com forum

SeaMonkey

With a properly crafted capacitive switching system it
may be possible to "fool" the digital power meters into
thinking that power is being delivered to the grid.

Charging capacitors parallel connected through the load
at certain points in the AC cycle, then discharging the
capacitors series connected, through the load, back into
the grid at certain points in the AC cycle may do the trick.

It would depend on the sampling algorithm employed by
the firmware/software within the meter and how it determines
the direction of power movement and its magnitude.

Working out the needed timing for the switching events
would be fairly easy to figure out.

The "secret" to the device, from what has been revealed
thus far, seems to be well timed high speed switching.

If indeed it is a device which utilizes high-tech trickery
to accomplish what seems to be over-unity, it will be
decreed "illegal" by the authorities.


Farmhand

I don't need to be an engineer or be able to interpret wave forms (that may be generated in a way not stated), to be able to
understand the basic principals of energy delivery and reactive power.

Real power delivers energy to a load and we do not get it back.

Reactive power does not deliver energy to the load and we do get it back.

Any power dissipated in a load is real power, and we do not get it back, reactive power we do get back because it was not consumed.

I explained in the QEG thread the basic method that could be employed with switches to show a returning power to the load
greater than the applied power for a time. EDIT: During the time the reactive power is being stored the input would be much
greater than the output, this could be done in a fraction of a cycle and on a cycle by cycle basis in order to out speed the meter.

Basically the device is started showing a less than 1.0 power factor then the reactive power is stored locally in the device for a time
before being applied back to the grid at a higher voltage and in phase to show for a time a greater power in than out, but it is not
sustainable indefinitely or with all loads.

That's just one way, another is as SeaMonkey said the switching scheme may be "engineered" to fool the meters, or just as simply the circuit could be configured to show improper measurements.

Truth is we do not know if any of those are in play and neither do we know if they are legitimate or more scams or just mistaken.

I say without a schematic we have no choice but to design our own schemes or just wait to see if in several years anything
comes of it.

..

hartiberlin

Well Seamonkey and Farmhand you are both wrong.

Have again a look at this below picture.

Look at the lower RED MATH traces.

THESE ARE POWER WAVEFORMS where above the groundline
areas mean positive input power and below the groundline means
negative input power, that means returning power to the
grid !

Left scopeshot shows the grid input ( here labled: Transformer output power)
You clearly see a sinus like wave
so  power is delivered to the circuit, BUT also almost the same amount of power again returned to the grid,
so the average input power is only 1.1 Watts !

At the right scopeshot you see the Math trace only above the groundline,
meaning, that at the lamp only positive real active power is lighting up the lamps.

I guess Seamonkey and Farmhand  should wait with further postings, until a block circuit diagramm
is posted, so further antipostings without discussing the switching technology behind it
are considdered as Trolling....

Regards, Stefan.
Stefan Hartmann, Moderator of the overunity.com forum