Is overunity really possible?

[pinestone]

...But what is overunity anyway? The creation of energy from nothing? There is no such thing like nothing...

...but my opinion is, the system, as in Bush, Bilderberger, CFR, NWO etc. is worse than the shit of a sick pig. That's what they defend...

...Mankind must get rid of the parasite.

To me, overunity is getting more out of something than you put in. (ie unity meaning 'whole' and over that 'more than whole').
Starting with nothing will bring you nothing. I'm talking about combining energy sources and ending up with more than any 'one' can contribute.
'Summing parts of the whole' in which one energy source is featured, but other energy sources contribute to.
It would appear to be overunity, but more like free energy (almost free). What could happen if you combine a Gravity machine, magnet machine
and solar machine into one energy producing device?

Is there a need to be paranoid? Not during the design process. Maybe a little during the testing phase, and hell yea during the 'proving it' phase.
But that shouldn't stop one from trying. What's the alternative?

And we've been surviving with parasites since the beginnings of humanity. I don't see that situation changing anytime soon.

[dieter]

Coun't me in for "Rock'n'Roll"


My primary interest is independence, not the money or the fame. But a little oven at the north pole, making my igloo nice and snug.


I really think there are many ways to get free energy, just don't let yourself be disappointed by those who say this is impossible and that is impossible. These guys suck out your energy, inspiration and motivation like vampires. Assume that many energy sources do exist. Then tap em. Follow your own instincts, do your own research, verify the theories.


As for gravity and magnets, they are no obvious energy sources, although I think it may be possible to combine them as an alternating oscillation, but it's definitely tricky.


There are so many fields that are promising. For instance the many reports of heat excess in LENR to name just one.


Read about the various projects and systems. If you find something that is verified by many, including professors and if there is complete information about the technical howabouts (no guessing and speculation like in many closed source things, like don smith, thestatica aso.), then you may wanna reproduce it.


An other aspect is: combustion engines are wasting so much heat, you could easily run a stirling engine only by that heat of a car engine. And that already violates the 2nd law...


You say OU is when you get more out than what you put in. Well, putting some gas in isn't that much work, yet the car has a lot of output. It is the fuel. And in that sence you will always be on a 1:1 level, although the car has great heat and friction losses. Energy won't get lost, it's just getting out of your hands, or your tank.



There are sources of energy that are desperately waiting for us, tapping them. Eg. the casimir force, or the electron spin aso.
BR

[Overunutty]

My question to all you geniuses is: "If I can create, mechanically, 100,001 joules of stored energy in a set of flywheels with input used to reach this goal being 100,000 joules, is this considered OVERUNITY?

[Farmhand]

My question to all you geniuses is: "If I can create, mechanically, 100,001 joules of stored energy in a set of flywheels with input used to reach this goal being 100,000 joules, is this considered OVERUNITY?

Well you can't "create" 100,001 Joules of stored energy in a set of flywheels with an input of 100,000 joules simply because energy cannot be created or destroyed. You can store energy, but you cannot "create" stored energy.

It is possible to utilise "free" energy, but the only type of "over unity" possible as far as energy goes is to utilise more energy than is input to a system or process.

An simple example is if you use a water wheel powered by the natural fall of water to do work for you.

..

[massive]

the mayflower made it to america with no on board power source