Why Over-Unity is Possible

[pauldude000]

Well said, Paul.Energy is conservative, but WORK is not...
Now start to think about how this can be used.

That in itself is a good question. Technically, no energy should be able to be drawn out of any situation in equilibrium. In the magnet example, energy is coming from somewhere (probably directly from space/time) to both create and maintain the field (potential), and do any work. 


I have seen many ideas on a magnet motor, but most strike me as improbable in their function. To extract energy from any system, either energy must be inserted artificially to overcome negative forces and/or system losses, the energy can be directly converted to a useful form, or it has to have an inherent or artificial energy imbalance within the system that can be exploited.


If these energy principles were either easy or obvious, we would have had solar cells and generators in the 1500's, LOL.


Most of the principles we accept as common today were discovered fairly recently in history, yet they were evident all throughout human history. We need to re-examine our base knowledge looking for anomalous discrepancies that don't quite fit the model to find the simple stuff that is still hiding in front of our faces.


With magnetic fields, I think we are looking at usable power at far too low of potential to be utilized. An example would be a direct conversion that might yield say P=I/V of 1Watt =  .0001V X 10000A -- in such a situation, what could you realistically do with it unless you could artificially raise the potential energy slope to a realistic level to work with our systems???


This is the question I have been asking myself for a long time as I have seen hints of just such things in many of the electrical systems I have played with over the years.


Every possible system I have examined that seems to have available energy gives off that energy at potentials either far too low or far to high for any practical purpose using today's technology. Basically, it is like discovering fission in the 1500's. That is where amateur experimenters and forums like this might just work. Most of the people building and replicating do not have a clue what can't work, so they try it anyway. Sooner or later accidents are bound to happen.


However, when they do expect complete BS explanations for WHY they work. (Listen to Hutchinson as a 'for example'.) Everyone is pressured to give explanation for something they themselves truly do not understand, so it is no surprise why fairytales often make more sense than the given explanations.

[allcanadian]

@Paul

The sticky tape analogy is extremely loose, basically another illusion. Similarity in behavior does not yield equivalence unless all of the factors are equally equivalent. What we have with a magnet vs the tape is that the tape mechanically bonds the mass to another mass, making the two into one as far as gravity is concerned. With the magnet, it is falling, but being pulled in the opposite direction at an equal or greater rate by a different force.

In a sense it is all an illusion because if we were in outer space we could see one magnet rise to the ceiling as another magnet falls to the ceiling on the opposite side of the Earth. In effect we have forces causing accelerations with little insight to what or why the force is.

The problem I have with the definition of work is that it actually allows violation of the conservation principle due to an old, outmoded notion of the concept we call work. Any system which does not move an object, but necessarily expends energy is a violation of the conservation principle. Due to the work definition, since no mass was moved spatially, no work is done. However, energy is the capability of doing work. Energy as a term can be looked at as potential or kinetic. Stored energy (no work) is potential, expended energy is kinetic. No work being done requires conservation of the energy in the system. Therefore we end up with a paradox due to definition. The magnet scenario has to expend energy to overcome a force, therefore energy is being used. If no work is being performed, then no questions have been answered, only new ones raised.

I would agree it is a quagmire of contradictions and the newest contradictions relate to nano-technology or engineered materials. One scientist built a wall in which water drops are always forced to travel upwards against the force of gravity. Another built a material which is invisible to certain spectrums of electromagnetic waves. In time they will produce Maxwell's Demon where meta-materials cherry pick high energy particles or EM waves from ambient conditions to generate power. At which point we may understand it is not the energy of a system or the supposed work performed per say but the selectivity or characteristics of the process. If we allow only high energy particles to pass a boundary and exclude low energy ones then the particles themselves have performed work due to their nature not the process.

We can produce this kind of selectivity on the macro scale it's just a matter of understanding what is actually happening and why then making the choice as to how we want to control the process. Knowledge and control is power...literally.

AC

[forest]

It is very very simple. take a coil, power with dc, measure field.Take a ferromagnetic core insert into and measure field. You have found OU.

[Zephir]

"Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler". Albert Einstein in a letter to  Jost Winteler (1901)

It's generally accepted (1, 2, 3) that the overunity results during demagnetization of ferromagnetic materials with hysteresis curve under negative slope conditions (magnetic viscosity leading to oversaturation). So you cannot observe the overunity in steady state DC conditions.

[forest]

"Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler". Albert Einstein in a letter to  Jost Winteler (1901)

It's generally accepted (1, 2, 3) that the overunity results during demagnetization of ferromagnetic materials with hysteresis curve under negative slope conditions (magnetic viscosity leading to oversaturation). So you cannot observe the overunity in steady state DC conditions.

You are wrong. The same energy used but results are different. Analyze again.