Has anyone here constructed an overunity system that works?

[stivep]

 I'm out of town  but I will provide answer to your  comment
Wesley

[onepower]

Ilya Tsimbaluk

I think your misrepresenting the intent of Einstein and most credible people in science and engineering.

First, we do it not because we want to be wealthy or famous which is misguided and fleeting at best but to acquire knowledge and understanding. So these scientists shared what they learned as there best guess at the time knowing full well it would be improved and refined in the future by others.

Did you know there is no such thing as a field or lines of force?. Faraday created the concept of the field to replace action at a distance which was ambiguous as well as lines of force so others could do math and equations and understand the concept better. Thus we can see a translation in time we call science whereby man has created an artificial reality to describe nature not as it exists but as they perceive it to exist. In the same way as Faraday, Einstein created space-time not because it described reality but because it was better conceptually than most other theories at the time. We could ask, Einstein's theories made you think didn't it?, thus he succeeded.

The most common problem relating to this misunderstanding relates to psychology. The majority of people tend to see a condition of something as being something in itself. For example many believe heat is a substance which miraculously flows through materials and space. However it is not something but a condition of something, a "measure" of the motion of the atoms in molecules or EM waves ergo oscillations. So how is it a "measure" of something came to be perceived as something tangible?. The same confusion seems to appear with respect to Faraday's "field" which is also not something in itself but a condition of something already present.

However the truth tends to come to light when we ask someone... "what is a field" and most have no idea. What is this something or term everyone uses so liberally yet have no idea what in fact it is?...

So how is it that so many could use a term so often and yet have literally no idea what in fact it is?. All this terminology, wave after wave of new terms, words, and yet at the end of the day most are no closer to the understanding they seek. It reminds me of a saying... we can talk the talk but it means nothing unless we can walk the walk.

In this respect the facts we know are much stranger than any fiction most can imagine. Every material thing is like a fog of charged particles in oscillation in a sea of waves, energy as motion, energy is motion. Nothing is or ever was tangible, it is an illusion, and if we could change or manipulate the kind of motion taking place on the atomic/particle level then literally anything is possible. What is free energy when literally everything everywhere is energy?.

As Einstein put it... If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

That my friends is pure genius and it was Einstein's observation that the people who use the most complicated terminology and explanations seldom understand what there talking about. If they did they could explain everything in simply in terms even a child could understand and there lies the problem.

Regards
AC

[stivep]

I don't quite understand what you are writing to be honest.
I personally am not attached to anything or anyone.
I'm here only because there's a forum to discuss alternative physics issues. energy and so on.
Are you sure that this is a historical forum dedicated to Russia?

one of rules in physics is :
single observable point of fact, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.
- that in philosophy the mother of all sciences includes also  phenomena seen from  perspective of Russia and Western world.
  and phenomena we  are talking about  is history of science and  factors related, just because we have disagreement   about eter/eather
  rejected model after 1905
https://www.thoughtco.com/idealized-models-an-introduction-2699439#:~:text=In%20physics%2C%20a%20model%20%28or%20idealized%20model%29%20is,a%20simple%20point%20object%20and%20ignore%20the%20fuzziness.

Your last name  suggests its Ukrainian origin, but I didn't yet have interaction with any Ukrainian scientist  who would  in year 2021 vote for  widely in Russia  manifested  Eater/Ether .
I as an American happened to  know about  that region of  Eastern  Europe and  I even speak Russian better than  average Russian from regions.
However  I got  this skills here in New York employing Russian scientists  lazy to learn English.
____________________________________________________


I do thank you for participating in this forum and you are welcome  here.
I do appreciate your position in given subject, and I respect your position as this is not Russia here and no banditism of any Eastern origin is affecting you  dear  Ilya
I'm able to understand your English too , and that skill is uncommon to most of Eastern Europe (of direct/indirect Russian influence.)



_________________________________________________________________

Einstein, first of all, contradicts himself with his thought experiment, where he flies on a frozen ray (wave) of light.
First of all, the contradiction itself arises for the reason that the presence of a ray of light in space is initially considered
in this image based on Maxwell's ideas about Ether, in which there is a medium in a frozen state.
That is, a thought experiment is based on an environment with some properties.

1. you not reading what I wrote.
2. you not answering  questions
3. you adding test without links
4. I'm confused as to  how to respond to your questions : :
    a. if intuitively - than we will have  Russian borscht .https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borscht
        that is for me no way to be as tasty as Ukrainian.
    b. if based on facts , than please give me facts !!!!!!
        ,( links, quotes,  statements  and particular lines in question .)
    c. if my answer is to be kept  in relation to 19 century science format  I need quoted  and numbered  text.
    d. if my answer is to be kept  in brackets of modern physic  of current time than  I will just present current position to  questioned phenomena.
I understand  that  you don't  want associate yourself with Russia  or its history  but:
ИЗ РОССИИ УЕХАЛ А РОССИЯ ИЗ ТЕБЯ НЕТ.-  набор
СЛОВ КОТОРЫЕ ВЫДАЮТ РУССКИХ ВЕЗДЕ!!!!
I hope you understand me now.
In this part of the world we not only respect you but we also expect you to respect our , rules, and common format of communication:

________________________________________


I'm formulating my  answer according to point 4d.

Einstein was born in  March 14  of 1879 and at this time  Umv, Poynting and Heaviside were in the middle of  Ether/Eather controversy.
in 1895 Einstein was only 16 when he started to think about that what we now call

"...a paradox upon which I had already hit at the age of sixteen:

__________________________________________

Einstein's thought experiments took diverse forms.
In his youth, he mentally chased beams of light.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%27s_thought_experiments
I propose a new way to read it that fits it nicely into the stages of Einstein's discovery of special relativity.
It shows the untenability of an "emission" theory of light, an approach to electrodynamic
theory that Einstein considered seriously and rejected prior to his breakthrough of 1905.

If I pursue a beam of light with the velocity c (velocity of light in a vacuum),
I should observe such a beam of light as an electromagnetic field at rest though spatially oscillating.
There seems to be no such thing, however, neither on the basis of experience nor according to Maxwell's equations.
From the very beginning it appeared to me intuitively clear that, judged from the standpoint of such an observer, everything
would have to happen according to the same laws as for an observer who, relative to the earth, was at rest.
For how should the first observer know or be able to determine, that he is in a state of fast uniform motion?
One sees in this paradox the germ of the special relativity theory is already contained."

(http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodies/Chasing_the_light/Light_animation_2.gif)




If the young Einstein were to chase after it at c, he would catch up with the wave and be moving with it, like a surfer riding the wave.
He would see a frozen lightwave.

The untenability of that thought led to the downfall of the great achievement of nineteenth century physics,
the ether, which then provided the basis for all electromagnetic theory.
The trouble is that it is quite unclear just how this thought creates difficulties for the ether.
Einstein gave three reasons and each of them could be answered readily by an able ether theorist.
look at picture below:
All you need  to do now  is to go to the link   here:
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodies/Chasing_the_light/index.html

Conclusions:
We are  all human animals including you Ilya.
We imagine  things  and not always right ,till we  think about it  again
and perfect that   thought experiment  to the point that is now ready to be presented to the world.
But at the end Einstein won big time.
All other thoughts of other  big names scientist are not important now as 19 century was  the  period of confusion and now is not.

Today's science  doesn't talk about two magnetic fields where one is rotated and we know that   EM wave  has electric field component and magnetic field component  at 90 degrees.
Source of EM wave  is not seen  from perspective of philosophical monkey but based on solid  and checked  science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation

Because  you didn't provide necessary links , I did cut part of your text as my answer was  in format 4d
Wesley

[Ilya Tsimbaluk]

Greetings, as regards the force interaction of the Electric Field on the Coulomb torsion balance, it corresponds to the fact that the electric fields in the current day with the physical body are strong. which can be measured, which is what Pendant did.
This is what Milliken did with the Pendant.
The forceful interaction of the forces of gravity and the force of the electric field on a droplet of oil, which was carried out by Milliken and Ioffe, are regarded as forceful.

About the fact that Faraday and Einstein created space and time.
In fact, the idea was eventually expressed by Poincaré, and Lorentz's transformations by Lorentz.
Faraday had nothing to do with relativism. He only documented the experiments carried out. Maxwell made an attempt to write down his vision in mathematical form. Let me remind you that Maxwell was under the yoke of harsh criticism for 25 years, until Heaviside wrote down Maxwell's equations in vector form and understandable for the average person.

All attempts by Lorentz and Einstein consisted in a mathematical approach to define physical phenomena. And the difficulty was. that they had the complexity of the idea that two physical bodies in the same torsional balance of the pendant can have an intermediate medium, which is what the Force is.
But then Lorentz and Einstein were not focused on attention. Einstein caught on to the ideas of Poincaré and Lorentz, and the efforts of scientists of the late 19th and 20th centuries to determine the behavior of light in space relative to the emitter and receiver. which is on Earth. Then various hypotheses were put forward - Ether is completely motionless, carried away partially or completely carried away.

Lorenz and Morley considered their theory. in which the Earth moved relative to the motionless Ether. But here's the problem - if Ether or an intermediate medium is responsible for the force interaction of physical bodies and this force is connected. Like any with the field, then it would be necessary to talk about that. that there is a kind of moving field in space. which interacts with the Earth. But materialists or primates are always thinking. that it is the Earth that is the field. The earth in this case is a consequence. and not the reason for its movement.
It follows its field like a magnet. so the field follows the magnet. but if we have magnetic interactions of magnets. in which there are two physical bodies with mass, and an intermediate medium. which has an equivalent to this mass, but in an intermediate environment. That he began to describe Umov for the first time, putting forward views about the flow of energy and not only.

During the nineteenth century there were several speculative attempts to show that mass and energy were proportional in various ether theories.[45] In 1873 the Russian physicist and mathematician Nikolay Umov pointed out a relation between mass and energy for ether in the form of Е = kmc2, where 0.5 ≤ k ≤ 1.

And yes, the famous formula E = mc ^ 2 does not essentially belong to Einstein, it was also derived by Thomson and Heaviside. K = 1 was determined by Heaviside. that it was pointless to use k. Heaviside corresponded with Lorenz, the latter with Einstein. so that Einstein could not be unaware of these formulas. Everything. what Einstein did was use Poincaré's idea and Lorentz's ideas. But Lorenz, with all due respect at that time, acted mathematical juggling around strange ideas about Ether, which in his hypothesis were not confirmed.

However, here's the question, Umov did not expect to receive finances and grants, which the Western world is so abundant in, Heaviside also did not seek to do this. What's the first. that the second lived a modest life and the requirements of capital, which pays for science, did not interest them. They did that. what they were doing. Einstein clearly understood what he could play on and make money.

But what followed from Umov's logic? It followed from logic that in mechanics mechanical waves propagate at the speed of sound, and between magnets they interact with the speed of light. But it is known for sure that force interaction in statics or magnetism cannot do without matter, which maintains force in the physical world. hence it is necessary to introduce an intermediate environment. which is the movement of matter equivalent to the mass of the physical body with which this environment interacts. When asked how energy flows can be realized in thermodynamics or Electromagnetism, Umov came to the conclusion that this should be an intermediate medium. This idea was picked up by Pointing and independently of Poynting Heaviside.
precisely because of that. then Heaviside worked in telegraphy and considered the conductor as a waveguide, this is what allowed him to just consider the idea of ​​that. that Energy does not move along wires. and in the space around the waveguide.
But if Heaviside lived in times. when superconductors were discovered, he would immediately express his dissatisfaction with Thomson for what he called the luminescence in the tube moving particles of gases and cathodes ... that is. movement of charges in the conductor itself. After all, the Skin effect was first discovered by Heaviside. And from here it would follow that the current moves in space as a flow of energy having a mass. Thu is obvious, and Then many Nobel laureates would have to return the money back from the owner for the mediocre work done. But the question is - the owner himself. who paid for the work paid for what?

But let's get away from politics.
According to information reported at one time by V.N. Chikolev, the experiments on their use, demonstrated by Yablochkov at the Paris Exhibition of 1878, even aroused applause from visitors. The Paris Academy of Sciences was especially interested in Yablochkov's work, which formed a special commission to familiarize with it, which included such celebrities as Saint-Clair-Deville, Edmond Becquerel, Berthelot and others. At the meeting of the Academy, Ing. Deneyruz, speaking of the kaolin lamp, characterized Yablochkov's inventions in this way:

In explanations of the privilege, Yablochkov writes: "In order to obtain useful effects from the current delivered by the source of dynamic electricity, instead of connecting the terminals of the current source together with a continuous circuit, as This is done up to now, causing the dynamic electricity delivered by the electricity source to undergo a double transformation - first into static electricity and then back into dynamic electricity. This is the principle of my system. I carry it out as follows: instead of connecting the terminals of the current source with a continuous circuit, as has been done so far, I connect the conductor coming from one terminal of the electricity source to one of the plates of the capacitor, consisting of one or more Leiden jars of a larger surface or arranged according to the directions below.

The impulse technique immediately assumed that the current does not move in a continuous and integral flow, this energy moves in waves and the higher the frequency, the shallower this flow enters. The nodes and antinodes of the current were already known, which makes the idea of ​​a chain moving in the form of a continuous movement of electrons meaningless. in the War of currents, Tesla just wanted to show something. what is called the current at high frequencies moves across the surface and voltage. which we simply use as a term has a direct relation to the theories of Umov, Poynting Heaviside as to processes remote from the conductor, in which, according to Druda, less and less this energy flow interacts with the crystal lattice of the conductor itself, leading to Joule-Lenz heat losses.

[Ilya Tsimbaluk]

For Wisley

Greetings. You have a lot of equipment, I would love to work in the laboratory, with such a variegated set of measuring equipment. Considering that you have a professional video camera and video editing equipment. but as I understand it, you are not involved in professional filming and editing. And many interesting things could be done.

The only thing for which you received criticism, which you considered aggressive, is your politicized videos in which some inventor was killed. In the video itself, this inventor is 20 years old at most, does not live in Russia, he showed a fake and a show, but you dramatized. that he was killed by Putin's henchmen, the FSB-schnicks. But there were no men in black, no KGB or FBI. Why in your country they kill thousands of UFO witnesses and dispensers of free energy, and you are not talking about that? Are you dancing to the tune of the World Government in the person of the Illuminati, or are you in cahoots with the Freemasons who force babies to drink blood, engage in homosexuality and be involved in the orgies of Satan himself?

You have the opportunity to make cool vlogs, and experiment with that set - I suggest you do an interesting job. And if you want to make an art series with cannibals in black suits. then do it creatively.

So write, we will communicate. But not politics with a depressing connotation of mass shootings of seekers of free energy with reference to the locality with the word Russia. I don't like depression. why I'm watching a video with Searl, because this guy talks about positive and inspiring things, and a dying old woman on a modest retirement in the Russian wilderness is a very sad topic for discussion. I'm sure. what if you collect all the dying old women including Africa. it will be possible to make a film for those who want to commit suicide from the injustice of the world. Life goes on and I don't want to think about it. because all I can do is show the world that. what I can.

So write if you want to talk about science and technology in a personal message.

About Lorentz and Einstein. who took the Lorentz transformations.
The question is that the idea of ​​the inconsistency of Morley's thought was, like Lorentz and Einstein, that it was the signal source and the receiver that moved at the same time.
However, Lorentz and not only he grasped the idea that if the ray moves relative to the stationary ether. in which it has not yet been determined - and why it should be motionless, moreover. that Heaviside identified some points associated with the Casimir effect, what is it like space or environment.

The absurdity of posing the question lies in the fact that the beam emitted by the emitter moves with a speed relative to some absolute space. We mentally define this absolute either by the solar coordinate system or other other usual Euclidean geometry. But if we are considering exactly the Euclidean geometry, then mentally determining the absolute point from which we build our representations of the motion of the Earth, then we know exactly what speed the Earth has relative to the Sun. So, according to Ritz's ballistic theory, we should have the formula v + c. The receiver moves with the transmitter. therefore, we must describe the receiver as -v.
The only question is that Dirac did not yet exist, who began to ask questions of signs, but we can just describe -v, because wherever energy with a positive sign is outraged, there is also its negative or opposing Energy, which develops with dualistic Newton's representations of F = -F and not only.
And hence v-v + c = c.

But more on that later.