new magnetic motor goes 2000 rpm without load 1000 rpm with load

[starcruiser]

@All

I believe that Richard needs to step up and disclose a better video and results (measurable) and a way his device can be independantly tested by dis-interested third parties. Otherwise I feel he will go the way of the DoDo and the other non-existant OU devices.

[turbo]

Hey Carl

I think you are right, at least one person should replicate to see if it works.
By the way your pic is gone again 

M.

[skeptic_tc]

The net result is to develop a self-fulfilling sympathetic resonance ... surrounded by an electromagnetic bubble ... and then create ... another EM bubble ... and then resonate the created bubble with that surrounding the earth.

However, this is not new at-all and something that Tesla had discovered,

Hi Funky,

I would like to learn more about this if possible.Ã,  It sounds like a small scale experiment could be performed using an inductor (coil) to create the large EM field (simulating the Earth's bubble) and another inductor to 'beat' (resonate) against it.

It sounds like a transformer with a source on each side.Ã,  Can you explain more - if not, maybe you can point me to Tesla's theories?Ã,  Perhaps I can help?

TC

P.S. I'm not worried about the MIB.

[starcruiser]

@marco,

I know, my web server is in the basement and the kids knocked the power cord out, no biggie.

[celeri]

The first point I?d like to stress is the fact that in order to attain any form of over-unity, I believe you need the least amount of outside interference (i.e. : friction, heat, gaseous interaction, gravitation, magnetism, vibration) unless you explicitly use it the in the course of your energy conversion. I think that?s the idea with that air-tight container.

In any case, most of the stuff I imagined and drawn on paper is based on how to mitigate these interferences. As a matter of fact I concluded a while ago that oxygen was a major obstacle. It encourages heat and friction, so air-tight is a must if you don?t benefit from the excess energy created.

My other point is directed mostly to the ?scientific types?. I was a science maniac as a kid. But I eventually fell off the wagon, after discovering the dark side of science ? if you listen to your scientific guru for too long, what science doesn?t know, doesn?t exist. And eventually you clash with reality ? things happen but you don?t believe in them because you can?t explain them. It?s exactly the opposite of what true science is supposed to be. Instead of breeding open mindedness, it breeds the vilest of dogmas. Science is good and beneficial. Too much science is destructive.

So in conclusion I must say I don?t really care about this little soap opera of a battle you are having here. What I do mind is will this invention (even if in the end it isn?t true OU) bring down our energy bills and make this planet cleaner? What I also object to is the fact that some people waste a lot of bandwidth expecting a single answer to this problem when there are probably millions. Wise up and focus!