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



"Free energy" and "Overunity" We need a definition.

Started by Pirate88179, December 13, 2008, 11:34:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43
User actions

mrwayne

#170
February 19, 2018, 07:56:49 AM

Hello M.


I have not been here for a long while, I do peak in every once and a great while to see if people are beyond Over unity yet, and the article defining the meaning caught my eye because "looking for a gain" is the key error which misdirects inventors.


Looking for a gain is wrapped around the created or destroyed idea..


Utilizing methods (there are several) for ways to reduce the reset cost in a process does results in the desired outcome - free energy - and is mathematically accurate - but it is not Over-unity - and is not creating energy.
[size=78%]
[/size]
It is literally a waste of time to look for a gain in any system.
[size=78%]
[/size]
Looking for a differential value between the "opposite and equal reactions" is the logical approach, presuming a baseline has been established (for the reference).


So imagine you had a "Mechanical standard for work" - in these conditions - this amount of work can be preformed with this standard - then you take that standard with you to each observation, and you compared the work performed in each step of the inventors contraption.


You would never find a single step of the process that would exceed the standard (at that location), but you may find less work performed (without loss being the difference).


That less work can result in a remainder when combined with a standard system (presuming the differential is greater than the systems losses).


The difficulty without a standard is that a "Remainder" looks exactly like a "Gain" to the observer who does not have a standard to compare.


+ no measurement will find a gain.......... circular trap.


So if Over Unity is a persons goal, good luck with that, but if energy available is the goal - then look for unequal cost to perform work - the result of work available is a physics requirement.


As far as an experiment - with the mind of looking for the same work with different "costs" go back and look at the original discovery of the Travis Effect #5 and see if you can see that the cost to perform the same work is not the same in both systems and then try to apply what I have shared regarding a reduced reset cost observation.


Don't try to find a gain -


Just subtract the energy into both examples - if a difference exists - then you have the premise to the new mathematics - worthy of a Nobel Prize.


The Virtual Mass is the relative reference which is altered - that video will highlight that differences in cost can exist.


As you know - our work after that discovery was on methods to expand the differential.


Using the reduced reset process mentality - we have had great success.


Looking for a gain, in my view - is a distraction that harms innovation.


Wayne












   


[size=78%] [/size][size=78%] [/size]













   






[size=78%]  [/size]

sm0ky2

#171
February 19, 2018, 11:51:36 AM
Regardless of how we choose to define the concept


"Free Energy", ultimately is the idea that we can provide the energy demands
of our society in a manner which is not economically devastating to our populous.


In a society where 95% of the end-user cost of Everything, can be directly traced to
energy costs. We have a clearly defined problem.


OU/Free Energy is therefore the persuit of a viable solution.
Freeing ourselves from the global energy crisis, equates to prosperity for all.
I was fixing a shower-rod, slipped and hit my head on the sink. When i came to, that's when i had the idea for the "Flux Capacitor", Which makes Perpetual Motion possible.

mrwayne

#172
February 19, 2018, 09:31:44 PM
Quote from: sm0ky2 on February 19, 2018, 11:51:36 AM
Regardless of how we choose to define the concept


"Free Energy", ultimately is the idea that we can provide the energy demands
of our society in a manner which is not economically devastating to our populous.


In a society where 95% of the end-user cost of Everything, can be directly traced to
energy costs. We have a clearly defined problem.


OU/Free Energy is therefore the persuit of a viable solution.
Freeing ourselves from the global energy crisis, equates to prosperity for all.


The root of the problem is the cost of the "resource" and one solution is to eliminate the need for the resource while still supplying the need.


The old pre-posed solution is over-unity
Over Unity - the pursuit and the evaluation ... wastes valuable talent.


The pursuit of "Free Energy" is both a solution and a reality - the issue is with lumping the two together (Over-unity and Free energy), that is the error.


I agree, the desire to solve the energy cost problem is noble.


Solution:


Utilize a resource that is continual, scales to economy, does not consume or convert a resource.


Any system that consumes a resource is just a trade for what we currently have.


The next step to the solution is to "unlock the knowledge needed" - if this web site is a reflection of current research - than the knowledge must be unknown, hidden, does not exist, suppressed or not understood.


This is why I chimed in - the knowledge is known by a few, it is "not understood" by the masses - that's all.


I am one of those that hold that knowledge, and I have been attacked, just like the others, yet knowledge - like an idea can not be destroyed.


I can tell you that the key to our success happened when we were able to recognize that the important knowledge that "supplies the real solution to the real problem" is not Over-unity, and in fact the scope of over-unity turns both the skeptic and inventor in the wrong direction.


It s almost criminal - the effort to find Over-unity was spent in futility all while the real solution is to simple create or find equal output processes that do not have the same energy foot print - and combine them in a process.


To be clear: My suggestion (from years of working with working Free energy systems) is that having over- unity and free energy in the same light of a conversation is very misleading and will deter from the solution to the problem.


A definition that is actually possible - will help innovation and skeptics.


MrWayne

loner

#173
July 25, 2018, 06:02:27 PM
Quote from: Pirate88179 on December 13, 2008, 11:34:13 PM
I am involved with several topics on this site and the question always seems to come up:  What is free energy? And: What is overunity?

I know we are all here looking for it but how can we find it if we can't agree on what it is?  To me, I think it is a given that energy can't be created or destroyed.  Having said that, I believe there are some "free energy" deices working right now.  My earth battery is but one, and I know of several others....depending on your definition of "free energy".

My earth batteries generate power with no input from me.  To me, this is "free energy".  The guy with the water wheel living by a river is getting "free energy" to him, and he can power whatever he wants from it.  Windmills, the same thing.
Also solar, etc.

So, my definition of these devices as "free energy" does not mean the power comes from nowhere.  We know where it comes from, and it fits all of the known laws of physics.  But, is this still "free energy"?  I believe it is.

Hans Von Lieven once said that if one were to touch a match to a puddle of crude oil leaking from the ground, it would ignite and produce heat and light, all for the effort of striking the match.  So, these could be seen as both "free energy" and "overunity" by some folks.  Of course it is burning hydrocarbons and this reaction is well known so the energy is not coming from nowhere, but, we do need to define our parameters if we are hoping to find new power sources.

So, my purpose of this topic is to help open a dialog on what the parameters are for that which we all are searching for.  what is "free energy" and what is "overunity?

Please feel free to post any and all ideas on this subject.  Without a clear definition that we all agree upon,  how will we know if we find it or not?  Thank you.

Bill
I think the best term is over-unity. You always have to put some force/work/potential to get a output. Then we have zero point energy that everything is attached to.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43
User actions