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

[Trino Cularoid]

Many good points. I'm partial to a "goal-driven" "definition". Basically, what I want to achieve is more sovereignty and independence for every individual who chooses so (and I don't consider "working harder" such a desirable choice option).

In the long term, that also means, for example, it has to be "renewable" and "sustainable" in the sense that over time the quality of living for all should not degrade (it does if you produce waste that "cannot" be recycled, like nuclear waste, or that doesn't "grow back" fast enough, like oil, or if it changes the environment so that you or future generations need medication or psychological support to live as well). Excluding things we currently cannot manipulate so easily (sun, ice age, state of fear?).

Independence of any "networks" must be guaranteed (be that electrical power, water, air, food, financial, taxes, communication, social) at any time if anybody desires so. In other words, no network is allowed to control people. This doesn't look like it's directly related to technical issues, but often technology and infrastructure is used as a means to control instead of making life simpler and more enjoyable, and to fix it "backwards" by starting with technology is difficult.

I guess looking at the current financial situation gives enough ideas what kind of networks won't benefit everybody. BTW, nothing against networks per se, but I think if technology is developed to allow more independence first, then the step to adapt it for networking is much easier than the other way round.

So if I can combine different partial solutions and achieve above, then I'm fine, I guess. Whether they adhere to establish physical laws or not doesn't matter that much (for example, if I don't have a formula to explain it but can build a machine using some kind of approximation model, that's good enough for a start). If "clean" technology comes from an extraterrestrial source and they don't lock us (individually or collectively) into trade/religious/communication networks, fine.

Hmmm... Not sure if that will lead to a clear-cut definition for FE or OU so soon... 
But if an invention contributes to above then it could be considered to be a part of an FE or OU "device", right?
So it's some kind of indirect definition that allows a lot more freedom and possibilities for the individual parts.

[captainpecan]

free energy is a by-product of over-unity which may be the function of a device either mechanical or electrical in nature.

I also dispute that an earth battery creates either on the grounds that work is done to create the device, similar but not the same as creating a magnet.

Nuffsaid

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at either?  "By saying free energy is a by-product of over-unity", are you saying no free energy exists unless there is over-unity? I'm just not following your opinion I guess.

I really don't know what you are trying to say with the last part of your post?  Could you clarify your views please?

[dean_mcgowan]

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at either?  "By saying free energy is a by-product of over-unity", are you saying no free energy exists unless there is over-unity? I'm just not following your opinion I guess.

I really don't know what you are trying to say with the last part of your post?  Could you clarify your views please?

I interpret it as Overunity being a function of a device whereby free energy is the product of that function.
I suppose its an oversimplification however, i see them as hierarchically related where one is a subnode of the other.

As for the earth battery:

I percieve it as displacment of potentiatly. The materials used to create the earth battery will eventually decompose releasing their free ions which were gathered or rearranged in the process of construction.

Hope that helps illuminate my point.

Cheers,

Dean

[Pirate88179]

@ Dean: (Partial quote from Dean below)

"I percieve it as displacment of potentiatly. The materials used to create the earth battery will eventually decompose releasing their free ions which were gathered or rearranged in the process of construction."

I am not sure this is a fair statement.  Everything made by man will decompose, eventually.  Everything.  (even nuclear waste) So again, if this is your "acid test" for an energy device, you will never have any, no matter what.  Every component of any device will be gone in a long enough period of time.

I am not arguing with you.  I think this is one of those subjects that can't really be argued as no one really knows the answer.  It can, however, be discussed and I would be interested in doing so.  Thanks.

Bill

[dean_mcgowan]

@ Dean: (Partial quote from Dean below)

"I percieve it as displacment of potentiatly. The materials used to create the earth battery will eventually decompose releasing their free ions which were gathered or rearranged in the process of construction."

I am not sure this is a fair statement.  Everything made by man will decompose, eventually.  Everything.  (even nuclear waste) So again, if this is your "acid test" for an energy device, you will never have any, no matter what.  Every component of any device will be gone in a long enough period of time.

I am not arguing with you.  I think this is one of those subjects that can't really be argued as no one really knows the answer.  It can, however, be discussed and I would be interested in doing so.  Thanks.

Bill

Ok I agree decompose is not the best word to use there ..
Maybe the point would be that the earth battery would use all the available free ions in the materials and cease to operate over time.