Mass and Inertia

[Daniel Jackson]

When I look at the ideas for use with over unity devices I am left wonderig if the inventor has stoped to considerer how much energy it takes to move mass against friction and inertia?  Except for some ideas I have seen in magnetic motors which can add electrical energy by their movements through magnets with coils and perhaps aid themselves, there is no reason to want to look at any idea that involves movement of large masses since these require allot of force and hence energy at input to move.

Only if there is some new and unique view to over coming the losses due to friction and inerta where moving masses are used in an over unity device, can we look at the idea.  I will however say I will look at some magnetic motors: I will.  I will how look at them in light of the rest of physics however.

We can then say that except for one case there is no reason to pursue the possibility of an over unity device based upon mechanical ideas: except for magnetic motors.  This then should guide you and you should then look more to solid state non moving principles: at least non moving on the surface level for their may be allot of movement on the electron level.

If you think about this you will see the wisdom of it.  You will then know in what other directions to move in that may be more productive.   This should get us on the right road and cut more to the chase than in going off into odd directions to view side light items in the parade and light show theater of ideas and notions for sale.

Daniel Jackson

[ring_theory]

Daniel nothing personal but this is the mentality that has hindered new innovative technology.

Let's hear what you think unity is. because overunity cannot be achieved if we don't know what true unity is.
As an inventor of what has been called an over-unity mechanism. However it wasn't designed as such.
See post (fully baked innovation) http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,498.0.html

Either way mass and inertia go hand in hand in the universe and the result of that is kinetic energy. you got macro masses with inertia all over the place. Deny that and you deny the earth's existance.
Where's the friction in such macro masses?

Either way my mechanism has no friction no physical mechanical interaction as most mechanisms have.

[ring_theory]

 The ring is the mechanism that will free man of his addiction to fossil and nuclear energies.
It is energy in the purest and most natural form Kinetic. It's sole purpose is to transform energy in a cyclic manner. However it complies with ALL the qualifiers of conservation of energy. angular and linear, if i might add in a extremely hyper manner in a friction-less environment. 

Good observation on the electron thing it's run amuk. the proton and photon are involved as well if you want to look at it in that level. However to quantify it is to reduce it to nothing. There are many ways to describe the interactions but the only real way to look at it is as applied electromagnetic wave harmonics. However it is the prime model for such manifestations.

I'm not the math guy. numbers confuse me above the basics. the more i look at mathematics the more it confuses me. However that gives me a truly optimistic observation of it. Mathematics is mearly a form of communication like the written language. Mathematics has self declared that unity is as you describe. For some reason it works that way. However if the sciences are ever going to discover what occures in natural physics they are going to have to admit that natural physics is ABSOLUTE. 

Mathematics could never discover this! Which makes it the improper tool to use for discovery. It doesn't work out in the mathematics. It represents the integer in nearly every aspect. It is multifarious and implicates what mathematics and the sciences deny or misunderstand. To the sciences it's a pseudo scenario.  Thus the prototypes.

Anyways Unity is NOT 1 it is (0.999999999999999 infinite) Mathematics rounded it off to 1. making it useable in mathematics as a multiplicative identity. In essence making mathematical unity and natural unity out of sync. The reaction is the misunderstanding of =0 above the basics. The basics =0 represents nil, nothing, no result, nada.  Above the basics it represents true unity and the point where a true equilibrium
is reached.

How does mass get involved in E=mc2?? It was an observation of light! No wonder he falsley predicted the speed of light cannot be exceeded by mass. E=mr2 is more like it. Your the math guy have you ever looked at ring theory?? This mechanism is ring theory in application. But not limited to just that theory GR and SR are implicated as well as string theory, superstring theory and every other credible theory out there. They are all simular theories in a fragmented way, just the terminology is different. The manifestations are the same weither it's aether, dark energy, ZPE, ZPF, etc. it all comes down to wave harmonics and the wave form via wave function.

The perfect wave form is the ring. I'm working on a 9 slit test in a pan of water to support this. Your welcome to do it yourself. 3 circular barriers, 3 slits each, 3 different sizes to fit inside eachother with some space between them. Offset the slits so they don't align with the next circular barrier.  drops in the middle of the center circular barrier. post your results but don't forget the origin of the experiment.

I don't doubt your ability or capabilities. I'm not insulting your intelligence, I'm  challenging you to use your intelligence to decypher natural physics.

[magnetoelastic]

Here's a simpler way to implement a magnetic ring.  Take a large size socket for your ratchet wrench - 1/2" or bigger, nice hardened steel.   Run a piece of heavy copper wire down the middle of the socket.  Put in some shims or spacers to center the socket around the wire.  Connect the copper wire to a set of jumper cables.  BRIEFLY connect the jumper cables to your car battery to send a surge of current down the copper wire running down the middle of the socket.  After the current is removed, there will be a huge remanent magnetic flux around the circumference of the socket.  Then, take the socket and try to pick up a paperclip.  You will find only very weak fields, if any, emitted by the socket.  This is because the ring is a closed system, the only magnetic fields emerging are from imperfections in the symmetry of the socket, or from the magnetization current not being coaxial to the socket.

If you were to cut the socket in half down its axis, yielding two shallow 'U' shaped pieced, you would find them to be very strongly magnetized.  You have then opened the ring, creating an open system.

Unless the ring/socket is broken, there is no way to extract the magnetic energy contained within it.

[ring_theory]

Sure but what you are doing is taking a unified closed system created by an event (the radii) and split it into 2 seporate systems (the radius). still a qualifier of unity Via the radius of the natural sine. However your example is coaxial.

I'm applying a multipole configuration.
See post (fully baked innovation) http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,498.0.html