This device is the real self-running overunity?

[LarryC]

To let the magnet spin you will need to let it move off its axis....maybe his can move a little, but the magnet will still not spin if it can vibrate up and down at all so there is still a stalemate there.

For my testing, I used a 1" diameter neo on a free spinning rotor and another small ceramic (repulsion) being manually passed over one side. No spinning when the neo was centered on the rotor, but if it was off center more than 1 MM, slight spinning would occur and would increase as the offset increase. This should be expected as the push is not balanced to the center of the rotor with an offset.

So if he has spin, wobble and bounce, there is no wonder why he speaks of the unit tearing itself apart. It also makes it extremely difficult for us to build a reliable unit.

Regards, Larry

[JamesThomas]

Unfortunately I see again the well known pattern in this case:

- no self runner
- tall claims by the inventor
- mysteries instead of clear answers

I also see the well know psychological pattern that the inventor does not know himself whether he wants to give the idea away or to become rich by protecting its alledged secrets. Like in so many cases the inventors "will" and "wishes" seem to change from day to day, but drift torwards "I do not give away my hard worked for secrets for free". This keeps up the illusion and gives a purpose in life.

The folks who communicated with the inventor for sure asked the straight forward question "Does the machine run two hours without a battery?" ("Closed loop without a battery, yes or no?") and did not get a clear answer?

It is also strange (and telling) that the inventor does not defining clearly where the poles are on his little disk magnets and everybody has to speculate.

It seems to be the age old missconception that 25 Volt spikes on the pick up coils deliver more energy than the continuous current from the 6 Volt battery into the DC motor turning the machine.

My comments do not help and sound pessimistic, I just wanted to say what I felt after going through this thread. It is so sad to see it all over again.

May be, the folks who can talk or write to him just ask this two simple questions again in a very friendly and clear way:

1) Does the machine run longer than an hour without any battery (closed loop)?

2) Please explain the poles on your magnets, specially on the little (may be rotating) disk magnet or magnets passing by the pick up coils or coils?

If there is no useful answer forthcoming, everything humanly possible has been done. Game over!

It is very nice to give the inventor a scope, why not. From my own experience I know that using a scope needs a lot of learning. So I see no immediate benefit besides charity and a way to open up more conversations with the inventor (in case someone has the patience of a Ghandi).

Greetings, Conrad

Yes, I too see an all too familiar and counter-intuitive psychological pattern. One that I have witnessed in myself at times. We work hard at something and in our eyes it becomes far more than it really is. Perhaps good people, sensitive people, are even more prone to this. We have a mothers protective love for our brain-child.

If we invented a machine that could possibly change much of the negative dynamics of the world to positive, wouldn't we want to do everything possible to clearly prove its validity and perhaps even improve on it? But subconsciously we know that what we have is not what we so very much want it to be, and so we become defensive and vague rather than invite the examination and scrutiny that could prove us right.

Even though it may appear to, no one can say yet if this dynamics is at play here. Often I am mistaken about things.

[gyulasun]

Hi Folks,

While I agree with most that you have written, I think we have to step forward from this and for instance somehow persuade the inventor in a polite way to run his setup for a longer time than a few minutes in the self run mode etc etc as Conrad suggested.
Of course the other way is trying to reconstruct his setup, Larry's test on the cylinder magnet's slow turning sounds promising and may justify an attempt in building it.

rgds,  Gyula

[Sprocket]

After playing around with aluminium and spinning diamagnetic magnets for the last few days, I'm left in no doubt that what he shows with the drill is a non-starter - the magnetic field strength needed for this to work produces far too much drag.  Also, using lead sheeting to form a 'sleeve' around the spinning magnet, the drag was so great I was able to increase its temperature by 10 deg.C using just a small 12V DC drill motor.

I also knocked up a similar motor setup, minus the spinning magnets, ('cos I don't have any!) using normal bearings, just to see how they compare in the torque-required department.  Although my cross-sections are a lot heavier and not wing-shaped, the torque needed seems considerably more - there's no chance I could leave my motor dangling precariously like he does, as it would quickly strangle itself with the power-cables!

Anyway, fun to play with... 

[Gwandau]

I have a feeling the following line of thought might be a clue to what we are dealing with here.

First of all, there is no need for any academically attempts to explain what Mr.Walker, the inventor, is onto,
since it is clearly beyond orthodox knowledge.

If it was only an example of harnessing known electromagnetic parameters, it would not be such a mystery to us all.

I believe we have to think out of the box in this case.


Regarding  pure observations of the videos, one of the critical parameters in gaining the extra torque out of this invention
is directly linked to a certain minimum of rpm before shorting the coils.

Another critical parameter, which the inventor himself stresses, is the magnetic bearings, which I believe are there for more
crucial reasons than just minimizing friction.

So what happens to the freely rotating head/tail magnets is obviously something beyond predictable electromagnetic knowledge.

It makes me think about the strange and academically unexplained magnetic oscillation technique used by the Terawatt group in California,
where a magnetic wheel on a drive shaft indirectly induces 150 % torque in another unconnected freely rotating axis also equipped with
a magnetic wheel and additionally a set of strong magnets on the other end of the shaft, creating strange magnetic field oscillations
at certain minimum rpms.

What is really interesting in the Terawatt concept in relation to the invention of Wendell Ray Walker is the neccessity of freely rotating
magnets.

According to the Terawatt group, the magnetic field oscillation created on the passive shaft would not exist if this shaft was connected
to a direct drive. The indirect induction of rotation by a physically unconnected magnetic drive is according to the Terawatt group essential
in creating the 150% effect in the adjacent shaft.

Below is two images depicting the basics of their invention.

The only way to study and finally get to understand the workings of Mr. Walkers invention is to create an exact replica of his model,
and start from there. Any deviation of parameters in a construct like this will lead us astray.

Gwandau