Mehess Motor

[tinu]

Bill,

Thanks for your detailed answers.
Now you indeed provide us with some figures, to analyze! Here is my opinion:

An equivalent capacitor of 1 Farad charged at 0.185V equals 0.0171125 Joules. This energy was stored over a minute and it was maximal, I understand. From this energy, one can estimate the maximum power the device can produce, which is 0.2852083mW. (Actually this is the averaged power, computed over 1 min. but it should be a close enough approximation of maximal power for any practical purposes). That level of power is very small but let skip this issue although I do not see much ways to increase it significantly. Let?s assume for now that the only goal is over-unity and not the level of powers involved. I can fully accept it.

Up to now, I have one important question:
Are you aware that after a discharge most electrolytic capacitors charge back up to approx. 10% of their before-discharge voltage? It takes many hours for an electrolytic capacitors to be discharged (short-circuited and kept that way) in order to read close to 0V. In some cases, it takes many days to properly discharge it, depending on the type of electrolyte. I?m asking because if you did not discharge the capacitors completely, it means that the above .185V is not correct and the real value is smaller, thus affecting in a significant way all the estimates one can do.

Assuming that the answer above is positive, you?ll get in theory:
1.02675J in 60 min
24.642J in 24hrs
and finally, 739.26J in 30 days.

I?m saying ?in theory? because in order to get this amount of energy, you?ll need a very large bank of capacitors, ideally one of 43200F, which is very far from practical. If you embrace the idea of re-winding the spring of the clock every 3 days, it will still be needed an equivalent capacitor of 4320F, which is also very impractical, to say at least.

What happens if you do not have such large capacitors? You?ll have to discharge some capacitors into others, to collect all the energy and in the same time to obtain a voltage close to that of the motor (12V, for instance) by rewiring the connections (from parallel to series or combined).
But in the case of dumping some capacitors into others you will lose a lot of energy! Basically, every time you discharge a capacitor into another one, you lose up to 50% of energy! Please check the math and remember that we are not talking here of loses of 3-5% but much larger!
Consider the initial state:
1F at 10V     and       1F at 0V    total of    50J
After dumping the first into the second, you?ll have:
1F at 5V       and       1F at 5V    total of    25J, hence loss of 25J and efficiency is 50% exactly. (In practice is even a bit lower due to the ohmic resistance of conductors).

Now, even if the above-estimated energy of 739.26J may be enough for re-winding the clock, although I?m not sure of that because no detailed data are available from your posts, by subtracting all loses, the final result will be, imho, way under-unity. Loses include capacitors leakages but also motor inefficiency and other Joule effects on various contacts and resistances.

Even more difficult than the above loses: it is a huge challenge to connect several capacitors in series in a proper way. You have to closely monitor the charge (or voltage) of EACH capacitor. Otherwise, the capacitor with the least charge (voltage) will be charged in reverse polarity by the others capacitors in the bank, when discharging the whole bank onto a load. Not only that the others capacitors will spend their energy to reverse-charge the ones initially least charged (instead of energizing the motor/load) but you may risk the last ones to explode. This is a huge challenge in itself and you?ll basically need voltage regulators on EACH capacitor. That would be extremely costly and surely not-practical from various reasons, including overall efficiency.

All in all, my judgment is very pessimistic, hence the reason of my first post above.
Maybe I over-reacted a bit and I apologize for that but it was due to the poor content of the 19th pages I?ve just read and due to my clear understanding of the phenomena involved, which again, imho, does not leave room for making the device workable.

Anyway, I wish you all the luck and hopefully you?ll discover something new.

Respectfully,
Tinu
?In the absence of light, dark prevails?

[tinu]

Well, my math above was greatly exaggerated: I wrongly understood that 1F cap will charge at around 180mV in 1 min. But now I see that only one 0.047F cap will charge at that value and not the whole bank of 213 caps (1F in total).
Therefore, the averaged power and the intermediate energies as well as the final energy shall all be divided by 213 to get the correct answer.
Then, it implies that the total energy collected in 30 days is not a respectable 739.26J but it is only 3.47J or less. This is very, very low. In fact, compared to 648J as needed for running the motor for about 12s, the maximum (= theoretical/ideal) value of only 3.47 Joules speaks for itself.

Tinu

[billmehess]

I've done the same calculations myself a thousand times. Your thinking is very
straight line and not outside the box. There are ways to generate a 12volt source voltage to charge upa bank of 213 caps to 12 volts within 60 hours (4200) minutes.
At this point lets don't keep bantering about. You are convinced that the device cannot generate enough voltage to rewind itself within some fraction of a 30day or 43200 minute period. That's ok. I'll be posting videos very soon.
Thank you for your input

"In the absence of dark, light prevails"

[tropes]

Thanks Tinu and Bill. That was great! That's why I come back to this forum. Both spoke truthfully and in the end no one left pouting or crying. It appears that Bill must provide new data and Tinu is obligated to respond to this data. I'm anxiously awaiting.
Peter

[HopeForHumanity]

I was tired and reading through some of the threads and I have to say this. Tinu, why do you care? It doesn't effect you what so ever, so whats the problem? You talk about it being strange with all the pages for this invention, but in actuality, you seeming so offended, and writing that massive post(freaking time consuming) is more strange than what you think is strange. It almost seems like that if he is successful that you will have failed at something or lost out. You arn't physicaly productive in conritbuting positvely or negatively to the invention(physicaly meaning an experiment to prove him wrong or right). Thus logicaly making it unimportant to show all that math, as math is never exact in real life. You cant use math to solve overunity, as overunity is pulling some unknown source into the picture. I don't need to know exactly how this works to see what your missing in your "argument".