anything that works?

[mbrownn]

What do folks make of Imhotep's device: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=2003

Anything there? Any useful power being produced?

Yes, but its small, milliwatts. The device itself, apart from being a fan does not produce anything other than the conditions for a battery anomaly to occur. The overunity is when we compare what we put in with the mechanical work done and what is found in the battery. This apparent gain is in the battery and there has been no "accepted" process put forward as to how it happens, but it is real.

It is also scalable, have you built and tested one?

I think you should, they are fascinating and useful too. You can even use them to increase the overall output from a solar system.

[velacreations]

Hi Vela, How can you not consider solar, wind, hydro ect. to be free energy.
It's not like running a cable from my neighbors socket, no one pays it's free.

well, it isn't free, you just pay for it up front. My solar system cost me a few thousand dollars, so hardly free. But, I wasn't really thinking about $$$ cost when asked about that.

If you don't consider those free energy then nothing is, end of story, stop looking.
There is no such thing as over unity as such in that energy is coming from nowhere.
No one that I know of thinks energy can come from nowhere. It is all we can do
is to collect energy either with no input totally free like a solar panel, wind,
hydro ect. ( not reliable).

There is input in all of those devices, though. Lots of energy required to make the panels, the wire, the batteries, components, magnets, etc. Again, you are paying for it up front, so it "looks" free, and it might eventually have a COP >1 (if used long enough).

Here's my problem with that definition. It isn't free, it is just free to you. You don't input the energy, but like my example, someone else does. So, "free" is relative, at best, in this definition.

I agree that the energy has to come from somewhere, but where is the biggest bang for our buck. Where can we extract the most usable energy?

I think what most people are looking for is a way to use some energy to get
more, just like a heat pump or such where a C.O.P. is applicable. And the
system is reliable in that it will work 365 days a year 24/7 with a usable
output above what is input.

eg, 100 watts input 1000 watts output. Or even 10 watts in 20 watts out would
be groundbreaking if real.

yes, this is more what I consider free energy. And a wind generator or solar or similar device could achieve this if used long enough. But, the COP>1 is not automatic. If you break a solar panel in year 4, you haven't achieved anything.

If we get to ignore the energy contained in manufacturing the components, and in conditioning them (magnets), then the field changes completely. Then, all of a sudden, there is free energy everywhere, but how useful is it, really? If you have to spend 1 unit of energy constructing a device that in 20 years will finally return that 1 unit of energy, what have you achieved? COP >1?

Think of it this way, if you buy a alkaline AA battery and use it in a device, is that free energy? Ok, it cost some $$, but you didn't put in any energy to get the energy out. Someone else did, though, and really, we haven't achieved anything.

It all comes back to terms and definitions, I made a thread to try to get input
from the members so we could agree on acceptable meanings of terms and
define what we mean when we type certain words. Like "back emf or counter
emf", "scalar", over unity, the list go's on, it seems there is a lot of wasted
time in argument over misunderstandings due to poorly defined terms.

personally, I think we focus too much on the terms, and we should really be focused on the devices. If solar and wind count, then we can all relax, because solar and wind are readily available, manufactured on large scales, reasonably inexpensive, and are more cost effective than just about any device on this forum.

If we focus more on gravity devices (do we have anything working in this class?) or "radiant" energy or whatever, then it is less of a question about "free energy" as it is of a device that actually works and can produce usable power.

I WANT to believe in a lot of devices on this forum, like Ufopolitics' motor/generator system and similar devices, where we can input 1kWh and output 3kWh. Unfortunately, few of these devices can be verified or replicated.

In the end, I don't care what we call it, I just want something that works.

[Farmhand]

Hi Vela, How can you not consider solar, wind, hydro ect. to be free energy.
It's not like running a cable from my neighbors socket, no one pays it's free.

If you don't consider those free energy then nothing is, end of story, stop looking.
There is no such thing as over unity as such in that energy is coming from nowhere.
No one that I know of thinks energy can come from nowhere. It is all we can do
is to collect energy either with no input totally free like a solar panel, wind,
hydro ect. ( not reliable).

I think what most people are looking for is a way to use some energy to get
more, just like a heat pump or such where a C.O.P. is applicable. And the
system is reliable in that it will work 365 days a year 24/7 with a usable
output above what is input.

eg, 100 watts input 1000 watts output. Or even 10 watts in 20 watts out would
be groundbreaking if real.

Forgive me but i think I understand what you think a free energy device is
not, but I'm not sure what you think a free energy device would be or should
be. Could you explain what would qualify a device as a "free energy device".

I think I am seeing extremists on both ends of the spectrum but no rational
debate based on previously defined and mutually understood terms.

It all comes back to terms and definitions, I made a thread to try to get input
from the members so we could agree on acceptable meanings of terms and
define what we mean when we type certain words. Like "back emf or counter
emf", "scalar", over unity, the list go's on, it seems there is a lot of wasted
time in argument over misunderstandings due to poorly defined terms.

Cheers

[velacreations]

What do folks make of Imhotep's device: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=2003

Anything there? Any useful power being produced?

[velacreations]

Hi velacreations, would you class solar, wind, tidal, fission or fusion as "free energy"?

no, I don't consider those as free energy, but others do. See my free energy device earlier in this thread, as it meets similar requirements by that definition, and I think we would all agree that it isn't really free energy.

What about gravity?

same as above, though if you have a device that converts gravity into useful power, that would be really great. Just because I don't consider it "free energy" doesn't mean it sn't useful or revolutionary.

Do you think they are spending their time and money wisely to help humanity or are they dellusional?

I think the jury is still out on this device. I am not convinced of the power gains shown in those videos. There might be something here, but I don't see it being replicated and measured properly, yet.

Also, on a different note. What do you make of the patent office rejection of Moray's technology? Have you read that?

I haven't read it, or if I have, I can't remember it specifically.

[soundiceuk]

The problem I see is trying to make evidence fit a hypothesis rather than forming a hypothesis based on available data.

To put it simply: bias. If you want to see free energy, you will. But, that doesn't mean it is really there.

A common thing in the threads of "working systems" is that someone did it at one time (supposedly), but it can't be recreated. Then, people say we don't know the science well enough to recreate the effect. But what is more plausible, that a backyard tinkerer unlocked a great mystery of the universe, or that he misinterpreted his results?

Hi velacreations, would you class solar, wind, tidal, fission or fusion as "free energy"?

What about gravity?


One of the most promising technologies in my eyes is harnessing the energy of gravity, centrifugal force and inertia combined.

Mikhail Dmitriyev's technology:

addition4.Full mixed loads - YouTube


Purely Primatives experiments to validate Mikhail's claims:

Dmitriyev Weight Rotation Test 1 - YouTube

Dmitriyev Weight Rotation Test 2 - YouTube

Dmitriyev Weight Rotation Test #3 - YouTube


His last comment being:

This is a fairly incredible phenomena. Doubling the weight results in almost no incremental increase in current draw from the motor!! I believe that this validates his claim of overunity.

I know Mikhail and Purely Primatives are building more advanced prototypes.

Do you think they are spending their time and money wisely to help humanity or are they dellusional?


Also, on a different note. What do you make of the patent office rejection of Moray's technology? Have you read that?

Cheers,

Paul

[EMCSQ]

..several valid options

In France at least 2 Inventors :
Femradd and another one with a mechanical device with electrical output.
There is no input power needed for them. Eventualy to start them , but it's all.
The mechanical device ; those you can hear a gears running through operation: at least 3 occurencies : a russian , a israelian (site closed) and that french one. On Pesn there is an amphibian vehicle introduced with claims to have a self-running device. I could take a trip to both french locations just to prove if they are valid. But I have debts on the house , that will be paid off in less then 1 1/2 year. When this is done priority 1 will be to have a free energy device because you will suffer a steadily decreasing living standard , if you don't install them.
Luckily the size of the roofs combined will be high enough to get my electricity bill cut down to zero by installing solar panels.
And by that time I will know which other alternatives are valid.
The alternative Energy market here in Germany is still growing .
New HV-DC Lines are beeing built over the next years , that connect the north , where the Wind -Turbine parks are installed in the north sea to the south where for example the automotive industry exists as consumer.
All this is payed by tax or raising electricity prices. You must do something to compensate.

[velacreations]

"Science" is the gathering and interpreting of perceived data. But how "good" can our "science" be if our brains are "hard wired" to misinterpret our perceptions

The problem I see is trying to make evidence fit a hypothesis rather than forming a hypothesis based on available data.

To put it simply: bias. If you want to see free energy, you will. But, that doesn't mean it is really there.

A common thing in the threads of "working systems" is that someone did it at one time (supposedly), but it cn't be recreated. Then, people say we don't know the science well enough to recreate the effect. But what is more plausible, that a backyard tinkerer unlocked a great mystery of the universe, or that he misinterpreted his results?

[Mineko]

Greetings Folks,

Is there "Anything That Works?" Of course there is. Quite a few working systems are being talked about in these threads. So, what is the problem? Why do so many "well meaning" and "interested" people not "see" the solutions being offered?

The real answer is quite disturbing, but here it is. Our PERCEPTION is TRAINED to be FAULTY!

Here is a perfect example.



Believe it or not, the two squares are the exact same shade of grey. So, why does the one on the top look darker? The reason is that our brains are trained to interpret the shading and the edge effects so that we "believe" that the upper square is a brightly lit dark object while the lower one is a light colored object in shadow.

To short-circuit the illusion, simply place your finger across the central section of the image at the horizon line.

"Science" is the gathering and interpreting of perceived data. But how "good" can our "science" be if our brains are "hard wired" to misinterpret our perceptions?

How can we learn how to STOP deceiving ourselves so we can STOP blaming others for our own misunderstandings?

Peter

Freaky...

I have to agree, it'd be nice to stop misunderstanding things.

[Peter Lindemann]

Masters of Deception

Greetings Folks,

Is there "Anything That Works?" Of course there is. Quite a few working systems are being talked about in these threads. So, what is the problem? Why do so many "well meaning" and "interested" people not "see" the solutions being offered?

The real answer is quite disturbing, but here it is. Our PERCEPTION is TRAINED to be FAULTY!

Here is a perfect example.



Believe it or not, the two squares are the exact same shade of grey. So, why does the one on the top look darker? The reason is that our brains are trained to interpret the shading and the edge effects so that we "believe" that the upper square is a brightly lit dark object while the lower one is a light colored object in shadow.

To short-circuit the illusion, simply place your finger across the central section of the image at the horizon line.

"Science" is the gathering and interpreting of perceived data. But how "good" can our "science" be if our brains are "hard wired" to misinterpret our perceptions?

How can we learn how to STOP deceiving ourselves so we can STOP blaming others for our own misunderstandings?

Peter

[admin]

We have received a few reports regarding this thread. Please keep things on topic and stop name calling and any other offensive posting immediately. If this does not cease, we will begin deleting posts and/or close the thread.

Thank you for keeping this a place to share and learn.

[Gdez]

still trying

My latest replica (tsmo360), was meant to have an escapement added on to it to do just what you are asking. While the design is good, I did not make it sturdy enough. An important part of the tsmo is that I has a non movable frame/ base. I am going to try to rebuild it out of all steel, and smaller. The pendulum will still have decent weight to it. Just don't know when I will have time, as I have several other projects I am toying with and I am pretty broke right now.
A good and bad thing about the tsmo is there really isn't a blueprint, so you have to experiment a bit just to build it. You can use your creativity though to build it just about any way you like though, as long as you understand the concept. I started a while back from Panacea's course, peters model builder guide is a good place to start.
a downside about everybody building there own version is that each one is actually different, and will have different results.
I have experimented with water pumping, but didn't really track my results to well. My last pump design (positive displacement), was hard to get linked to the tsmo properly, and started getting too complicated. I will try to do better with more detailed notes and results in all my projects.
I think if I can get another model rolling again, I would like to try and use a centrifugal style pump and a heavy flywheel to keep the power steady. or maybe ratchet up weight to measure difference in power supplied to the pendulum(via escapement) as compared to work done by the lever.
All I can say about adding the initial energy to the pendulum is that I don't care about that part.
If you want something that you just stare at and it provides fe, you probably need to look at other devices than the tsmo. You definitely have to get this one going.
Good luck,
Greg

[Stealth]

basic instructions

Here are the basic instructions for anyone who wants to build one. Basic Radiant Energy Circuit Good Luck. stealth

[velacreations]

I agree with Aaron. The TSMO defintely shows overunity. I am still
experimentjng with it, and the trick is---how do you get the power out, without effecting the pendulum, but still adding that little bit of power in? Once you play with the device, you will see that it works. Making it work the way you would like to make it work may take some some abstract thinking though.
Nothing is easy, unless you make it that way.
Happy Holidays,
greg

Greg, have you had a chance to take any measurements with your replication? In your estimates of OU, do you also include the energy input of initially starting the pendulum?

I have no doubt that it works, just as a lever works. But I am finding a lack of measured data for the device. I have seen some extraordinary claims for the device, and a lot of those claims come from people who haven't built and/or tested the device. So, it is difficult to get an accurate picture of what it can really do.

I propose a simple test with this device. Measure the total input to pump a set quantity of water a set height. So, say 100l of liter 1m in height. Now, measure the force required to initiate and maintain the pendulum. Then we can compare the input vs output rates to conventional water pumps.

I would greatly appreciate if you could share any measurements or data you have on the device.

[velacreations]

Gentlemen, this has to stop.

The powers that be are working to kill free speech all over the net and you are giving them the reason to do it. Posts with personal attacks have no place here, if I was a moderator (no I don't want to be) I would consider deleting them but that is censorship.

If you disagree with what someone says then respectfully do so, stick to facts and back it up with evidence If available.

If you feel you are under attack from someone then respectfully state that their post "appears to you" to be an attack and ask them to clarify.

Sweeping statements invite negative responses.

The tirades of abuse is not only sickening and unpleasant to the person it is aimed at but also the other readers.

This is a public forum thus it is not appropriate to use it for attacks. It is also dedicated to renewable/alternative forms of energy so lets stay on topic too.

I completely agree. Let's get back on topic.