Free energy already exist

[Ein~+ein]

That is one source of external energy. Do you not believe in any other source.

You're right. Gravity and magnetism are forces we don't fully understand yet, as are the subatomic interactions and relationships. But to get significant amounts of energy from them, chain reactions are necessary, whether they be chemical, nuclear or electromagnetic. You're right, there may be a possibility, however remote, that an inefficient generator might be able to tap into some unproven energy source in ways that no intentional effort has ever demonstrated in over a century--but to the degree Inventionmaster claims it does? Belief is a choice.

The term 'ether' itself is a 19th century term but whether you call it ether, zero point, radiant, cosmic, or whatever, you'll have to agree that for a rank amateur such as inventormaster to ONLY CLAIM to have accidentally discovered a way of collecting and harnessing it does not sound convincing, regardless of the number of similar unsubstantiated claims made. Seems the logical fallacy you and others commit is that the more people making such claims, the more you tend to believe them.

A solar toy car runs by itself using free energy. That is an equivalent example of an OU machine.

Currently, the most efficient solar cells--those on satellites aren't even 50% efficient--far from the OU you attribute to them. While a solar-powered toy uses free energy, that alone does not make it an OU machine, unless of course, you're rejecting the commonly accepted definition of OU too:

Overunity: COP = P out/P in > 1 (more power out than in)

[Turion]

Ein~+ein,

I believe you are confusing two different concepts in your discussion of solar cells. True, solar cells are only 50% EFFICIENT. But overunity (realy don't like that term) does not have anything to do with efficiency. It has to do with how much of the energy to get a device to work you PAID FOR or PUT IN compared to what you get out.

Windmills, water wheels and solar all have losses in EFFICIENCY for various reasons, but the electricity generated by them is "FREE" compared to the energy YOU put into them to make them work. Once assembled they (theoretically) run on their own.

In any system you have the costs of construction and maintenance, so those need to be exempted when you talk of "costs". It is the input of some form of fuel such as gas that is the determining factor....and I would take it even one step farther than that..... Can I sell the electricity I produce for more than I pay for the gas to create it. If so, would that not be "over unity?" even though it is not a "traditional" definition. The traditional definition would be whether or not the gas provided more or less energy to the system than the electrical energy produced.

Just my two cents.

Dave

[inventionmaster]

The term 'ether' itself is a 19th century term but whether you call it ether, zero point, radiant, cosmic, or whatever, you'll have to agree that for a rank amateur such as inventormaster to ONLY CLAIM to have accidentally discovered a way of collecting and harnessing it does not sound convincing, regardless of the number of similar unsubstantiated claims made. Seems the logical fallacy you and others commit is that the more people making such claims, the more you tend to believe them.

Look bud
If everyone in the world thought in this manner then the advancement of technology of the human race would come to a complete standstill. In the existence of life itself (all things that exist and all things that will soon exist) there is an infinite way to try an infinite number of different things. One thing that separates myself from certain others is that I don't care if someone tells me that someone else already tried it or that something is impossible.

Personal thought's of some people: ("Oh it can't be done because if a certain group of people with certain credentials tried it then no one else in the world can make it happen no matter what they try").

Everything we know about technology today is far from perfect as we humans are far from perfect. Since most of us think differently the possibility of new discoveries are limitless

Personal thoughts: "I can't believe how little some people's brains are. No one person or group of people can discover every possible way to do something because however long we exist we will never discover every thing about the universe mainly because our kind evolves technology around the dollar bill. Allot of organizations seem to think (why build it if we can't sell it?)".

As I have stated before my ultimate goal in life is the advancement of technology. If I want something to work I find a way to make it happen regardless of what I need to do. If the information I need does not yet exits then I do whatever experiments are required to obtain that information/research. Then eventually I get it working no matter what

BTW Ein~+ein it's not inventormaster but inventionmaster

[Ein~+ein]

Ein~+ein,
I believe you are confusing two different concepts in your discussion of solar cells. True, solar cells are only 50% EFFICIENT. But overunity (realy don't like that term) does not have anything to do with efficiency.

It has everything to do with efficiency. With everyone redefining terms to suit themselves, no wonder we can't agree. Reminds me of Humpty Dumpty from Alice in Wonderland. For inventionmaster to pull off the science discovery of the century, he's going to need an e-wizard.

COP = Coefficient, not Cost of Performance.

[Turion]

Ein~+ein,
I disagree. A motor that is only 80% efficient COULD run a generator that puts out more power than the motor uses to run. It is not about the "efficiency" of the system, but of the relationship between input and output. Sorry, but the efficient in the word "coefficient" in NO WAY means what you seem to believe it means.

Dave

[Ein~+ein]

A motor that is only 80% efficient COULD run a generator that puts out more power than the motor uses to run.

Sure, at Hogwarts or in Wonderland.

Perhaps the slickest, most convincing argument I've seen for a motor-generator OU device was from Thane Heins. Years on, Heinsians are still trying to replicate his results... with nothing to show for their time, effort and expense. Hopefully none have been electrocuted as Inventionmaster reminds us the dangers are not fictional. You have to ask yourself, why would Heins, et al be so guarded about their secrets on the one hand, but provide so many informative video demos, test data, explanations, etc on the other especially when he's still not making any money other than what investors may be sending him to continue his research?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[Ein~+ein]

As I have stated before my ultimate goal in life is the advancement of technology.

Few of us would've gathered that from your OP. You were far more interested in advancing your personal status than any technology which is why we roasted you:

Free energy is possible as I have rebuilt a generator to produce free energy providing 120v with a frequency of 60hz and a max load of 3500 watts and 30 amps. I have been working on free energy designs since the age 12 and I am now 28. I have designed far more complicated things then this free energy device. I have a special ability when it comes to technology. Every time I learn how something works my mind almost instantly sees many different possible combinations for the creation of other inventions that does not yet exist. However when it comes to holding normal conversations with people I tend to get confused and have almost no common sense as to what there saying unless it has to do with technology.

[Turion]

Turion

Ein~+ein,
I wouldn't be so quick to discount Thaine if I were you, unless of course you have BUILT a replication of what he claims (as I have) and have seen for yourself that it does not work. Which would be unlikely, as it DOES work. I built a two coil generator based on those exact principles (not exactly as Thaine showed us, but based on those principles), and the generator DOES accelerate the drive motor under load. The more load you put on it, the faster the motor spins. This is running on fixed voltage and amps from a power supply for testing purposes. It can be adjusted so that it BARELY affects the drive motor, which then increases the output of the generator coils. I currently have a 12 coil prototype being constructed by a machinist (at a cost of over a thousand dollars so far, but then it will all be programed into his machine, so future replications will be MUCH less expensive, plus we learned a few things along the way) and expect to be testing it within the week....except I leave for a week vacation this Friday. To run it I am using a pulse motor that actually puts out 3 volts MORE than it uses to run, so I truly believe we have a winner. but the proof is in the pudding (as Grandma used to say) and we will see when the testing is done. So I BELIEVE that you can put together a system that produces more energy than it takes to run. I have seen it on more than ONE occasion, and have held it in my hands and tested it. On those previous occasions (see the 3 Battery Generating System Thread) It always quit working after a while. My hope is that this new system won't. By the way, neither the motor NOR the generator are of MY design. They are amazing pieces of work and come from the hard work of others. I would not even attempt to take credit for their hard work.

I am viewing THIS thread because it is my hope that we can come up with a motor that is even MORE efficient than the one I am currently using. I also intend to try UFO's motor in this setup as it has showed me some amazing things (See UFO's threads). If inventionmaster has a motor or generator that actually works, and wants to share how he did it, I will replicate it, because that is what I do. I test this stuff, and then I take the best of all the things I see, put them together with what I KNOW already works, and strive to build the best device possible.

But in answer to the question I know you will ask, we have not been able to loop the system. The input is measured and controlled, and we can measure the output, but when we try to loop back to the run battery, for some unknown reason, the motor slows down. If it drops below 1100 rpm, then when loads are added to the generator, it slows down instead of speeding up. So we have some work to do, but we are getting there. One of these days we will probably start a whole new thread on this setup, but not quite yet. I bring this up only because it proves TO ME that a setup that produces more energy than it takes to run IS possible. And fairly easy to build. So I have no problem believing that inventionmaster CAN build such a setup. Whether he has actually done so remains to be seen.

Dave

[inventionmaster]

You were far more interested in advancing your personal status than any technology which is why we roasted you:

Funny I never truly felt roasted

Anyway I plan to finish up the generator and installing it on the new mount this weekend. My new battery charger will be in towards the end of the week. I plan to take pictures of the gutted engine and everything else and a video of it running (assuming I hook everything up correctly without frying myself or anything else).

There is a couple of wires that I think I don't need to connect

I'm trying to do away with anything that's not needed

If it quits working then I'll know for sure that I've missed something important which will cause me to have to rebuild it again.

I'll put it on video once it's completely finished no matter what

[Ein~+ein]

[QUOTE=Turion;231146]Ein~+ein,
I wouldn't be so quick to discount Thaine if I were you, unless of course you have BUILT a replication of what he claims (as I have) and have seen for yourself that it does not work.

Why bother when Thane himself denies the device is perpetual motion--it can't power itself and if it can't power itself, it's probably* not OU/COP >1 or whatever you choose to call it. Notice how even Thane (deliberately?) confuses perpetual motion with efficiency:

Of course in my mind any person capable of rational thought would realize rather quickly that this is not a perpetual motion machine because:
1. If you unplug the prime mover it stops.
2. Bearing friction still exists in the system.
3. Core losses (eddy currents and hysteresis) still exist in the system.
4. Windage losses still exist in the system.
5. Wind losses still exist in the system.
6. The system produces noise.
7. The system produces heat etc.
8. Our generator reverses a torque but its magnitude is very small compared to that supplied and required by the prime mover.

If you can fairly easily achieve what neither Heins, his partners, nor any other amateur hack has then approach him (or his partners) with a business proposal.

* Assuming the device is OU/CoP>1/(?) but only when plugged into household current as you both admit, then isn't it strange why he'd only want to promote it as an EV energy source? Who wants a corded EV? A year and a half ago, he claimed to 'road test' it but it was simply a bench test equivalent.

[Ufopolitics]

OU, COP>1...and Motion Perpetual...Self runner

Why bother when Thane himself denies the device is perpetual motion--it can't power itself and if it can't power itself, it's probably* not OU/COP >1 or whatever you choose to call it. Notice how even Thane (deliberately?) confuses perpetual motion with efficiency

Hello Ein~+ein,


I believe You are the one who has some confused terms here...

The fact that a device is COP>1, or Over Unity means Output is greater than Input (I know You have written this before...so, I do not understand why you have this confusion?)..and that excess at output measurement, could perfectly be One(1) Volt above and One Milli-Amp (0.01 mA) above Input...

Now, the fact that Output exceeds Input for so little...and in some cases much more than that...it absolutely does NOT means that device could be a self-runner...or much less a Motion Perpetual Machine.

I want you to have in mind...that in order to be a self runner...a Device must be able to produce an excess of V/A that "FULLY Satisfy" the Prime Mover Side (consumption/demand/draw) ...PLUS, another excess of Energy to be stored, in order to keep compensating ANY "Incoming Surge Draw" from either Machines during operation or when we apply any kind of load to them....could be Electrical...or Mechanical.

When we are referring to Electrodynamic Devices (which is the case on this Thread, as is Thane Device you cited)

We MUST separate them into two Basic Categories:

1-Prime Mover-Generator are ONLY Mechanically attached/coupled, Having all their Magnetic Components Separated in different Cores-Frames, Assemblies.

2-Prime Mover and Generating Units are "MIXED/FUSED" within a COMMON Shaft, sharing SAME CORES and more...

There is a HUGE difference between the two Systems...as the Second one shares also Internal Inductions between Coils, by having common Cores...Shares Magnetic Fields within the same 3D Space, therefore, share Magnetic Interactions/Dynamics/ Inertia Forces...This Structures could also share same components...like Stators for Motor and Generators..they have a completely different outcome...All this Common/Shared Actions/Reactions/Components, makes this Systems Very Difficult to measure precisely...what is the Real Input..or Output...since also Consumption/Draw is shared between them...as they could "Assist" each others Internal Actions-Reactions as well.


Now, related to the term "Motion Perpetual Machine"(MPM)...I see it as an Extreme of Exaggeration, used by many Skeptics, as Conservative/Defenders of Classic Physics and Closed Systems Laws (Energy Conservation and Thermodynamics ) ...I see it as a way to set in Ridicule any OU or COP>1 Claims.

USPTO as any Lawyers You hire to get you a Patent...will read/recite prior to your Disclosure... your "Miranda Rights of Physics":

"Please, realize that ANY DEVICES...that gets "EVEN CLOSE" to MPM...would be denied at Application Stage, by the Office Examiners".

So, US Patent and Trademark Offices uses this term...as a "Limit/Frontier"...in order to "measure" IF, You approach "Too Close" ...you get denied.

And Your Claim remains denied, EVEN, IF You offer to demonstrate working models....Decision taken at App stage is FINAL.

The word "Perpetual" means Eternal, Forever...and ever...and everyone here knows that NO -MAN MADE-DEVICE in existence in our entire planet...is Perpetual...or Eternal

All of them have "Consumables"...like Brushes...Bearings...sliding mechanisms...Even a Solid State Device have FET's, Diodes...Capacitors, etc,etc...that ALL of them have a limited life...therefore, NONE OF THEM...Could EVER BE...a Motion Perpetual Machine...


And the reason why I wrote all this...is because I see many times here (in this Forum)...that people "expect" when we say it is OU...that then, Device MUST BE a self runner...or MPM...or THEN IT IS NOT OU...or COP>1...And this is very wrong interpretation of this different Terms.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[ewizard]

Look bud
If everyone in the world thought in this manner then the advancement of technology of the human race would come to a complete standstill. In the existence of life itself (all things that exist and all things that will soon exist) there is an infinite way to try an infinite number of different things. One thing that separates myself from certain others is that I don't care if someone tells me that someone else already tried it or that something is impossible.

Personal thought's of some people: ("Oh it can't be done because if a certain group of people with certain credentials tried it then no one else in the world can make it happen no matter what they try").

Everything we know about technology today is far from perfect as we humans are far from perfect. Since most of us think differently the possibility of new discoveries are limitless

Personal thoughts: "I can't believe how little some people's brains are. No one person or group of people can discover every possible way to do something because however long we exist we will never discover every thing about the universe mainly because our kind evolves technology around the dollar bill. Allot of organizations seem to think (why build it if we can't sell it?)".

As I have stated before my ultimate goal in life is the advancement of technology. If I want something to work I find a way to make it happen regardless of what I need to do. If the information I need does not yet exits then I do whatever experiments are required to obtain that information/research. Then eventually I get it working no matter what

BTW Ein~+ein it's not inventormaster but inventionmaster

Very well said! There are always going to be people like this on forums. Sometimes they are people working for companies that would lose big money if things like you are working on come to fruition. So it becomes fruitless to even argue with people like that as they will keep attacking no matter what you say. I've seen it before in many cases where someone has something new. I'm not saying Ein~+ein is such a troll but I'm starting to wonder. Just don't let him distract you from your work as most of us ignore the few who are stuck inside the matrix.

[Ein~+ein]

Sometimes they are people working for companies that would lose big money if things like you are working on come to fruition.

Not just sometimes, all the time and everywhere.

[Ein~+ein]

Hello Ein~+ein,

I believe You are the one who has some confused terms here...

The fact that a device is COP>1, or Over Unity means Output is greater than Input (I know You have written this before...so, I do not understand why you have this confusion?)..and that excess at output measurement, could perfectly be One(1) Volt above and One Milli-Amp (0.01 mA) above Input...

Now, the fact that Output exceeds Input for so little...and in some cases much more than that...it absolutely does NOT means that device could be a self-runner...or much less a Motion Perpetual Machine.

...but it is! (according to the OP):

Once it's started the external power source can then be disconnected and the generator will then run on its own power while leaving behind an ample supply of power to be used for other things (refrigerator, tv, microwave, etc).

NO -MAN MADE-DEVICE in existence in our entire planet...is Perpetual...or Eternal. All of them have "Consumables"...like Brushes...Bearings...sliding mechanisms...Even a Solid State Device have FET's, Diodes...Capacitors, etc,etc...that ALL of them have a limited life...therefore, NONE OF THEM...Could EVER BE...a Motion Perpetual Machine...

You and Heins clearly don't understand Perpetual Motion as I said. Bearings, brushes, sliding mechanisms, electronics are subject to wear.

per·pet·u·al mo·tion
Noun
1. A state in which movement or action is or appears to be continuous and unceasing.
2. The motion of a hypothetical machine that, once activated, would run forever unless subject to an external force or to wear.

Think of classical gravity-based perpetual motion devices. Supposedly, once gear teeth, bearings, or something else wore down, friction would overcome the force of gravity used to power the device and it would stop. The reason for your confusion is that as you and Heins well know, such a device would have to eliminate all friction, all energy loss just to achieve COP =1. The irony is that such devices as Heins', Inventionmaster's and this one obviously don't:

[Ufopolitics]

You and Heins clearly don't understand Perpetual Motion as I said. Bearings, brushes, sliding mechanisms, electronics are subject to wear.

per·pet·u·al mo·tion
Noun
1. A state in which movement or action is or appears to be continuous and unceasing.
2. The motion of a hypothetical machine that, once activated, would run forever unless subject to an external force or to wear.

Think of classical gravity-based perpetual motion devices. Supposedly, once gear teeth, bearings, or something else wore down, friction would overcome the force of gravity used to power the device and it would stop. The reason for your confusion is that as you and Heins well know, such a device would have to eliminate all friction, all energy loss just to achieve COP =1. The irony is that such devices as Heins', Inventionmaster's and this one obviously don't:

Ein~+ein,

Could You please explain to me...and to whoever be interested...or concerned...

How is it possible,.. -so, absolutely sure- To establish,... solid and definite "limitations", "exceptions"...and "attributes" to "something" is completely Hypothetical?!...

Then...on top... get to copy-paste and use it as an Established and Approved Description of this Hypothesis?...

I really can not understand...how, so many smart and intelligent people...allow to be fooled so easily and with such obvious "False Statements"

Motion Perpetual, is and always be JUST what its name expresses so clear...no less no more...An Eternal Movement, that is it...that name does not give any spec's...as it is mounted on ball bearings, skate boards or...energized by brushes...etc,etc

Until Someone shows all of the world a REAL, working model...then we will go into "details"...as trying to get firm/solid attributes of that particular one...



Oh!, and by the way...could you look up for me... if Unicorns had blue or brown eyes?...it should be also written somewhere...maybe in the same place where you found the Hypothetical Motion Perpetual Machine , Specifications and "Limitations"....

A LABEL WE SHOULD ALL FIND ON ALL PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINES...

This Machine, once activated, would run forever , unless subject to an external force or to wear...in which case warranty should be voided...unless you have acquired a special extended warranty plan at time of purchase...
Please do not remove sealed label or warranty void

Regards



UFO