The case against Over Unity

[Bit's-n-Bytes]

[dmonarch]

Energy Wars

I think your in part right when you say the following

I for one am glad that OU is not easy. If it was easy then the governments would goto war with incredible energy weapons.... Yet these may be there only in hiding.

However i think one of the main reasons that energy weapons are not used in war is because the main reason for war is over energy. As well energy is a control factor of the those in power. If the average joe blog has the ability to control his/her own destiny then in most cases he/she will choose to stay at home and enjoy the good life. Have you ever thought why china dosnt have free energy. The chinese people dont live in a little shell any more and are aware of a big wonderful world outside the regime. It would divide country strongly. Those who want to stay red and those who want liberty and know they can have it via free energy. I dont explain it to well but i think you get what i mean.

[dambit]

When someone can take a 4 inch crystal tube filled with water and oscillate the crystal and watch the water disappear as it blows a 4 inch hole through his roof,that's telling me something.

Who did that?

Cheers,

Steve

P.S. I couldn't care less if some of Bedini's OU claims are not being replicated. He seems like a pretty good bloke and he builds amazing amps! I am just thankful that I now have a kick-ass battery charger.

[Ted Ewert]

Perpetual motion is a fundamental property of matter. Matter never stops moving! Electrons revolve perpetually around their nucleus. If matter really behaved the way we're taught in school, every electron in the universe would have spun into its nucleus at the beginning of time.
Where does all that energy come from? We're swimming in a sea of energy. Just because we haven't figured out yet how to harness it for our own purposes doesn't negate its existence.
The possibilities and opportunities are endless. The most difficult hurdle is getting out of the mindset that free energy is some sort of a pipe dream. Nobody said it was easy (it isn't). Bedini gave us some tools and pointed us in the right direction, it's up to us to take it further. This entails a lot of hard work. Research is not easy or quick.
People want it all handed to them on a silver platter. Life doesn't work that way. Building a schoolgirl motor or two and then throwing up your arms and declaring free energy a bust is shortsighted. The schoolgirl motor is kindergarten. It's just the beginning, not the end.
This road is not for the feint of heart. Countless disappointments are the rule and not the exception. Nevertheless, each setback is a lesson. If you stay in school long enough you start to learn things. The more you learn, the more you see. New possibilities present themselves and the process continues.
My advice is to get your hands dirty, and keep them that way.

Cheers,

Ted

[Stealth]

Excellent posts . I too, have been involved or obsessed with free energy for about 15 years. I have tried to replicate different systems from different inventors to obtain free energy. One thing I found out was that these patents, which you can freely download, are only a set of ideas, which may have not been built in the first place. The patent office no longer requires a working model to obtain a patent. And too, there are no dimensions to go by. These are not actual blueprints. Of all the many people who have been working on free energy over the years, only a handful have suceeded.Of those, only one I know of has actually posted his on the web. It is not all complete though. Energy is all around us, we only need to design a device that can convert it in useful energy.This is not in opposition to conservation of energy laws, it is using energy already existant and changing it. I have not succeded with free energy either, but have come close many times. I have not become discouraged either. Perseverance. My new design works on paper. Good Luck. Stealth

[patmac]

if we evaluate our results... Baraoutologos is right...

@Baraotologos
@theremart
@dambit


My case is identical, I have not seen OU in this circuits, my battery has 20 cycles charging discharging totally controlled, I've using a Good Equipment regulated power source to feed my solid state, the Solid State was perfectly tuned, with high tech components:


Two Coils
TL494 PWM precission
Mosfets IRFP450 one per coil.
4n25 Optos for Mosfet Control
Battery YB5L-B.

The circuit was tuned reaching a 65% recovery spike measured putting a resistor on the output.

I had two months charging & discharging the battery, the discharging process was with a 3 Watts bulb, I've noticed the when the bulb is connected the voltage drop to 12.51 volts but is scaling up after first 8 minutes to 12.56 (conditionning sings), but when the battery is discharged by the bulb per 1 hour then the circuit need > 10 hours to fully charge the battery to >14.2 volts (levels 100% connected).

The circuit has operated with 65 ma @ 12 volts, so I have tried to recharge the battery with only < 6 hours and was impossible, the battery only reach 13.5 volts and in this level battery is continually discharging between cycles for example if I repeat discharging process for the next recharging cycle in 6 hours hardly reach 13 volts....

I have no OU, was impossible, conditionning process sings is no visible with 20 cycles I've took 2 months (charging + resting & discharging + resting etc).

I can say that battery is perfect 100%, amperage, holding charge etc.

Baraoutologos, you're right this is continue in this way is stupid and anti-economical, wasting money in transistors, copper etc.

I would like to see the result's ren in his Window Motor and to know if was possible get OU adding circuit's Mike. I'm saving some money to try a Window Motor using the circuit's Mike and Why not?, the circuit I've designed about Adams generator coils some months ago.

overunity.com is publishing news about circuits OU but really works?.

Regards...

[baroutologos]

Patmac am i sound like a bit angry? I am researching man and have purpose of finding the truth.

Thanks for your confirmation but one thing is very clear to see. No OU is possible with the circuits and info given by Bedini et all. Its best to tell Ou secret is hidden and not revealed, than to support is easy to be attained with some transistors, wires and coils and DVDs of course.

I remember EFTV 10, saying after you saw that monumentary DVD you have no excuse not to make an OU machine... jeez a pile of bull. This forum has some of the excellent tinkerers i have ever met. yet not one OU. So? we have not excuse? We are dumbs?

Perhaps... if we are to continue spending and buying the OU promise by the OU merchants. Its a kind of fetich if you think better of deprived of logic. Unless its a hobby... That way i understand.

@ Stealth,
If there are some people claiming that have attained Ou why not share their results? Economic interests? Kind of convinient. I know equal amount of people claiming they are speaking with God.

Anyway, perhaps OU is there, but guidance surely is not. Only exploitation of our urge to obtain OU.
I have nothing more to add. Conslusions are yours gentlemen.


regards,
Baroutologos

[patmac]

@baroutologos

Yes. I ever thougt Bedini uses some like negative resistor for example, look if we extract negative energy from SG and pass throught a truly negative resistor then output current is amplified and is possible get OU. But what type negative resitor is using?. Maybe rocks who knows...

[Ted Ewert]

Many people try to find "over unity" without first identifying the energy form they are trying to tap. It's like trying to build a windmill without ever experiencing the wind.
You have to be able to identify and "measure" the energy source before being able to harness it. Zero point energy sounds great, but how the hell do you quantify it, let alone use it? Tom Bearden talks a great talk, but I have yet to hear him offer one way to tap into all the energy he yammers endlessly about.
Negative energy, zero point, Dirac Sea, scalar waves, Phasers and light sabers are all in the same fantasy world until they can be harnessed and used. I think this is where a lot of the confusion and frustration is generated.
Stick to what you can work and feel comfortable with. Find the energy source first, then figure out a way to harness it.

Ted

[Matthew Jones]

Whats the definition of "overunity"?. Is the word thrown around to loosely.

I never heard Bedini himself say the monopole was an overunity device. I was always under the impression it put the battery into a state of self charging. It also reformatted the lead crystal structure that allowed for more storage in a given battery.

If there are some people claiming that have attained Ou why not share their results? Economic interests? Kind of convenient. I know equal amount of people claiming they are speaking with God.

Would you believe the results? Even if you couldn't duplicate it.....And if God spoke to you would you listen?

Hmmm

Matt

[Stealth]

I need to clarify what I call free energy. This is energy that is already here, like sunlight on a solar cell, or wind on a wind turbine, or hydroelectric from a water source. OU is what I call man made energy, like from a battery powering a device which produces more energy than was consumed. I was not talking OU. I was talking about identifying and using energy already in motion, but changing it to another form in which we can use to do work. Energy is all around us, we just need to identify it and build a device to transform this energy to a usable motor. Good Luck. Stealth

[Allcanadian]

@Stealth
I think your on the right track, many people who do not understand always get into this argument of semantics. ie...OU is impossible as is perpetual motion because of this or that scientific principal, it is a nonsensical argument because they always take the terms out of context to suit their perspective. Physics and nature dictate all matter is in motion, all motion is energy, matter is energy, energy propagates through all supposedly empty space as radiations (light, microwave, UV, infrared ect...)therefore all space whether it is occupied by matter or not contains energy. I think the biggest issue is the fact that everyone complicates things until they make little or no sense what so ever. If you want to see perpetual motion all you have to do is look out the window, everything you see will always be in motion relative to something else -- perpetual motion is nature
Regards
AC

[baroutologos]

People, pls. We all need to have same reference ground.

Whatever negative energy is, it must be converted to standard electricity in order to obtain the usual usefull effects. if negative energy was to have same effects as normal electricity, then fine by me.

If work could be produced, heat, light etc then no problem at all. The case is it is not there and it does not. Someone claims, we could not utilize it since we cannot grasp it essence.

Pls... we are told the standard devices make and capture it. Batteries. No? OU is in batteries we are told. No? Anyway, this debate is somewhat futile. The point is, with this kind of orientation and humble means my best bet is that no one of us could ever experience Ou no matter how many years pass and how much persistance we have.

Its almost mathematically true that anyone of serious search of OU could spend muriads of hours and money and yet nadda. That was the "easy" promise of some coils and magnets and a set of battery. (and having bought a couple of books and DVDs of course)

Later you discover its not that easy huh? We must "understand" first huh? has anyone understood anything so far? If yes pls present your results and some device for replication that goes OU. Its a long way yet to go... Okkk...

One thing is for sure. A clever practical man should make distinction between things that work and bull.

Regards,
Baroutologos

[Sephiroth]

I would just like to repeat something I said earlier about my experience since baroutologos is only speaking from his experience...

a fan I modified (which I was told was between 75 - 85% efficient to begin with) performed 8 times more mechanical work then the original fan could with the same batteries. This is interesting, but not proof.

Though I can not explain why the batteries charge as fast as they do when the power they are receiving is so low. when performing the load tests, the energy that ends up in the batteries far exceeds the energy that was being output by the oscillator. Usually many times greater.

@patmac
I'm pretty confident that solid state can not go "overunity". The mechanical work is important.

[Tehnoman]

Yes, baroutologos, you have a point.

I totally agree with you in terms of blind OU chasing. You have to be very bright and talented (and I mean - very very, one in a billion) person to empirically build a device, using presently available tech, that works based on physics principles yet to be discovered and utilizes energy from source yet to be found as valid energy source. For normal, everyday citizen it is practically impossible.

In contradiction we should search for natural phenomena, which can't be explained by traditional science. That is what I am trying to do, reading about K.Meyl and building an experimental setup. That is what other guy in this same forum is trying to do, developing a device in order to try to detect scalar EM waves.

It is a fact, that energy is around us, at zero point. Vacuum energy. I believe it can be used. Many believe otherwise. But there are two possibilities. One, that in macroscopic scale all these fluctuations really averages out and we can't pick it up using macroscopic phenomena (like electromagnetism), that our only chance is nanotech. Second, maybe there are some kind of interaction that allows to use that energy with macroscopic phenomena, but then again - we don't know how that could work. In both cases it is extremely hard to just "tap into this energy".

Best luck to all.