Muller generator replication by Romerouk

[minoly]

@minoly
On the contrary, the accidental confection would be more easily derived from applying what one already knows about food stuffs. I'm not saying happy accidents don't happen, they do. But much more is acomplished by building on what is known.

If this brick never floats(imo, and according to all the evidence, it never will) will anybody take the time to inspect the cobbler/byproducts or will they just move on to the next belief based ruse that pops up ie. The next romero, bedini, muller, milkovic, bearden, lindman or howard johnson or whoever....

this is but a small example:
Top 10 Accidental Inventions of the World
innovation is a wonderful thing.
why do you bother posting if you are not trying to learn and create...

[quantumuppercut]

Hey guys,

I just fixed my fan rotor and tested the bifilar coil disconnected using only capacitive coupling as described in earlier post. It does show about the same amount of voltage as direct connection to 1 of the coil. I'm thinking this is the way to do it, capacitive coupling. After all, negative inductance is capacitance, is it?

[142857]

See above as to why people didn't respond to you. It's sad really. Are you that bored that you are hear asking, nah, repeatedly begging, for a fight?

I'll bite one more time, you put yourself on the hot seat. One more chance. It's either redeem or ignore list for you buddy. No skin off my back either way.

About you saying magnets not being able to create kinetic energy.. do a super simple test for me. Place a magnet in your hand and slowly raise your hand up under something metal. Tell me what happens.

Magnets do create kinetic energy. All the time. The lenz trick is removing the second half of the energy, so they do not cancel out the energy they initially created.

Ignore is two mouse clicks away. Are you going to add to this thread or just try to derail it? If you are sincere with your questions prove it by starting a new thread titled something like... "practical applications of the Muller generator".

you should probably ignore me just like the rest of physics.

but first you do a simple experiment for me.....put a rock in your hand and slowly turn you hand over. what happens? did the rock create kinetic energy or did you?

how bout this , pull the spring out of a pen and compress it between your fingers, then just let go?

when you are done, just for kicks, see how much energy it takes to remove my magnet that stuck to my piece of metal.

I AM NOT trying to pick a fight. I'm asking questions. Valid questions at that.

my opinion is that this thing will not self run, sorry that offends but, nobody seems to be able to prove otherwise. Show me, I'll shut up then. That should be simple. No?

So far there is no need for a seperate thread about valid uses, myself and matt are the only ones who have made any kind of suggestion at all.

[Shadesz]

And yes...there is energy in the wall. To get it out we knock the wall over. The energy in the wall was moved there. What you can get out of it is still going to be less than it took to stand it there.
You can't access the potential energy stored in a boulder on a cliff edge without pushing it off.....while your push may be less than the energy gained from the fall....as your apparent understanding of where energy comes from will show you, no matter how efficently you gathered the energy from the falling stone, it can only at best equal the ammount to real energy it took to get it there.

You don't truly understand all the phases of energy do you? Tell me, in a sentence or two each, what is...
Potential energy?
Kinetic Energy?
Electric energy?
Thermal Energy?
Solar Energy?
Chemical Energy?
Atomic energy?

I'll follow this leg through, if your apparent motives don't change you have had your last interaction with me. I have too much life to live wasting it arguing with trolls.

[Shadesz]

your magnet cannot CREATE kinetic energy.
You can:
input/move your magnet into a position wherein you could use it to derive kinetic energy that will be equal to or less than your inital input.

See above as to why people didn't respond to you. It's sad really. Are you that bored that you are hear asking, nah, repeatedly begging, for a fight?

I'll bite one more time, you put yourself on the hot seat. One more chance. It's either redeem or ignore list for you buddy. No skin off my back either way.

About you saying magnets not being able to create kinetic energy.. do a super simple test for me. Place a magnet in your hand and slowly raise your hand up under something metal. Tell me what happens.

Magnets do create kinetic energy. All the time. The lenz trick is removing the second half of the energy, so they do not cancel out the energy they initially created.

Ignore is two mouse clicks away. Are you going to add to this thread or just try to derail it? If you are sincere with your questions prove it by starting a new thread titled something like... "practical applications of the Muller generator".

[142857]

Well now take a moment, just one, to align all those molecules in the wall so their inherent energies are not chaotic and are not working against each other and you have a magnet. Now use that magnet to create kinetic and electric energy, but divert half, and what do you have?

your magnet cannot CREATE kinetic energy.
You can:
input/move your magnet into a position wherein you could use it to derive kinetic energy that will be equal to or less than your inital input.

And for arguments sake, I already have a pulse motor that I can get half of what I put in back out.....

And yes...there is energy in the wall. To get it out we knock the wall over. The energy in the wall was moved there. What you can get out of it is still going to be less than it took to stand it there.
You can't access the potential energy stored in a boulder on a cliff edge without pushing it off.....while your push may be less than the energy gained from the fall....as your apparent understanding of where energy comes from will show you, no matter how efficently you gathered the energy from the falling stone, it can only at best equal the ammount to real energy it took to get it there.


@minoly
On the contrary, the accidental confection would be more easily derived from applying what one already knows about food stuffs. I'm not saying happy accidents don't happen, they do. But much more is acomplished by building on what is known.

If this brick never floats(imo, and according to all the evidence, it never will) will anybody take the time to inspect the cobbler/byproducts or will they just move on to the next belief based ruse that pops up ie. The next romero, bedini, muller, milkovic, bearden, lindman or howard johnson or whoever....

[minoly]

They are, Untill you try to get your lenzless generator to "self run"

no, minoly, on youtube i'm 50lbhead.

Appologies to matt for my line of questioning being obnoxious. I dunno what I've said that is so unrealistic. Perhaps I've stepped on somebodies beliefs.
I do believe that every question I've posed in this thread are things that everyone here should be asking along the way.

Again I'll say that what one may or may not believe should have little to do with any of these conversations...

However if you 'believe' that you can levitate a brick in the air with a mixture of flower, sugar, and peaches .....you are going to waste alot of time, and you may just totally overlook the wonderful cobbler you just made.

If you BELIEVE that you can MAKE energy you will wind up with all manner of arcaic magnetic spinny things that all do the same thing in various manners

IF it's going to self run...it must get the energy from? where? Are we really going under the presumption that it's just going make it?

what I'm saying is:

If you did not attempt to levitate that brick, you might not have ever made that wonderful cobbler.

[Shadesz]

This system creating energy? I think not.

"Energy" in this context is electricity. So what is electricity? The flow of electrons. Are the electrons created from nothing?

No. In fact there is not electricity unless the electrons are going in a circle, and virtually ending in the same place they started. Basically musical chairs every time you turn the light switch on, only you don't remove a chair every round.

Hence, electricity is a flow of the same electrons that existed in the system(circuit) already, but they are just going in circles (or vibrating in synchronized pulses).

Why would a lenzless generator be so cool? Well, imagine a hose connected to itself full of liquid. At one point you have a rotor standing above the hose so the direction of spin is parallel with the hose. There are special magnets or whatever connected to the rotor. The magnets are attracted to the liquid inside the hose.

If you slowly move the rotor so a magnet's field picks up on the liquid it will pull itself as close to the liquid as the rotor will let it. As it pulls itself closer to the liquid it will also be pulling the liquid through the hose at an equal force (in the other direction). Note: This is lenz law. As the magnet pulls and forces itself one direction it is also pulling an equal mass of 'liquid' in the other direction.

In a traditional system as the magnet passes tdc the magnet will now be pulling against the liquid at an equal amount as it propelled itself to the liquid, plus any friction in the system. Hence the effect slows and stops both the liquid and the rotors energy. The magnet does not escape the pull of itself to the liquid unless acted upon by another outside force.

Now, suppose you do the same thing. As the magnet pulls itself to the liquid it pulls the liquid in the opposite direction and thus creates a flow. BUT this time, right at tdc, or very close to it, you somehow turn off (or divert) the attraction between the magnet and the liquid. So now the magnets force has created kinetic energy in both the rotor and the liquid in the hose, but when it comes time to normally pull against that force it doesn't. This now allows the flow of liquid and the rotation of the rotor to continue. The system repeats itself over and over and you have a self running flow generator.

Did you create energy? NO! You simply used energy that was already there and re-routed half of it so the other half could create a current.

What energy was already there? You don't look at a wall as you walk down the hallway and assume there is no energy in that wall do you? All the atoms in that wall are moving. Not just that but their electrons are moving REALLY fast. There is energy holding the individual atoms together into molecules. There is also energy holding the very molecular compounds in that wall together. All that energy just sitting there! There is also the potential anergy that the builder put there when he stood the wall up (doesn't it want to crumble down if allowed?). And most people walk down the hall ignorantly assuming there is no energy there. Oh there is energy. TONS of energy! Potential, thermal, chemical, and atomic/quantum.

Well now take a moment, just one, to align all those molecules in the wall so their inherent energies are not chaotic and are not working against each other and you have a magnet. Now use that magnet to create kinetic and electric energy, but divert half, and what do you have?

A system to extract energy that is already there in the quantum world. You aren't creating energy, just aligning it and converting it from quantum to kinetic, to electrical. Just like a wind generator converts it from thermal(heating air), to kinetic (wind), to kinetic(a spinning rotor) to electrical (electrical current).

From a different angle... ALL energy originates in the atomic/kinetic world.
Gasoline? It came from oil which came from organic matter which came from plants absorbing light which came from hydrogen molecules fusing into helium (in the atomic/quantum world) in the sun.

Solar cells skip a few steps but still ultimately require light generated from the atomic world.

Wind relies on thermal energy created form the same light.

Tidal currents/generators rely on the gravitational force of the moon. (can you say magnetism?). Again, the atomic world.

Geothermal relies on heat in the earths center. Thermal energy created by gravity. Again, atomic energy.

Nuclear power plants convert atomic energy into thermal (steam), then into kinetic, and then into electric.

So why not skip the thermal step in nuclear power plants and go from atomic to kinetic (a spinning rotor) to electric. Now you have skipped a step and have no radioactive waste either! It is the most efficient system... except one.

A solid state generator is trying to convert atomic energy directly into electric without the step of kinetic.

The energy is all around you, above you, below you, inside of you. We just have to figure out how to harness it. Create energy? No. Harness it more effectively and efficiently? Yes!

lol, and to think a month ago I was against the idea.

[142857]

To me the question of "Energy Creation" and "lenzless" applications are two separate questions.

They are, Untill you try to get your lenzless generator to "self run"

no, minoly, on youtube i'm 50lbhead.

Appologies to matt for my line of questioning being obnoxious. I dunno what I've said that is so unrealistic. Perhaps I've stepped on somebodies beliefs.
I do believe that every question I've posed in this thread are things that everyone here should be asking along the way.

Again I'll say that what one may or may not believe should have little to do with any of these conversations...

However if you 'believe' that you can levitate a brick in the air with a mixture of flower, sugar, and peaches .....you are going to waste alot of time, and you may just totally overlook the wonderful cobbler you just made.

If you BELIEVE that you can MAKE energy you will wind up with all manner of arcaic magnetic spinny things that all do the same thing in various manners

IF it's going to self run...it must get the energy from? where? Are we really going under the presumption that it's just going make it?

[quantumuppercut]

So the REAL question here, and everybody feel free to chime in, is:

Do you believe that you can somehow Create Energy.

To me the question of "Energy Creation" and "lenzless" applications are two separate questions.

I personally don't believe in Energy comes from nothing. Where it comes from then? I don't know. I just know Rod experiment show such and such.

[minoly]

minoly, I did read your first post, and I understand that you think I'm somehow unfamiliar with what's being worked on here. On the contrary, I've actually been following and reading this thread from day one. I do understand the concepts at play. Hence the realistic skepticism.
I've had a lot to say for a long time now, initially I was going to wait a week or two to chime in(just beyond the predicted replication time) but I just kept reading and trying to absorb the mindset.
The very first post, very first sentence, approaches this with the mindset that it's already somehow truth. That in it's self is more along the lines of how magic and religion work. Not so much science.

@quantumuppercut
Thank you for your insight. Mostly for the way you approached it, for the sense it gave me that you thought through my posts and tried to understand where I'm coming from. Basically for not acting like my questions were somehow a personal attack on what you believed(again alot like religion) Like I said though, I'm not dumb to the idea, I get it.
And everything you said is right up to the speculatory last sentence where you imply or crossover into the realm of actual energy CREATION.

So far there is not one proveable example of anyone in any lab, or anything in the natural world or in the know universe that 'creates' energy. There is ALWAYS a fule source/er input.

So, for rods 20 coil "lots extra" version to attain desired results it will either have to MAKE energy from nothing, or access somthing yet unknown. Just like JB's radiant energy(ghost)

So the REAL question here, and everybody feel free to chime in, is:

Do you believe that you can somehow Create Energy.


If somebody doesn't play the devils advocate here, none of these threads will be 'history in the making' they will be endless "ferris wheels".

Fact is, If what you guys are onto here is what it seems to be, you could very well revolutionize wind generation. If you can see it through your religion.

I will go out on a limb and say that I don't believe any of you are going to CREATE any energy, you will need some additional input.

Seems to me the most logical input for a freespinning gen is wind.

Or if this thing doesn't actualy work as well as a common wind turbine, then why wouldn't you put your magnets and coils around the perimeter of a regular windmill and use the windmill output to fire your drive coil....then your windmill could make it's own electronic wind....or would that be a sort of lockridge device?

Thank you for taking the time to post something thoughtfull, however, if you have kept up with the thread, then you either believe the results people are getting or you do not. if you believe, it seems your questioning might follow a more specific line of wanting to understand and/or replicate a specific experiment that you are interested in rather than only asking a general question. if you do not believe then I do not understand why you would post anything at all...


If you are user 142857 from youtube as well, your reputation precedes you, if not your last 68 posts here do the same.
I'm all for questioning everything, and I do. many claims made have not come to pass. I don't feel the need to question people to their face, the possibility is too great that it might squelch some innovation that will prove to be profound. BTW I do like the "PMH getto motor" you posted a link to.

[142857]

minoly, I did read your first post, and I understand that you think I'm somehow unfamiliar with what's being worked on here. On the contrary, I've actually been following and reading this thread from day one. I do understand the concepts at play. Hence the realistic skepticism.
I've had a lot to say for a long time now, initially I was going to wait a week or two to chime in(just beyond the predicted replication time) but I just kept reading and trying to absorb the mindset.
The very first post, very first sentence, approaches this with the mindset that it's already somehow truth. That in it's self is more along the lines of how magic and religion work. Not so much science.

@quantumuppercut
Thank you for your insight. Mostly for the way you approached it, for the sense it gave me that you thought through my posts and tried to understand where I'm coming from. Basically for not acting like my questions were somehow a personal attack on what you believed(again alot like religion) Like I said though, I'm not dumb to the idea, I get it.
And everything you said is right up to the speculatory last sentence where you imply or crossover into the realm of actual energy CREATION.

So far there is not one proveable example of anyone in any lab, or anything in the natural world or in the know universe that 'creates' energy. There is ALWAYS a fule source/er input.

So, for rods 20 coil "lots extra" version to attain desired results it will either have to MAKE energy from nothing, or access somthing yet unknown. Just like JB's radiant energy(ghost)

So the REAL question here, and everybody feel free to chime in, is:

Do you believe that you can somehow Create Energy.


If somebody doesn't play the devils advocate here, none of these threads will be 'history in the making' they will be endless "ferris wheels".

Fact is, If what you guys are onto here is what it seems to be, you could very well revolutionize wind generation. If you can see it through your religion.

I will go out on a limb and say that I don't believe any of you are going to CREATE any energy, you will need some additional input.

Seems to me the most logical input for a freespinning gen is wind.

Or if this thing doesn't actualy work as well as a common wind turbine, then why wouldn't you put your magnets and coils around the perimeter of a regular windmill and use the windmill output to fire your drive coil....then your windmill could make it's own electronic wind....or would that be a sort of lockridge device?

[Matthew Jones]

Valid uses for this "lensless" generator? nobody yet?
...I really am asking pretty valid questions....

...I'm just wondering if this would be better than a currently available wind turbine?....

.....Is a free spinning "lensless" gen turning really fast on an input of "X" better than a traditional gen turning slower at the same X input?.....

Ultimately can this kind of system put out more energy from the same input as any number of other generation methods. or does it just spin faster?

I want to know your thoughts on what kind of real world uses this kind of a generator might really have.

I don't know why no one has answered you other than you do seem to be a little obnoxious and full of yourself at times.

Lenz free generator would allow many more opportunities to collect energy as the primary driver could quite a bit smaller.
A good example would be a water tower. Small turbines that did not lower the pressure on the main line out, or drop. Would not matter if it needed to go faster or slower the primary driver would not need to work as hard to produce the same amount of energy.

Alot of what your asking is hard for them to answer as they have not built one they are looking to make one work. But the Kromrey is a perfect example of a Lenz free generator that is already functionally to those who have built one. Its power productions increases while the tension of Lenz decreases as it produces energy. Why more haven't gone to look into it I have no clue.

The advantages should be obvious but since you think most of these people are waisting there time I see why you would start to question.

But just because things don't seem to work out doesn't mean there isn't something to learn. For instance they have figured out YOU are not a worth wild investment and so no one feels the need to answer your questions.

I am sure if they keep at it someone will see the light and make this work.

Cheers All
Matt

[minoly]

@12345 there you go,
now you do not have to heed my first post on this:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7982-muller-generator-replication-romerouk-38.html#post150790

[quantumuppercut]

Valid uses for this "lensless" generator?

I think I'm starting to understand what you mean.

Let's say we have a wheel with magnets turning. If there is no pick up coil, the energy require to turn that wheel is exactly the bearing friction.

If we makes it frictionless, then the energy require is zero. The wheel turns under Newton's first law (object stays in motion unless a force act on it).

Now if you put a pick up coil to extract energy. The energy you extracted will be exactly what the wheel has to slow down by. This is traditional understanding. Let's say you extract 10 units of energy. The wheel slow down by 10 units of energy. If you don't want the wheel to slow down, you have to put in 10 units of energy.

The mechanism of why the wheel slow down is govern by Lenz law.

If you have a lenzless way to do it. It means you can use a pick up coil and extract 10 units of energy and the wheel does not slow down at all.

If the wheel is frictionless, you will never have to put in any energy while keeping on extracting energy.

What Rod trying to do right now is makes those lenzless coil and put them around the wheel as many as possible. His rotor is not frictionless so there will be a set amount of input, but this input does not change.

If his input is 30 watts and one lenzless coil gives him 5 watts and he has room for 5 coils: his input is 30 watts, his output is 25 watts. It is still under unity. If he can fits 6 coils, then he is unity. If he can fit 7 coils, he has 5 watts extra. If he can fits 20 coils, then he has a lot extra.

Hope it makes sense.