Over Unity is No Longer Disputable

Loss Leader said:
I, for one, believe that this machine works. It does not create "free" energy; it harnesses energy from a parallel universe increasing the total available energy in our universe but also increasing entropy across the entire multiverse (like a solar cell harnesses the sun's energy to increase available energy on earth but offset by draining energy from the sun). The single problem with this technology is that it may destroy a parallel universe in which other copies of ourselves are fighting to survive including, but not limited to, Dr. Rodney McCay who might need the help of his own sister to reverse the damage. And that's not the amazing part. The amazing part is that his sister is played by David Hewlett's ACTUAL FRICKIN' SISTER!

Oh brave, new world ...
Click to expand...

<canadian accent>
I did not know that....
</canadian>

Good episode...
 
Last edited:
Dr Adequate said:
I thought it was the laws of thermodynamics, and all the time it was me! Boy, is my face red.
Click to expand...

That's because you're not clapping loud enough Dr Adequate! Remember, you have to clap or free-energy dies. Why do you hate free-energy?
 
Check out http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Energy_By_Motion_(EBM)
EDA: Forum breaks the last character of the URL. Add a ")" to the end of URL after clicking.

On Oct. 17, 2006, New Energy Congress member, Sterling D. Allan wrote:
Watching the video, having interviewed Prof. Szabo a few days ago, I was thinking it was produced recently (last few months or weeks). The wording certainly is similar to their posture right now. I was therefore thrown for a loop when the year 2002 was mentioned at the end of the video as the expected date of completion of the first commercial unit. They were claiming back then the very thing they are claiming now -- four years later:
  • a larger size will be sufficient for self-running, with adequate energy left over for sale
  • such a unit is expected to be completed soon
Another disconnect is in their statement at the beginning of the 2002 video (which they are still claiming): that the technology is now "commercially ready."
My definition of "commercially ready" includes the necessary condition that a production prototype exists and has been rigorously tested to withstand the rigors of commercial use. They don't even have a working prototype (self-running, with adequate left over to sell), let alone a thoroughly tested production prototype.
Click to expand...

It later said that "They have been able to raise close to $100 million to start building these units." but the source link didn't work.

g4macdad, this formula for scamming money is tried and tested. It's amazing that it continues to work so consistently. If someone did invent something to this effect there's no reason to be so secretive about the design. Your patents rights are not lost just because the invention is made public before being patented. Public disclosure actually helps protect your patents rights. If it was real then not publishing the design details actual could work against your patent rights should someone else claim it.

Wake up and smell the coffee.
 
Last edited:
g4macdad said:
This is one of several technologies that utilizes fields of energy.

Here is a list:Gravity_Motor, Steorn Toy, Wang Generator, Tsing Hua Magnifier, Energy from Air machine, Chao Car, Magnetic Power Inc flux change generator, EBM machine, Minato Bicycle, Milkovic dual mechanical oscillation system.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the list of amusing things to look up for laughs on the internets.

g4macdad said:
The whole problem has been the claim that these somehow break newton's first law of thermodynamics (COE). It has recently come to light that these devices actually follow this law just fine. The problem has simply been the dogma of the scientific community.
Click to expand...
Here is a New ClueTM: "Overunity" == "2+2=5"

Be careful; your New ClueTM is sharp, you can hurt yourself with it. Please consult with an authorized fact dealer in your local area before attempting to utilize it.
 
Mojo said:
19th century?
Click to expand...
Well, yeah. But earlier attempts had no chance of working, the didn't have the technology to block friction.

But with my band new Unique Geometry Lubricant, you can extend your overunity efficiencies by 20, 30 even 59.4%!! Don't let your unique geometry merely violate the laws of Thermodynamics... Make those laws your B*tch.

---
Disclaimer: Unique Geometry Lubricant may or may not extend your overunity efficiency. Unique Geometry Lubricant not suitable as a personal lubricant. Perpetual motion devices make baby jesus cry.
 
We are immersed in electromagnetic waves (and gravitational pulls) and exchange such energies constantly. Electromagnetic waves come from the orbiting electrons of atoms. Unless these electrons stop rotating and fall into the nucleus, there will be Electromagnetic Wave Exchanges. (Some call this a form of Zero Point Energy.)
Click to expand...

Me thinks you need to read up on your physics....

Now if you have a device that can tap into "gravity or background EM waves" and convert this into a usable practical power source, that would be great.

If you don't have the device or proven concept at hand, then you are just speculating and are wasting our time in a forum like this...
If you do have the device or proven concept at hand, you are about to become the richest bastard known to mankind but you would still be wasting your time in a forum like this :D

Bruce Jongejans
 
Ziggurat said:
Well, if you had an over-unity device whose extra output was heat, well, then you've got yourself a really good heater. Not completely useless, actually.
Click to expand...

*mumble mumble*...damn physicists...*mumble*..think they're so damn smart...*mumble*...

:D

Yeah, true. Not to mention you could use that heat to drive a turbine (or something along those lines) and possibly create enough energy to run back into your machine (depending on how far overunity you are).

Still, though, if you wanna claim overunity or perpetual motion or zero-point IQ...er...energy, then show me the "til-the-end-of-the-universe" cell phone battery and I'll listen :).
 
Last edited:
my_wan said:
Your patents rights are not lost just because the invention is made public before being patented. Public disclosure actually helps protect your patents rights. If it was real then not publishing the design details actual could work against your patent rights should someone else claim it.
Click to expand...



You have to be careful about this. The rules on prior disclosure vary quite a bit from country to country, and even the ones that are most liberal about allowing you to still patent something that has been published have tme limits on those rights. For example, Canada allows you to apply for a patent on anything you've invented up to one year after the first publication, while in europe, the time limit is only six months, and only for certain types of publication. The US (I think) still requires absolute novelty - any prior publication bars you from getting a patent.

Of course, all this means is you hve to submit your application for patent before publishing - once the filing date is secured, you're (almost) totally safe, even if someone else files a similar application, so long as the patent eventually does issue. So if they had a "working design" as far back as 2002, they could have filed everywhere they wanted to, and published in some engineering journal by now......
 
Broes said:
Now if you have a device that can tap into "gravity or background EM waves" and convert this into a usable practical power source, that would be great.
Click to expand...



I've invented a device that "taps into gravity" to produce free energy, but those bastards at the patent offce claim it's not novel.
 
Horatius said:
You have to be careful about this. The rules on prior disclosure vary quite a bit from country to country, and even the ones that are most liberal about allowing you to still patent something that has been published have tme limits on those rights. For example, Canada allows you to apply for a patent on anything you've invented up to one year after the first publication, while in europe, the time limit is only six months, and only for certain types of publication. The US (I think) still requires absolute novelty - any prior publication bars you from getting a patent.

Of course, all this means is you hve to submit your application for patent before publishing - once the filing date is secured, you're (almost) totally safe, even if someone else files a similar application, so long as the patent eventually does issue. So if they had a "working design" as far back as 2002, they could have filed everywhere they wanted to, and published in some engineering journal by now......
Click to expand...

Yes very true. Doesn't invalidate the point as you agreed. Technically a patent is public disclosure. My intention was not to advise on patent laws to an inventor but to point out the insanity. I'm 100 million dollars is enough for them to hire all the patent lawyers they need.
 
So you've made a discovery/invention that will change our knowledge of science and you put up a video on YouTube.:confused:

No need for peer-reviewed scientific journals, obviously. Do we need universities, or is Wikipedia enough?
 
I, for one, believe that this machine is really what they say it is. After all, with all those sciency words how could it not be?

Thinking about it a little, all they need to do is hook it up to a Retro Encabulator, and that would pretty much solve the worlds energy crisis, or at the very least in the milfer trenion industry.
 
Damn it, beaten to it....

Oldpossum said:
Ahhhh, heres your problem!
There is no "Newton's first law of Thermodynamics" to break, or follow!
There is Newton's 1st law of Gravitation, which has nothing to do with Free Energy.
and there is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, which has nothing to do with Newton, or Free Energy either, for that matter.

Basically your problem, g4macdad, is that you don't comprehend basic physics, and so you seem incapable of understanding, why you are posting gibberish; And why we are so sceptical of the links, to the Free energy scams, you post.
Click to expand...


What a fruit cake.........Newton's 1st law of thermo.... I like Newton, so I don't actually mind crediting him with just about anything....:D

Newton's Laws of:-
  1. Particle accelerators for a Chevy 69, re-routed through the tail
  2. 2nd law of pickle making and beverage swilling...
  3. The general law concerning making stuff up!
It's the 3rd law above our friend seems to be referring to... it never fails!

Griff....
 
Opqdan said:
Thinking about it a little, all they need to do is hook it up to a Retro Encabulator, ...
Click to expand...
I knew that device was going to require five or six hydrocoptic marzelvanes! Damn good thing I invested in Hydrozoid, Inc. way back when.

~~ Paul
 
g4macdad said:
You are correct, I am no scientist.

This video never did anything special for me honestly. I only included it it as a demonstration of the principal. There are tons of these devices out there and this is not on the top of the list by any means.

My point is, that this device is real, as are many others. The only real thing that keeps us from free energy is skepticism. I think that is about to change very soon. Either jump on the wagon now, or look real dumb later.
Click to expand...

If I get to call waste heat "energy output" then getting "free energy" isn't all that tough. However, if I want to actually use that waste heat to do something, I have the second law of thermodynamics to contend with.

I watched the video, but that's all. I haven't done any other research on the subject, What I'm curious about is what these guys are really up to. Those gizmos they put together cost a fair number of euros, and ever since the fall of communism, it's really hard to come up with funding for total crackpot ideas. Perpetual motion machines, and variants thereof, are crackpot ideas, so I'm guessing that the video doesn't actually represent whatever it is that they are doing. Or, maybe I'm underestimating the ability for crackpots to find funding.
 
A Rose By Any Other Name, Still Smells

g4macdad said:
It has recently come to light that these devices actually follow this law just fine. The problem has simply been the dogma of the scientific community.
Click to expand...


Not as much "dogma of the scientific community" as chronic, repetitive, negative experience for several hundreds of years.

Now the scientists are simply saying:

"We've heard all this before over hundreds of years, tried it and tested it so many times we've lost count and it was consistently proven bogus. Show us something we haven't seen before in a different disguise. Such claims simply aren't sufficient anymore to warrant serious consideration without new evidence."

It's that simple.

Now, when a person is intelligent enough to see the falsity of it all, he's labelled a closed minded dogmatist by those either obsessed with a pseudo-science profit making agenda or those who are just plain fools and easily duped.


Skeptics simply want evidence that is proportional to the profound magnitude of the claim.

There's nothing wrong with a closed mind - IF your argument is correct and you can prove it. There's the catch.

The bottom line is:

No 'law' of nature has yet been observed to provided a free lunch. Why simply assume otherwise without any apparent evidence?

The biggest barrier to 'free' energy is NOT skepticism, but the laws of nature itself.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom