Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Woo-Woo OVERUNITY??? you do the math

Status
Not open for further replies.

(*steve*)

¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd
Moderator
Jan 21, 2010
25,510
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
25,510
Doesn't matter how close you get to unity, you'll never quite get there and you'll even more never get beyond it.
 

NuLED

Jan 7, 2012
294
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
294
Damn. Steve, it's a joke link. They try to get you to watch Rick Astley.

He got me. Been awhile since the last one.
 

(*steve*)

¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd
Moderator
Jan 21, 2010
25,510
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
25,510
No, that was me. :D Not going to give page rank to that sort of stuff
 

davenn

Moderator
Sep 5, 2009
14,254
Joined
Sep 5, 2009
Messages
14,254
nice one Steve

ohhh am finally out of hospital, was sick of their food LOL

Dave
 

NuLED

Jan 7, 2012
294
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
294
nice one Steve

ohhh am finally out of hospital, was sick of their food LOL

Dave

Congrats!

I was in the hospital a long long time before as well and I hated that I had no privacy. The food was "so so".
 

KrisBlueNZ

Sadly passed away in 2015
Nov 28, 2011
8,393
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
8,393
This is my on going project and I am very close to making a self runner.
No, you're not. You're very close to wasting more time and effort on a futile endeavour.

Unless your intention is to convince uneducated folks that you're onto something and that they should invest in your design so they can take a cut of the huge profits you'll be making when you're selling megawatts of electricity to the power companies. In that case, you may be onto something.

To be charitable, I'll assume that you sincerely believe that your idea will eventually fly. In this case, what you need to understand is that you're looking at the wrong number. You're looking at efficiency, instead of losses.

If your system is, say, 95% efficient, that means that its losses are 5%. Everything you do to improve the system has the effect of reducing those losses - whether they're due to friction (mechanical resistance that converts mechanical energy into heat), electrical resistance (that converts electrical energy into heat) or any other kind of loss.

When you look at it this way, it becomes obvious that (a) the closer you get to zero losses, the more effort it takes to reduce the losses by a given number of percentage points, and (b) the concept of negative losses makes no sense. Therefore you should be able to see that "overunity" is a pipe dream.

Or you could consider the facts that (a) no one has ever achieved "overunity"; some unscrupulous folks have tried to trick people into thinking that they have, but upon proper investigation, their dishonesty has always been exposed; (b) people who promote and support "overunity" attempts are either charlatans or have little scientific training and literacy; (c) the practical implications, if "overunity" was really possible, would mean that it would be deployed immediately on a huge scale and would solve all the world's energy problems. (Conspiracy theories about governments, big oil, big power etc are totally implausible, IMO.)

Join the free forum and build / test it yourself for free no strings attached.
Free, unless you count the cost of time wasted and disappointment suffered...

You're way behind the pack on this one. Many "overunity inventors" already have demo videos showing a fully operational overunity device. (The tricks they use to make them seem to work are not shown, however.)

If you think I'm just being a smart-arse, and that you'll be laughing when someone proves me wrong, then fine. If "overunity" is ever verifiably shown to be possible, you and everyone else deserves to laugh at me. You can even send me a video of you laughing at me, or laugh at me via Skype, if you want. WHEN it happens ;-)
 
Last edited:

BobK

Jan 5, 2010
7,682
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
7,682
Kris, did you try clicking the links? It is a joke.

Bob
 

NuLED

Jan 7, 2012
294
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
294
You have to give the guy points for picking such an attractive subject line, that everyone is going to come and tell him he's not achieved the perpetual engine. Hahaha. I hope he isn't going to troll us any more though, it will be annoying to say the least.
 

Raven Luni

Oct 15, 2011
798
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
798
If anyone ever does succeed with one of these devices, it still wont be overunity, it will be energy harvested from one of the countless sources around us and that energy will be added to your transfer process - and for all you know that energy originates from a local source. Lets say radio waves manage to resonate in your circuit and supply enough energy to offset your losses. Those radio waves most likely come from a transmitter powered by a filthy coal burning power station :p
 

NuLED

Jan 7, 2012
294
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
294
Alright let's turn this into a useful thread then.

Raven brings up something I always thought about.

Can we harvest the RF all around us to recharge batteries?

There is a voltage induced on a wire right? From "radio" ?

Can we aggregate all these wires together with some kind of diode bridge and then maybe a joule thief?
 
Last edited:

magnetman12003

Mar 18, 2010
14
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
14
You have to give the guy points for picking such an attractive subject line, that everyone is going to come and tell him he's not achieved the perpetual engine. Hahaha. I hope he isn't going to troll us any more though, it will be annoying to say the least.

I suppose everyone here knows all there is to know about ""RADIANT ENERGY"". If so please ""STAND UP"" and tell the world what what you DID in detail and what your findings were. I will be most interested.as how anyone can pass judgment on something they dont understand or for that fact never worked with ???
 

eKretz

Apr 8, 2013
251
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
251
I thought that was because Steve changed the link...?

You are right; it would appear that we have several "readers" who are not reading thoroughly and have been fooled twice over.

Guys...read a little closer...from the start.
 

KrisBlueNZ

Sadly passed away in 2015
Nov 28, 2011
8,393
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
8,393
I suppose everyone here knows all there is to know about ""RADIANT ENERGY"". If so please ""STAND UP"" and tell the world what what you DID in detail and what your findings were. I will be most interested.as how anyone can pass judgment on something they dont understand or for that fact never worked with ???
I feel no obligation to learn "everything there is to know", and no inclination to waste my time trying to achieve the impossible. I'm happy with quoting the axiom that energy can neither be created nor destroyed; it can only be converted from one form to another. I also will not be responding further to your claims.

There is no burden of proof on me to demonstrate a fundamental and invariant principle of science. The burden of proof is, as usual, on the person making the implausible and contra-scientific claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top