OverUnity Research

I thought I would start a thread on this subject which has helped me in so many ways as well I should note that I see an increasing lack of critical thinking in society as we know it. I also feel this applies directly to the field of free energy which has become somewhat divided. That is the supposed experts lack critical thinking skills because they rely solely on memory and experience but lack creativity and self-evaluation skills. The novice on the other hand does not understand what is happening nor why and jumps to false conclusions and false beliefs on a regular basis. Somewhere in the middle I think we will find our answers however first we need a clear definition of what critical thinking is and why we need it.

QuoteCritical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally. It includes the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking. Someone with critical thinking skills is able to do the following :

understand the logical connections between ideas
identify, construct and evaluate arguments
detect inconsistencies and common mistakes in reasoning
solve problems systematically
identify the relevance and importance of ideas
reflect on the justification of one's own beliefs and values
Critical thinking is not a matter of accumulating information. A person with a good memory and who knows a lot of facts is not necessarily good at critical thinking. A critical thinker is able to deduce consequences from what he knows, and he knows how to make use of information to solve problems, and to seek relevant sources of information to inform himself.

Critical thinking should not be confused with being argumentative or being critical of other people. Although critical thinking skills can be used in exposing fallacies and bad reasoning, critical thinking can also play an important role in cooperative reasoning and constructive tasks. Critical thinking can help us acquire knowledge, improve our theories, and strengthen arguments. We can use critical thinking to enhance work processes and improve social institutions.

Some people believe that critical thinking hinders creativity because it requires following the rules of logic and rationality, but creativity might require breaking rules. This is a misconception. Critical thinking is quite compatible with thinking "out-of-the-box", challenging consensus and purusing less popular approaches. If anything, critical thinking is an essential part of creativity because we need critical thinking to evaluate and improve our creative ideas.

http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/critical/ct.php

I would also suggest everyone watch the video on the main page of the link above which I thought was very well presented. I believe we need to start giving some real intelligent unbiased thought towards what it is we want and how we intend to get it.

Regards
AC

A quote from the video--

QuoteMemorize a problem and you may master that particular problem

Improve your critical thinking and you will give yourself the tools to create your own effective solutions to a multitude of unfamiliar problems.

You see this is why being an expert in a given field in no way implies anyone has the ability to understand an unfamiliar problem which they have little understanding of. What most generally do however is fall back on their memories and experience which are biased and form a biased opinion of what they believe. This has nothing to do with real facts nor what is happening in reality only their opinion of what may or not be happening. Critical thinking solves this problem because not only must we look at the problem objectively from all perspectives but we must also be critical of how we see the problem and the biases we have formed concerning it. Thus we become an integral part of the problem and the solution because it is impossible to separate ourselves from our own thinking.

Critical thinking is a self-awareness of what we think and why we think it, it examines our own bias towards one way of thinking or another and understanding our own biases gives us more options for possible solutions. Now I wonder how many people felt a little offended when at the beginning I said being an expert does not always imply understanding?. This is a bias is it not, that one would suppose they understand everything just because they consider themselves an expert having a great deal of experience. Obviously nobody knows everything so the question remains... why would anyone find this offensive in any way?... yet most do in that place they don't like to talk about...why is that?.

The single biggest problem I see is when people apply a false common sense, they say I know this machine acts like this and I assume this other machine in question is almost the same so it must also act the same. Does it act the same?, well no we don't know that it does as a fact so why would we automatically assume it does?. Why would we speak of facts and logic and reason then base our opinion on nothing more than assumptions?. It is kind of comical when a person thinks about it because all of us tend to say one thing yet do another, we say they are not being logical or reasonable and yet neither are we.

I like to reduce it to simple math.
The real Problem = (a problem) + (our assumptions)
Our assumptions = (our experience) + (our beliefs)

The solution = (a problem) - (our assumptions) + (critical thinking)

Improve your critical thinking and you will give yourself the tools to create your own effective solutions to a multitude of unfamiliar problems and the unfamiliar problems are the reason we are her.


I should note this is not the place to debate OU devices this thread is to debate critical thinking which may help us understand the phenomena better.

Regards
AC

The best critical thinkers can quiet a room or shut down the argument with a single sentence.

 ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vw2CrY9Igs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vw2CrY9Igs)

Excellent topic for discussion AC!

There is enormous pressure in the world to
suppress critical thinking.

Those who speak out do so with considerable
risk.

A valiant professor does what is right. (http://my.telegraph.co.uk/reasonmclucus/reasonmclucus/15835660/professor-emiritus-hal-lewis-resigns-from-american-physical-society/)

Hopefully, more will develop such courage.

QuoteHopefully, more will develop such courage.

Get a seat in a life boat early as the main ship sinks.

@muDped

QuoteThere is enormous pressure in the world to
suppress critical thinking.

Those who speak out do so with considerable
risk.

I see it differently as in my opinion the greatest risk lies in not speaking up because we fear being judged by others, in a way it represents a way of overcoming our fears. Personally I welcome it because if someone wants to judge me then they will have to justify their opinions. For me there is no right or wrong persay there is only justification for one's thoughts regardless of the topic to be considered, there are no taboo subjects in my opinion. As well, how can we claim to be responsible adults and then take no responsibility for our own opinions because we may be afraid, it seems irresponsible to me and I question everything by default. In the words of the immortal Mr.T -- "I pity the fool" -- who tells me I have no right to question everything.

I want to keep this upbeat so let's consider this statement---

QuoteCritical thinking promotes creativity. To come up with a creative solution to a problem involves not just having new ideas. It must also be the case that the new ideas being generated are useful and relevant to the task at hand. Critical thinking plays a crucial role in evaluating new ideas, selecting the best ones and modifying them if necessary

How does Critical thinking promote creativity?, I think all of us have seen or heard things which make no sense and we feel we are unable to wrap our mind around it. Our default position is generally that it cannot be true simply because we cannot understand it however we have another options. 1) it is not true or 2)it is true but we cannot understand it right now or 3)through critical thinking we might expose unknown flaws in our own thoughts leading to new creative idea's to solve the problem.

Here is an example, many years ago I used to try to replicate/build damn near everything under the sun and I always failed...sound familiar?. I mean I spent decades of intensive research and hundreds of builds and nothing worked until I came to the understanding that maybe I was doing something wrong. It was a little depressing but then I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and it all became very clear to me. I would never succeed because I have sabogaged the whole of the process from day one, I was never looking for reasons how it could work from my own perspective as an individual I was trying to prove to myself that it would never work to retain a sense of normalcy.

So I tried to discard all the baggage I was carrying around in my mind and decided to start from scratch and take a completely new approach. My first step was learning psychology because in my mind I had created a mental wall which was impassable and created from past experience and one sided thinking. As if all the answers I wanted were right in front of me on the other side of that damn wall but my mind would not let me pass. Now think about that for one moment, we all have certain opinions or beliefs about one thing or another but how many times do we stop and question our own thinking?. I mean really question it, why did I just think that?, what conditions led to me thinking these thoughts relative to what I thought prior? where is the justification of having these thoughts and is there another perspective different from my own?. We should be honest with ourselves first and foremost.

As it were I came to a miraculous conclusion, I was thinking the same things over and over and I always had the same thought process therefore I always came to exactly the same conclusions in every case. I could not do anything different because I was not actually thinking any different despite my firm belief that I was. So it was not a simple matter of thinking logically nor a matter of reasoning but the context in which our thoughts are created. It is like saying one plus one equals two but never questioning what a number is or why it exists or how and why we use them. The question not asked is what if numbers were never invented, how would we rationalize the concept of multiple things and how they relate to other things in our world?. You see we cannot even begin to imagine this therefore we will always be held to this single perspective no matter how hard we try or how open minded we claim to be. We all have near identical thoughts without even knowing we do because they are so ingrained in us they are beyond comprehension or question.

As well critical thinking and being conscious of our own thought process has it's benefits as I used to grind my teeth at night and snore, lol. The dentist said I needed a mouth guard and the wife recomended surgery for my snoring so I put my beliefs to the test. I was doing things in my subconscious that would seem to be out of my control but I had to question if they were in fact. So I trained my mind to be more aware of what my body was doing as I fell asleep each night which was not an easy task in any way, shape or form as we are creatures of habit. The issue here is that we take these things for granted and never question them... they just are and there is no getting around it. In fact we can do something and within a month I stopped grinding my teeth and my snoring has all but ceased. Make no mistake it requires a great deal of discipline to retrain our mind and break our habits however it is worth the effort in my opinion.

So we do have choices and once I became conscious of my own thinking and became very critical of my thought process things did begin to change in ways I could never have imagined. I learned more in the last two years than I have in the last two decades. Actually it is kind of comical because when I look back at all those years there is only one thought which comes to mind... what in the hell was I thinking.

Regards
AC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coilgun

A coilgun (or Gauss gun, in reference to Carl Friedrich Gauss, who formulated mathematical descriptions of the magnetic effect used by magnetic accelerators is a type of projectile accelerator consisting of one or more coils used as electromagnets in the configuration of a linear motor that accelerate a ferromagnetic or conducting projectile to high velocity. In almost all coilgun configurations, the coils and the gun barrel are arranged on a common axis.

Coilguns generally consist of one or more coils arranged along a barrel, so the path of the accelerating projectile lies along the central axis of the coils. The coils are switched on and off in a precisely timed sequence, causing the projectile to be accelerated quickly along the barrel via magnetic forces.

Coilguns are distinct from railguns, as the direction of acceleration in a railgun is at right angles to the central axis of the current loop formed by the conducting rails. In addition, railguns usually require the use of sliding contacts to pass a large current through the projectile or sabot but coilguns do not necessarily require sliding contacts.

Whilst some simple coilgun concepts can use ferromagnetic projectiles or even permanent magnet projectiles, most designs for high velocities actually incorporate a coupled coil as part of the projectile.

History

The first operational coilgun was developed and patented by Norwegian physicist Kristian Birkeland.

In 1933, Texan inventor Virgil Rigsby developed a stationary coilgun that was designed to be used like a machine gun. It was powered by a large electrical motor and generator. It appeared in many contemporary science publications, but never piqued the interest of any armed forces.

Construction

There are two main types or setups of a coilgun: single-stage and multistage. A single-stage coilgun uses one electromagnet to propel a projectile. A multistage coilgun uses several electromagnets in succession to progressively increase the speed of the projectile.

Can you stop a bullet ? send it back the way it came just as fast ? and then do it again ? and again.. ? How you gonna' power that baby?_.

Can you generate power with that moving mass ? Can you compress a fluid and phase change a matter ?

Can you recycle heat ? Can you operate at 100% thermal efficiency ?

What can you do... ? . ?

@evolvingape
Uhm... I have no idea where your going with this because it is just random incoherent information and the context of why, how and where do not seem to be present.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.11.04, 16:59:45
@evolvingape
Uhm... I have no idea where your going with this because it is just random incoherent information and the context of why, how and where do not seem to be present.

You have applied critical thinking to my post and reached your conclusions. Ok good.

Anybody else want a go at applying critical thinking and explain what they think I am getting at ?

@evolvingape

QuoteYou have applied critical thinking to my post and reached your conclusions. Ok good.

Actually it was just a smart ass remark and there wasn't much thinking in it, lol. I was trying to provoke a response as to where your going with this.
I have concluded that in every system with a gain in energy there must be a mechanism for a gain in energy. Thus we could take almost any system and show a gain if we knew the true nature of the mechanisms for gain. However to say look here is a simple system now try to guess what I'm thinking never has worked in my opinion, we need more context because as it stands it is just another system with losses like any other.

AC

"According to the field of inquiry [weasel words], critical thinking is defined as:

"the process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information to reach an answer or conclusion"[4]
"disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence"[5]
"reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do"[6]
"purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based"[7]
"includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs"[8]
in critical social theory, it is the commitment to the social and political practice of participatory democracy; willingness to imagine or to remain open to considering alternative perspectives; willingness to integrate new or revised perspectives into our ways of thinking and acting; and willingness to foster criticality in others.[9]
the skill and propensity to engage in an activity with reflective scepticism (McPeck, 1981)
disciplined, self-directed thinking which exemplifies the perfection of thinking appropriate to a particular mode of domain of thinking (Paul, 1989, p. 214)
thinking about one's thinking in a manner designed to organize and clarify, raise the efficiency of, and recognize errors and biases in one's own thinking. Critical thinking is not 'hard' thinking nor is it directed at solving problems (other than 'improving' one's own thinking). Critical thinking is inward-directed with the intent of maximizing the rationality of the thinker. One does not use critical thinking to solve problems — one uses critical thinking to improve one's process of thinking.[10]"

Wikiquote...


Consider the above, and then answer the following question, assume the device wasn't given a title by the inventor, assume the patent gave no description or theory of operation, you being knowledgeable and or skilled in the arts, have little or no problem stating the obvious.

Aside from what you will read what else could this device be demonstrating?

(http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US464666-0.png)


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.11.06, 07:04:50
Consider the above, and then answer the following question, assume the device wasn't given a title by the inventor, assume the patent gave no description or theory of operation, you being knowledgeable and or skilled in the arts, have little or no problem stating the obvious.

Aside from what you will read what else could this device be demonstrating?

I see a device that has enumerated around its outside stator core, an alternating arrangement of solenoids and transformers.

Applying critical thinking here, I would conclude this device isn't simply a motor, converting electrical energy into mechanical energy.  It clearly has some sort of energy recuperation components.  Lets go deeper...

Why, one must ask, would you simply convert electrical energy into mechanical motion, when it's quite possible and feasible to borrow electrical energy, create rotation with this energy, then give it back to the source to be reused.

However, it is not my point to here to determine why the originator of this device chose to construct it in this manner.  My point is to familiarize myself with the concept so that it can be utilized in other applications.

Hey Erfinder

QuoteConsider the above, and then answer the following question, assume the device wasn't given a title by the inventor, assume the patent gave no description or theory of operation, you being knowledgeable and or skilled in the arts, have little or no problem stating the obvious.

Aside from what you will read what else could this device be demonstrating?

I like the premise, we know what we see but what could this device be demonstrating?. It's really hard not to be biased as I know the patent well however I cannot help but think it relates to ferroresonance as the induced LC circuit FG is closed on itself with capacitor H. However depending on the nature of the applied current it could do any number of things ... a motor, a generator or a motor/generator. For me there is just too much going on because we have E, we have FG - H and we have D which in themselves could produce any number of effects in relation to the other elements again depending on the properties of the elements and the nature of the applied current.

I have been having this problem lately in that I have come to understand too many things which opens up too many possibilities which is no better if not worse than understanding too little. It has been very hard to focus lately so I'm going to need a little guidance on where you want to go with this.

AC

I see what Matt states mechanically resides well with AC's Ferro-resonance.
I also see the making of an Armstrong like resonator where feedback is used to push the system along. Whether in phase or not depends on the configuration.
We'll see where this goes...

@Erfinder, good to see you on board.

Hi All,

Don't know what the point is in this critical thinking forum, but the facts are most inventions was created thinking out of the box of critical thinkers!

I also think those that want other to think like themselves should have enough inventions to walk the talk!

I find most of my ideas is out of the box, then I will break it down into critical thinking or what ever you want to call it.

If we want to become a robot in thinking then most of the time someone has to fix you because you're broken!

I seen many time in life, other telling us how to think, like they are above all...NOT!

Tom

Those in the box are not worth placating. Once one gets the inventions, the patents, the business, the money, the accolades, the self righteous pontifications, the process... one then realizes they have a trail of feeding idiots following behind. Critical thinking without creativity is merely complaining and welfare hunting.


Well, well well. While this was going on some one just took a rail gun, an emp gun, and a stun gun, and put them all together to make a phenominal product.

@GK
I take it critical thinking is working well for you then?, lol.
Personally I found it to a peculiar process because we try and convince ourselves that nothing has changed and it isn't working however the fact we are thinking about it and our thoughts must mean it has.

AC

Quote from: Tommey Reed on 2014.11.07, 14:41:36
Hi All,
Don't know what the point is in this critical thinking forum, but the facts are most inventions was created thinking out of the box (OOTB) of critical thinkers (CT)!
Tom

@TR

I was wondering when someone would mention OOTB when discussing CT. I disagree. Most inventions are just a slant of a previous invention. Widget A has BC features, but now with feature D added, it becomes revolutionary. Normal progression of action/reaction fosters extended ideas/conclusions but they are not OOTB.

OOTB would be applicable if, let's say, someone proved that driving backwards was 300% safer then driving forward. Who the hell would have thought that possible. Only a crazy guy with his brain screwed backwards, but what if what he discovered was in fact true (not saying it is - just using an example so don't anyone try it on a highway nearest you - hehehe).

OOTB requires one to absolve themselves of their present state of thinking and almost integrate a new persona as if you are an alien visitor to your own planet. You can't just turn CT or OOTB on and off with the flick of a switch. It becomes a way of life. It permeates your present and it dissociates yourself from the norm. It is not always pleasant and it can create major problems for professionals that have to follow a well defined mode of conduct and public acceptance. It can also alienate yourself from your peers (hic-hic) and it can create major and constant questioning of your state of mind. "Why is it only me that sees this? Why is it so difficult for others to realize the differences. WTF can I do to get this into their brains so others can (in your view) advance towards a new horizon? HowTH will I be able to show this blue color if everything around us is tainted red? The obstacles can be extremely daunting but given all the resistance involved in formulating CT or OOTB ideas, the rewards can also go through the roof.

Wow, that felt good. Sort of an auto analysis. hahahaha

@all
(Continuation of this post after @Erfinder post was edited and re-posted.)

But let me give you some of my own CT.

From my present frame of mind, I realize that Tesla's invention of AC is basically all he could do at the time. I have now realized that all coils, Tesla or otherwise, AC or DC driven all suffer from what I call Half Coil Syndrome (HCS) if I consider my present view of how electricity is actually produced, conducted and put to work. In Teslas' day, they were totally immersed in the perspective of the "magnetic field" that was invented to perpetuate a belief system that is over 2000 years old and based on the first iron objects that stuck to a lodestone as being "magic", hence the derivations "magnetic and magnetism. So over the centuries, magnetism became an accepted reality equal to dandruff and death. It is not surprising that when we finally get to the "modern age", this magnetism was as pervasive in higher learning as it was on the outset.

But where do I consider this all went wrong. Well of course it began way back then, but I feel the onus was on individuals like Faraday and others of his day who started to formalize a scientific method of observation. They only problem was, back then like today, if you are a true scientist, you should apply CT in all aspects of theory derivation which no one really did at the time.

No one questioned the reality of magnetism. If a perfectly objective scientist was at task, he would have seen a compass needle point towards a magnet and he would have also seen a piece of metal stick to a magnet and he would have responsibly derived TWO POSSIBLE REASONS for the effects.

1) Magnets produce this invisible magnetic field that attracts the needle and sticks the metal to the source.
2) Magnets are doing exactly what the Earth does every day and that is produce gravity to which metal has a major affinity, all without any fields.

History has made it so that we only follow the first presumption, whether it is right or wrong, we have taken this road till today but that road did not provide an easy ride.

That's because as soon as the first derivation was given and accepted by "supposedly" the Worlds" greatest minds and integrated formally as an academic reality, that magnets produce magnetic fields that attract metal objects and produce field lines onto which your compass needle rides to point to the magnet itself, someone discovered that when the magnet passed near a copper wire wrapped around a metallic core, the coil produced all the same attributes as the magnet, where the compass needle was attracted and the metal objects stuck to the coil. Automatically, since the magnetic designation was already provided by the greatest minds of the day, it would be blasphemy to consider arguing with these brainiacs who not only controlled scientific endeavor but more importantly the purse strings and the club pass to enter their midst, so people quickly learned to shut up, not rock the boat, follow the party line, always agree when your superior is talking to you and all the other trappings of being stuck in a scientific hierarchy controlled by the "nobles" (another word for Cabal), who by then realized that any advancement of any type must advantage them and their "banking" interests only. Science was theirs to profit, regardless of how it portrayed reality, as long as the end result was profits.  

So back to the magnet passing a wire actually energized a coil to act like a magnet and now they had to develop new terms, new reasons for such an effect. How can a magnet produce an energized coil? Well we already agreed that the magnet produced a magnetic field, and, since the magnet never touched the copper wire and coil but the effect was still seen, it had to be the magnetic field. Y'a but HOW????? Well, uhhhhhh, hmmmmmm, geeeeeee, rrrrrrrrrrr, well let's see. The field is composed of these magic electrons, see, that when they pass over the wire, the wire gets charged and electrons start flowing in the coil to produce the magnetic field. Wow that sounds convincing enough, let's go with that. Someone then just coined the words electron, then electricity, a magnetic field and from there, someone else put it into some mathematical matrix (Maxwell) and from there, this one sided view of effects has been perpetuated till today. Nothing happens on its own man. It is a succession of the strictest academic control based on a prehistoric presumption and from there, our greatest minds have seen fit to mold the empirical data to fit the effect and provide enough forms of segmentation that permit talking about the effects with math hence a science is born. Years pass and the electron is not only in the field but covers every atom in existence and is responsible for every chemical reaction known to man. TECHNICALLY, YOU NEVER TOUCHED ANYTHING BUT ELECTRONS, YOU EAT ELECTRONS, YOU EVEN SHIT ELECTRONS, WE HAVE ELECTRONS COMING OUT OF OUR GOUZZIES. WE ARE ELECTRONS AND YOU WILL OBEY!!!  

So here we are boys and girls. 2000 or more years later and we are still stuck with ancient premises. But let's go back for a while.

The first reality, a lodestone, is what? A stone, a rock, a damn rock like all the other rocks on this planet when added together produce gravity which we all accept as one reality, but then we do this switchover and give all the same attributes to a magnet, a coil, like our own planet has. But no, our planet can have gravity but this little stone has to be magnetism, because our most greatest minds DECIDED, THAT'S THE WAY IT IS. And the greatest crap of all is we now espouse two forms of presence, gravity and magnetism. Even though they are all the same damn thing, by the powers vested in the Nobels, we have been bambouzled into believing there are two distinct phenomena and by doing so, we have chewed up all the crap make-up designed to fixate this perspective and by doing so have neglected to discover the real functions of the atom (of which I have already defined 6). I blame this entirely on the Faraday era, who must have realized option #2 was an evident reality, but for them, option #2 was already taken by Newton who already had reaped mountains of fame, so it was time for someone else to grab the limelight and reap new rewards, even if they had to make up fairy tale stories to get it.

Shit, I went really long and will stop here. This OOTB or CT really get's you going.

@wattsup

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.11.07, 21:48:49
Shit, I went really long and will stop here. This OOTB or CT really get's you going.

The only thing I am sure of is if you find yourself having to think outside the box...

You need a bigger box.

What I see in the patent, and am asking the open minded here to see is a mechanism which demonstrates how a motor could double as a self-excited generator.  My use of the phrase "self excited" isn't limited to the production of magnetizing current.   It should be clear that when producing a magnetic field, one sets up the conditions whereby torque can and usually is produced, generally in a direction counter to the direction of rotation.  In addition to the production of magnetizing current.  

• I am suggesting that my use of the phrase "self excited" encompasses a heretofore overlooked torque producing mechanism, which when properly practiced, results in a motor force which operates in the direction of rotation.
• I am suggesting a real mechanism which yields acceleration when a generator is placed under load.
• I am suggesting a generator which drops the motors consumption when placed under load.  
• I am suggesting a generator when loaded mechanically, the consumption increases as is customary, however, the generator action increases, this despite the fact that the device is decelerating.
• I am suggesting we take a fresh look at an old patent, because we missed something.  

Before someone comes and states that they can demonstrate all that I am suggesting, I humbly request that before you do such, come correct, and show these things taking place in a real off the shelf reworked motor, not a toy format, not in a device that you threw together, such things aren't worth discussing any longer.  The only exception to this is when the toy or more proper, prototype is demonstrating the principles that can be applied to a real machine, and only if you can demonstrate the real machine after showing the prototype.

If you can see all I am suggesting that I see in that patent, then we have something to discuss.


Regards

Ready for field animation...

Quoteam suggesting a generator which drops the motors consumption when placed under load.

SM stated the same.
This patent device exhibits a variable frequency phase applied feedback.
Unlike the 180 degree out of phase Armstrong oscillator this phasing is in the power generation part of the curve.

Do not make the mistake most make and overlook the significance of the rotor layout, and its relation to the secondary windings.

Tesla wasn't the only guy to present this, however, he inspired many of the names that would be brought up, with that said, I fill my cup from the source.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.11.08, 07:34:18
... I fill my cup from the source.

http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-464,666-electro-magnetic-motor

Quote
... but no means have heretofore been proposed that would secure in this way between the phases of the primary or inducing and the secondary or induced currents that difference—theoretically ninety degrees—that is best adapted for practical and economical working.

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here, but it sounds as though Mr. Tesla is saying this motor runs purely on reactive power, much like an unloaded transformer.  And what makes this motor special is that it needn't use excessively large capacitors to do it.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.08, 08:46:46
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-464,666-electro-magnetic-motor

Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here, but it sounds as though Mr. Tesla is saying this motor runs purely on reactive power, much like an unloaded transformer.  And what makes this motor special is that it needn't use excessively large capacitors to do it.

The patent as penned is "primarily" dealing with securing a 90° phase difference between inducing and induced circuits.  True to his style, Tesla, slams us with the full potential of the disclosure in his closing remarks.  He states "any desired difference of phase between the primary and secondary energizing-circuits may be obtained.", any desired difference is a far cry from the 90° that we are presented with at the beginning of the document.  

The closing remarks send a powerful message, for it means that when you control the capacitance of the induced circuit you control the phase angle between the induced current and potential.  Before you go "DUH" remember that we are shown a circuit possessing capacity with a capacitor inserted into it.  I am of the opinion that a coil is a special case capacitor, and via this complex mechanism the circuit has no resonant frequency, the addition of the fixed value cap forces the circuit to operate at a specific frequency, the "selected" frequency of operation is just that, the frequency the operator selected, when the device is properly communicating with itself, this selected frequency serves as a catalyst for all that follows.  

In my opinion this isn't reactive power, or even converting reactive power.  Reactive power is when induced current and voltage are 90° out of phase, the secondary or induced circuit is not reactive owing to the addition of the capacitor.  The cap offsets the negative effects associated with self induction, and brings the induced current and potential in this (secondary) circuit into phase.  This particular scenario is frequency restricted.  Its clear that we are looking at an LC circuit operating in resonance.  The idea I am bringing to the table goes beyond the securing of an economic phase shift, and encompasses Tesla's closing remarks.  

I am interested in the mechanism which brings us to the threshold, a point which many are familiar with, a point characterized by the effect acceleration under short.  When this condition is established in a circuit of proper construction and driven in the proper manner, when one recognizes the quadrature relation of the induced potential and current, (something akin to 1/4 wave tuning, as that concept applies to pulse width modulated rotary machines...) this condition can be pushed further, pushed to the point where the device transitions from something akin to parallel resonant into something which resembles series resonance, when this transition takes place, the device runs away.   When runaway manifests, acceleration is accompanied by increased consumption, the current limiting mechanism is completely inverted.  The induced regulates the increase of current supplying the motor as opposed to regulating its decrease.  The run away condition is only possible, and above all stable, when you control the one parameter that has been ignored by all but a few, phase angle.

I accept that to many this comes over as conjecture, its mine, and it works for me both on and off the bench.   Now what in the hell does any of this have to do with a self excited generator?


Regards

The other thing I see in this device that has not got focus is the core saturation and the interplay of the coil core stems and what the interaction is on the ring of the core.
This part of the ballet is very intriguing as to what capacitance it offers. I can only assume the runaway condition is maximum when the armature rpm is in synchronization with the ferro-resonance.
A slow motion representation of the external field with the saturation expression would make a very revealing insight.
The core polarities would not merely switch in a binary fashion but the boundaries/Bloch walls would cascade in a rhythmic fashion. In the copper interface this activity could represent itself like spark gaps because of the stored fields of the coils trying to collapse, i.e. change polarity. These collapses would push against or pull with the saturated core.
This type of interplay is what Howard Johnson accomplished with the generator operating beside the motor where the external fields would exchange energy back and forth. The Hector Torres version, where the generator and the motor are on the same shaft, would never work.

Quote from: giantkiller on 2014.11.08, 14:26:17
The other thing I see in this device that has not got focus is the core saturation and the interplay of the coil core stems and what the interaction is on the ring of the core.
This part of the ballet is very intriguing as to what capacitance it offers. I can only assume the runaway condition is maximum when the armature rpm is in synchronization with the ferro-resonance.
A slow motion representation of the external field with the saturation expression would make a very revealing insight.
The core polarities would not merely switch in a binary fashion but the boundaries/Bloch walls would cascade in a rhythmic fashion. In the copper interface this activity could represent itself like spark gaps because of the stored fields of the coils trying to collapse, i.e. change polarity. These collapses would push against or pull with the saturated core.
This type of interplay is what Howard Johnson accomplished with the generator operating beside the motor where the external fields would exchange energy back and forth. The Hector Torres version, where the generator and the motor are on the same shaft, would never work.

In an ideal system, there is no iron in the motor.

I created a new thread called Tesala patent 464666 so we can debate this device in it's own thread.
I think we have too many concepts going on here which may disturb our train of thought.

AC

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.11.06, 07:04:50
"According to the field of inquiry [weasel words], critical thinking is defined as:

"the process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information to reach an answer or conclusion"[4]
"disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence"[5]
"reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do"[6]
"purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based"[7]
"includes a commitment to using reason in the formulation of our beliefs"[8]
in critical social theory, it is the commitment to the social and political practice of participatory democracy; willingness to imagine or to remain open to considering alternative perspectives; willingness to integrate new or revised perspectives into our ways of thinking and acting; and willingness to foster criticality in others.[9]
the skill and propensity to engage in an activity with reflective scepticism (McPeck, 1981)
disciplined, self-directed thinking which exemplifies the perfection of thinking appropriate to a particular mode of domain of thinking (Paul, 1989, p. 214)
thinking about one's thinking in a manner designed to organize and clarify, raise the efficiency of, and recognize errors and biases in one's own thinking. Critical thinking is not 'hard' thinking nor is it directed at solving problems (other than 'improving' one's own thinking). Critical thinking is inward-directed with the intent of maximizing the rationality of the thinker. One does not use critical thinking to solve problems — one uses critical thinking to improve one's process of thinking.[10]"

Wikiquote...


Consider the above, and then answer the following question, assume the device wasn't given a title by the inventor, assume the patent gave no description or theory of operation, you being knowledgeable and or skilled in the arts, have little or no problem stating the obvious.

Aside from what you will read what else could this device be demonstrating?

(http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US464666-0.png)


Regards

Erfinder, the motor in that patent is described in the book below- Chapter XX11 Page 106. Motor with condenser in one of the field circuits. Maybe a direct copy to the patent, not certain there could be additional info there.
https://archive.org/details/inventionsresear00martiala

It was a new way to secure a difference of phase to enable the running and "starting" of induction motors from a source of single phase AC power.

As SeaMonkey said the shaded pole and others do the same thing.

Tesla seems to have gone a a mission to discover as many ways as he could to secure a difference in phase for that purpose, he has many devices to do just that.

Right up to patent 524426. Securing two phases from one to effect a self starting motor was a big deal then.

..

P.S. I got to here by quoting a post back in the thread, I didn't realize this was taken elsewhere feel free to move the post without the quote. I don;t see a way to delete the post.

I created a new thread called Tesala patent 464666 so we can debate this device in it's own thread.
I think we have too many concepts going on here which may disturb our train of thought.

AC

I was just skimming through this thread following the posts when a single thought crossed my mind...what in the hell happened?, lol

I'm not blaming anyone however there always seems to be a complete lack of coherence when debating an issue and I have to wonder why this is generally the case. I'm not sure but if I had to take an educated guess I would say were not actually looking for feedback when posting were looking for people to reinforce our own thoughts and the insecurities we have concerning them. It is actually kind of funny when we think about it because I think most want to share with others however not so much they may actually succeed at something because then the leader must follow. I mean god forbid we might give someone an idea and they might profit from it leaving us here running in circles.

Again I'm not blaming anyone or pointing fingers and it's only a general observation of what I see in the forums as well as in myself from a more critical view point. Maybe it might help if I got the ball rolling, yes I only show and tell the stuff which is basically useless to me, lol. There I said it and if I nailed this technology I guesstimate there is a 50/50 chance I would leave this place and never come back. Why?, because it's human nature and I don't think most are here to really share were here hoping someone else might fill in the gaps for us.

Were here to parade and hope someone falls in line giving us that crucial piece of the puzzle we are missing so we might rise above the supposed ignorant masses we long to distance ourselves from while selling our soul to do it. Thus we become what we proclaim to despise and the cycle repeats itself over and over. It is comical, it really is and if a person can't laugh at what we do then were missing the whole point.

Regards
AC

I think I failed critical thinking 101.
The patent 464,666 never mentioned the core makeup. Erfinder pointed that out after words. So I go back and look at the patent and i think "Is something missing or did I miss something?"

Hi AC,

I can see you have so much to say, my question is what do you have to show?

My question is why are you putting others down when they have built something and you come along and criticize their work?

Clearly you don't respect builders, and you always mention a better way of doing it. It's like someone claiming they can do it better and not show a single thing known as a  hypocrite!

I don't like you at all, not that I hate you but you clearly don't have a place in these forums my opinion.

I run into very few people who do what you do best, nothing but to add negative comments on those that spend their own time and money to have something to talk about.

I hope you change your ways, and I always believe we all have skills to improve in this forum and learn from each other. You are not helping in this forum, even with your critical thinking thoughts.

Having over 20+ years in martial arts and holding 4th degree in Aikido, sometime people need a beat down to make them into a better person.

I have no problem if you and I do a build off, it would be a very interesting to see what you come up with your critical thinking.....

Tom O0

Quote from: Tommey Reed on 2014.11.11, 14:10:35
I don't like you at all, not that I hate you but you clearly don't have a place in these forums my opinion.

Ouch!

That's going to leave a mark.

Silly children,
Kicks are for twids.

Emotions gone wild.

My "build" is better'n your'n.

Perhaps too many martial arts...

Dreaming of the Octagon.

Steel cage match??

sigh...

I think thumb wrestling is all that's allowed here ?

But I am not sure that this is what AC meant by "critical thinking" [being Critical of someone elses contributions]

40 lashes....?
minus one ?

just trying to be helpful.....
we have to stay on course !

thx
Chet

@Tommy
Of course you are right and I could never hope to win an argument against anyone who know's Aikido.

QuoteI don't like you at all, not that I hate you but you clearly don't have a place in these forums my opinion.

Personaly I think I like you, I think you have great determination and I sincerely wish you all the best in whatever you may pursue. I understand it may be your wish that I never post in your threads again and to be honest all you had to do was ask and I would oblige. So you may unlock your threads I will not bother to post in them anymore. Concerning a build off, no, I have way too many things on the go as it stands and simply don't have the time.

Regards
AC

Hi AC,

Maybe I over reacted on you, I can see you do have a personality other then being critical all the time.

For that I would say I'm sorry, I'm not a bully in any way and don't want to seem to be one either.

I'm a nice guy and don't lie or try to tell it as I see it. If I'm wrong or feel I over reacted, I'm man enough to emit that.

I believe integrity is very important in life, even if we all have different opinions.

I hope you can add to these post with a balance of critical or better ideas.

If we ever wanted to find a better way to power our homes, it will take many minds and ideas to do so.

I believe in efficient ways of producing energy, not free energy. Nothing is create or destroy, but trying to convert it into energy we all can use is my goal for myself and others.
I played the games of getting patents, how you have to pay $$$ for every 3.5 years with a compound fees just to keep it going, it's a joke and it's not always a smart choice getting a patent.

I do also believe we have a energy conspiracy due to the facts of how we all waste energy, because these hungry machines are made that way. Like buying a car, almost every car have the same range per size like cars,suv,and trucks.

(One mind is like a ant building a hill for years, the more ants the fast the hill gets built)

Tom ;)

@Tommy

QuoteI'm a nice guy and don't lie or try to tell it as I see it. If I'm wrong or feel I over reacted, I'm man enough to emit that.

I believe integrity is very important in life, even if we all have different opinions.

I hope you can add to these post with a balance of critical or better ideas.

I understand my posts can be a bit abrasive even at the best of times, lol.  I'm really not sure why because my intent is to help and add my knowledge however somwhere along the way it always sounds to me like I'm standing on a soap box preaching to people. I don't mean to however even I can feel the negative vibes given off when reading my posts....it's a work in progress and change is difficult sometimes. I think it stems from being an Engineer where were expected to tell it like it is in a blunt professional manner which basically means everything turns into a pissing contest at some point. As I said it is a work in progress and I would like to be more constructive and make more positive posts in the future... or I may just be turning into a cranky old f$%#er, I'm not quite sure yet, lol.

AC

Thank you AC,

It's good that you realize some of the stuff you come across on your writings, we all are learning as we move forward in life.

I really understand, I took classes in mechanical engineering and have seen in the past the same talking points. I had no problem do the course, by my turn off was the team player thinking even when it seem misleading.

Mathematics is not always right on, but it does give the best clear answers to the out come.

I'm starting to like you, even if I said I did not in the beginning..... O0

I do have a question, I could not find online amount of mechanical work needed to produce gpm at 40psi going through a 1/2 pipe

If I move water pressure at 40psi  through a 1/2 pipe at 1ft lift how many gallons will it produce?

I know that (psi * gpm)/1714 = hp but could not find the formula to find GPM@40 psi...

I believe it could be:

(0.408*24.55gpm)/.5^2 = 40.07 psi

40.07psi * 24.55gpm/1714 =.57 hp or 425.22 watts.

Tom

Hi Tom

You calculate your volume in the 12" X 1/2" pipe so = 2.352cu/in = 0.001361 cu/ft

cu/ft of water =7.48gal therefore 0.001361 X 7.48 = 0.01018 gal

Now 40psi (sec) X60 = 2400(min) X 0.01018 = 24.43gal/min

Using the formula of psi X gpm/1714,  40 X 24.43/1714 = 0.57hp

your answer is correct O0

keep up the good work, I love your builds

Just remember fluids are elastic, in the distance from the exit to hitting the impeller the pressure drop is great, that 40psi leaving will not be 40psi hitting the impeller.

Hydralic pump to "impeller" is far more efficient, as used by a company here in Spain in their generators ( platinum investments).

regards

Mike 8)

Thanks Centraflow,

  I always believe there is 360deg to the top of the hill, some people use different formulas to get the same answers.

Tom ;)

This is Platinum investments

http://platinum-invests.eu/palladium-green-energy/

Same principle from a different angle :D

regards

Mike 8)

OK now that we have all this like/dislike business out of the way, can we continue on CT, if it's not asking too much.

So maybe I can point in one specific direction that is coil pulsing by DC versus coil driving by AC (not @AC - hehehe).

The question is, can you define the exact differences between DC and AC pulsing of a coil. Start by defining what DC and AC potentials are, how they work, and how they exhibit different effects when applied to a primary coil of a transformer.

This is critical because this one simple method has been overblown to Saturn and back. This is critical because it will help explain why Tesla realized at the time that DC was not overly suitable for electric motors and transformers. This is critical because in those days when all there was in existence was DC, and, someone named Tesla saw it fit to think OOTB and go against the total mindset of the times, to be ridiculed by his own teachers saying such a thing is "impossible", to be flat out denied by Mr. DC himself, regardless, this one man persevered and single handedly changed the world.

He did in fact change the world, but what is the real impact of DC compared to AC? What is DC? What is AC? REALLY? 

@Erfinder mentioned something in his Patent thread, but it does not go deep enough.

The reason I am playing this game of tell me first is because in such discussions we absolutely need someone from the EE standpoint to provide the traditional answer so we can then build up a contrasting dialog. You can answer this question in one sentence, or you can take 1 page to answer it, it all depends on how deep you want to go. I am not asking you or implying to you that you will become the spokesperson for Standard EE. You are simply a reference source.

Let's take AC for example, 110 VAC applied to a transformer primary DOES WHAT to make the changes inside the primary that can be conveyed to the secondary. We are working with these coils, DC, AC, pulsed, but what does it really do inside our coils. This we do all day long, pulse, but what does it mean for the coil? So for AC, you have a hot lead and a neutral lead. You connect them to your primary so explain to us what exactly happens in the primary.

This ONE effect is the prime subject that everyone has to be 1000% proficient in realizing what is going on in our coils, because when we go about winding coils, choosing ready made coils, pulsing coils, looking for "field collapse", talking about BEMF/CEMF, FEMF (my term only - SC related), flyback, designing new coil topologies and all these subsets of the pulsing act are WHAT in real physical terms.

You see, someone far far away creates a generator system that uses falling water, that turns a turbine, that turns a rotor inside a stator, that produces electricity, that is fed to your house for you to use in your experiments. All that part of the process is 100% physical activity and 100% of your end of the experiment is also physical activity. Physical activities produce physical results, not etheric results. Your physical results may be as simple as using the output of your experimental device to turn a fan, which is a physical result.

Like in Teslas' days where everyone was happy go lucky and totally intellectually satisfied with the DC world of The Great Edison, someone came up and started questioning the norm. Those questions led to some very critical thinking that just happened to change the world. Does not take much but it does require EFFORT and in Teslas' case, he took it to the limits. But I don't even think Tesla knew the true answers for the above, or, if he did, he never published anything that went into it deep enough because he realized academia was going in a totally different direction but since their direction would never change Teslas' direction, he must have rationalized that he is better spending his time on the real devices and not put any time on the theoretical rationalizations of the then academia. Academia of the day took his invention and ran with it, gave it some empirical data points then set some basic AC formulas and from there, we are here today with the same half empty book of electrical reality. The most extraordinary phenomena of physical activity, of physical atomic attributes that produce the greatest forces humanity has ever had the pleasure of utilizing to change our state of existence for the better, and, after 150 years, we still have the same reason for all this change being relegated to invisible fields, flux, and magnetism. All that reality we witness everyday is simply reasoned out to be the result of a total mysterious and unprovable entity that we will never see, touch or feel. Where have you ever read Tesla discussing the merits of the electron. Tesla was a realist, he called his electricity "potential". He did not invent the word electron that led to the word electricity. if it was up to Tesla, he would have invented the word "Potentiatron" instead of "electron" and he would have responsibly designated it as being a "transitory" nomenclature "until man found out what the potential really was". But no, the academia could never accept such a conditional form of knowledge. It has to be the electron and it has to be electricity and it has to be caused by flux and it has to originate from magnetism. That is the base line of Standard academia since 150 years. Deviate from that and you will be stepping on some pretty high placed toes.

Some may think this question is so elementary that all that is required is a simple 1st Grade explanation, but let's not play that game. Let's go to the other extreme. Give me your explanations based on it being the most advanced, most knowledgeable most highest level of learning possible to provide the answer. No hyperphysics.com links required.

wattsup

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.11.14, 23:35:51
Some may think this question is so elementary that all that is required is a simple 1st Grade explanation, but let's not play that game. Let's go to the other extreme. Give me your explanations based on it being the most advanced, most knowledgeable most highest level of learning possible to provide the answer. No hyperphysics.com links required.

wattsup

Why should I play your game when you refuse to play mine ?

Tesla spent considerable time with DC motors and dynamos
attempting to improve upon their efficiency and reliability.
The problem with most DC motors and generators is the need
for brushes and commutator.  These are high maintenance with
limited lifetimes necessitating frequent brush replacement and
commutator repair and replacement.  Sparking at the brushes
and commutator segments was a problem very difficult to solve.

The advantage of the AC Induction Motor, which was revolutionary
in Tesla's time, was the absence of any brush/commutator in the
motor.  Although, some of the first Induction Motors did use slip
rings and brushes, as they were improved upon these were no longer
needed and are not now in most cases.

Efficiency robbing losses in today's AC Induction Motors are copper
losses, hysteresis losses and eddy current losses.

With proper electronic controls and other circuitry, the problematic
flyback pulses in DC Motors can be harnessed to improve efficiency.

ok,what about AC generators ? No brushes, no slip rings ? I'm curious if a detailed pictures of commercially used generators like those in large GW power plants are publicly available ?

Well what I want to know is why do all these threads all end up in prosthelytizing, banter, one-up-manship or regurgitated questioning?
I tell ya why...
There are lurkers and interviewers/spies. Everything has been covered ad-infinitum except one thing. A demo.

There is no try only do.

Be the first one on your block to have your ass come home in a box...

Quote from: giantkiller on 2014.11.15, 16:30:39
I tell ya why...
There are lurkers and interviewers/spies.

Do spies really exist ? The NY Times certainly thinks so...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/us/more-federal-agencies-are-using-undercover-operations.html?_r=1

@evolvingape

That is actually kind of funny because that picture brings back many fond memories. That picture was my representation of Tesla's ozone patent and at the time we had a group trying to understand Tesla's secrets. Erfinder was the leader and myself and many others followed his lead because he seemed to have it all figured out. We all thought we knew the secret to free energy and success was just around the corner, it was only a matter of days and all would be known. It's funny how days turn into years and as I look back in time I understand we really didn't understand much of anything...such is life.

That was in 2008 and my how times have changed and the forums seem very much more critical of others than they did back then. It's funny that I honestly believed that I would have a free energy device powering my house and my car by now, I was 100% sure of it and yet here we are and 2015 is just around the corner.

Now some may say it was all a pipe dream and I am wasting my time but I see it differently because I have really enjoyed my time spent trying to understand the nature of the universe in which we live. How could something we enjoy doing which could help so many possibly be considered a waste of time, that is absurd.

To be perfectly honest evolvingape your post is comical and transparent because like any good politician you implied many things without actually saying much of anything...haven't you?. You just through out an old picture and an unrelated link then implied a connection between them. So how about you grow up and tell us what's really on your mind because I have seen more than a few of these silly games in the past.

In any case thanks for the link, that was an interesting read. It is a peculiar thing that our government would be so interested in our personal life. It reminds me of an immature peeping tom lurking outside our windows and it is pathetic really as are the one's who may confuse their little perversions with their duty and service to their country. It is a peculiar thing that I feel I am the only responsible adult in the room on so many occasions, moreso when watching the news.

AC

These sites have all been taken over by Muslim sympathizers and propagandists, the last thing they want is for there to be free energy.  The funding for the Jihad is primarily coming from the sale of oil by Islamic countries, anything that can stop that is being heavily pursued and destroyed as best they can. I for one am tired of wading around in all this propaganda.  Until people wise up on this score they will continue to upset the energy sites. Have fun all. :(

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.11.16, 17:13:53
@evolvingape

To be perfectly honest evolvingape your post is comical and transparent because like any good politician you implied many things without actually saying much of anything...haven't you?. You just through out an old picture and an unrelated link then implied a connection between them. So how about you grow up and tell us what's really on your mind because I have seen more than a few of these silly games in the past.

AC

Comical and transparent you say eh.. unrelated link you say eh.. Erfinder was the leader eh ?

The link was current breaking news and was entirely related to giantkillers post.. I even quoted gk's post showing the source relation..

Simply threw out an old picture you say.. how so ? when the source has been staring you in the face every. single. time. you read this thread..

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/

'Critical Thinking' you say eh.. ?

@evolvingape

Quote'Critical Thinking' you say eh.. ?

No it was ridiculous, I was bitter when thinking about my lack of progress then connected imaginary dots in your post which did not exist and took it out on you. I apologize and it's pretty much a lesson in what not to do in my opinion, it is everything critical thinking should not be.

AC

Quote from: Room3327
The funding for the Jihad is primarily coming from the sale of oil by Islamic countries, anything that can stop that is being heavily pursued and destroyed as best they can. I for one am tired of wading around in all this propaganda.  Until people wise up on this score they will continue to upset the energy sites. Have fun all.  :(

It isn't about the 'oil' nearly as much as it is the
'petrodollar.'  The worldwide banking industry scam
and the Federal Reserve Banking System scam of the
U.S. will collapse quickly if the petrodollar doesn't
reign supreme.  Any who oppose the phony petrodollar
are dealt with viciously and brutally.  By the 'banksters'
who in reality call the shots.

@Mudped
Only Islam calls Islam's shots and if you knew anything about Islam you would know that, or are you a lying Islamist which I suspect anyway.  Nobody tells Islam what to do they already have it all spelled out for them, and they tend to play by their book as they are told to by Mo.  If anyone bothered to study Islam they would know what a bunch of BS you put out there. But keep it up you are just making yourself look worse and worse. And yes I have no love for the Banksters either.

Islam historically has been proven to be a
covert extension of Judah-ism.  It was long
ago created by those claiming to be the Tribe
of Judah for the very purpose it serves this day.

Virtually every 'religion' upon the face of the earth
has been corrupted and subverted by those who
claim they are the Tribe of Judah.  They (those who
claim to be of the Tribe of Judah) have made it a
centuries long agenda to infiltrate each of the nations
and to stealthily gain control of the finances and politics
therein.

All wars for more than two centuries have been planned
by and conducted at the behest of those who claim to be
of the Tribe of Judah.  Their history, even as truthfully recorded
by their own scholars, has been one of intrigue, bloodshed,
deception and self-aggrandizement.

Isn't it odd that the 'extreme Islam' of today uses the same sort
of terror tactics which have been such a characteristic strategy of
the State of Israel since its inception?  Peas in a pod.

Critical Thinkers delight in finding Truth.

@mudped
Sorry but my critical thinking says your full of it.  Islam and Judaism Have never had anything to do with each other, other then the fact that Mohamed early on was buying scripture from the Jews.  He would then go back to his people and relay the scripture, but being illiterate and unable to write them down he would botch the retelling and because of this the Jews laughed at him, for laughing at him he made Jews the most hated enemy of Islam for all time.  So your telling me the most hated people of Islam are are somehow responsible for it?
As I said your full of it!  He also ordered all Muslims to wipe Jews from the face of the planet which they are working on to this very day,  Jews had nothing to do with Islam!

And I am sorry Phong3327 that your alleged
'critical thinking' example is simply echoes of
the deceptions promulgated by none other than
those who claim they are of the Tribe of Judah.

Parrot Speak.  Propaganda.

Surely you are capable of better than that?

Yes muDped, if we just apply a little reasoning, these people with sand and camels would hardly cause us great harm, so who armed them to the teeth?  Those would be the ones I send to the gallows.

Quote from: muDped on 2014.11.18, 08:20:53
And I am sorry Phong3327 that your alleged
'critical thinking' example is simply echoes of
the deceptions promulgated by none other than
those who claim they are of the Tribe of Judah.

Parrot Speak.  Propaganda.

Surely you are capable of better than that?

Oh wrong am I? Would you like me to start quoting Koran, Sira and Hadith verses, I have never said anything about Islam that is not in their own books.  The things I know about Islam I have gotten right from their own materials and right out of out of their own mouths.  All we need to know about Islam is is clearly said to us by the Jihadists but we refuse to hear them, being PC means more to us.  All we need to know about Islam is clearly written in their books but we don't read them, being MC is more important to us. Critical thinking, anyone here practice it?  Know your enemy apparently doesn't apply to the Western world.  Our government, our media ect. hide the information from us and now we are not even allowed to talk about it in government circles.  So if you really want to know the truth PLEASE read Islamic scripture and get it straight from the source.  It is not me doing the parrot speak and propaganda but if you want to continue this dance keep spreading the BS that you are.

We are living in a very strange time which presents
many challenges to those who would strive to think
critically.

The crimes of those who through violence, brutality
and murder (http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2014/11/18/hot-off-the-press-har-nof-jerusalem-is-deir-yassin-and-it-is-remembered) brought into existence the State of Israel
may be coming back to them.

When one seriously studies the Babylonian Talmud
one discovers writings strikingly similar to those
pointed out by Heya3327 in his prior posting.

It is no coincidence that one set of 'scripture' is nearly
identical to the other 'scripture.'  Signs of a bloodthirsty
people.

Quote from: muDped on 2014.11.18, 20:00:11
We are living in a very strange time which presents
many challenges to those who would strive to think
critically.

The crimes of those who through violence, brutality
and murder (http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2014/11/18/hot-off-the-press-har-nof-jerusalem-is-deir-yassin-and-it-is-remembered) brought into existence the State of Israel
may be coming back to them.

This is pathetic, Muslims have been murdering Jews for almost 1400 years without letup and you want me to believe it just started when Israel became a nation, common muppethead give it some critical thinking.

You can insult me anyway you want and you have plenty of times here at OUR doesn't bother me, call me anything you want.  I know who the true Bigots here are.

Phong=Room (Vietnamese)

Heya=Room (Japanese)

Diversity of Expression, nothing more...

Think Critically!

Its
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/bb000307.htm (http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/bb000307.htm)
a long read but will straighten things out.

@room3327

QuoteThis is pathetic, Muslims have been murdering Jews for almost 1400 years without letup and you want me to believe it just started when Israel became a nation, common muppethead give it some critical thinking.

Personally I prefer to believe I am an individual with a universal conscience thus I am not bound to any given belief in any particular location nor mistakes made in the past by people I do not know. It makes life easy because what "they" believe whoever they may be has no bearing on me because obviously I am not them.

I guess the question is why do we continue to lower our standards and beliefs based on the past when we could elevate ourselves to accept a better future?. Do we really need to drag up the past?, should I consider you as a lesser person because you pooped your pants all the time when you were one year old or that your relatives 100,000 years ago were mostly apes. I think we need to move past the nonsense we see in the past and present and move forward... we must evolve.

Every day every hour turn your pain into Power -- The Script

AC

@last few posters

Just realize that all the wordly problems you can think of have only one root cause, the Cabal. You can stink in any other direction but ultimately, they always lead back to the top. Get rid of the Cabal and you will have world peace. Does not mean you will be at peace with yourself but ti does get easier when there is no one trying to blow you up or devise other population reducing means. But all this has nothing to do with critical thinking. Only critical blaming.

@all

Here is a "possible" CT question?

Can you have a 120 VAC line split into two lines, so one is regular phase and the other is 180 degree phase shifted. Then take those two lines and connect them to two primaries that share the same core where the two primaries are wound side by side and the center leads are sent to neutral, with hots on each end. Would this produce maximum change in the core since while one side is positive, the other wound be negative and so on? hehehe

wattsup

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.11.19, 15:15:42
@room3327
Personally I prefer to believe I am an individual with a universal conscience thus I am not bound to any given belief in any particular location nor mistakes made in the past by people I do not know. It makes life easy because what "they" believe whoever they may be has no bearing on me because obviously I am not them.

I guess the question is why do we continue to lower our standards and beliefs based on the past when we could elevate ourselves to accept a better future?. Do we really need to drag up the past?, should I consider you as a lesser person because you pooped your pants all the time when you were one years old or that your relatives 100,000 years ago were mostly apes. I think we need to move past the nonsense we see in the past and present and move forward... we must evolve.

AC

I like you AC, I like how you think at least most of the time but in this case you like everyone else is avoiding looking at the elephant in the room.  I would have no problem with Islam if they left everyone else alone. What the problem is, none of you understand that Islam is not going to leave you alone.  You need to understand the ideology of Islam which nobody does.
 We are not talking of the past but of today, these people are cutting off heads, machine gunning, blowing up and dismembering thousands of people for an antiquated religion that condones and blesses the murder of non-Muslims.  This is not in the past it is now, they are burning schools, churches,  synagogs,  and anything else that is not Islamic in nature, they are killing anyone who is not Islamic or even not Islamic enough for them.  They burn 100's of people alive inside churches, now not century's ago.
 This stuff is the essence of their religion a true death cult, but you have to know something about Islam to know this and apparently you too know nothing about Islam.  So when are any of you going to find out about Islam when they come to cut off your head.  What the Islamic State is doing in Syria and Iraq is PURE Islam but we are told it has nothing to do with Islam, but they are proceeding according to their book, but you have to know whats in that book to understand that what they do is pure Islam.  I too would like an Ideal world like you are saying but what I am trying to get across here is Islam is not going to allow it, today or ever.
 Do you think this is fun for me battling the propaganda and Muslim supremacists because most people, yourself included, refuse to find out about Islamic ideology.  I tell all of you right now Islam is like no other religion on earth, please check out what I am saying and please don't get mad at the messenger.    

@Room3327

QuoteI like you AC, I like how you think at least most of the time but in this case you like everyone else is avoiding looking at the elephant in the room.  I would have no problem with Islam if they left everyone else alone. What the problem is none of you understand that Islam is not going to leave you alone.  You need to understand the ideology of Islam which nobody does.

I would agree to some extent and I have come to understand that there is no reasoning with any group of people who may see another group as inferior to such an extent that they think they are incapable of reason. That is nothing we can ever say or do will be acceptable because in their eyes we are sub-human and delegated to the status of an animal. In which case there is no reasoning, there is no honest debate and something must change at some point because there is no reasoning with any group of people anywhere which are fundamentally unreasonable if not psychotic in their nature.

AC

AC

How are you going to reason with people who don't believe in reason, who in 1400 years have never made a treaty or peace pact that lasted longer then 10 years.This is because Mohammed never made any treaty that he stuck to for more then 10 years.  So even if you make a peace pact with them, in 10 years or less they, when they feel strong enough, will break it.  They are actually against reason, just like they are against freedom, again you have to know something about Islam to know this stuff.

An honest debate will never happen with Islam but you have to understand their Ideology to know that.  And yes Islam is totally psychotic.

So I guess what I am saying is many of you try to tell me what Islam is like and all about, but you don't know the first thing about Islam.  How can I talk on a peer level with any of you who don't know what you are talking about, and try and tell me what the score is.

It's  like talking physics with monkeys.

Quote from: AllCanadian
I would agree to some extent and I have come to understand that there is no reasoning with any group of people who may see another group as inferior to such an extent that they think they are incapable of reason. That is nothing we can ever say or do will be acceptable because in their eyes we are sub-human and delegated to the status of an animal. In which case there is no reasoning, there is no honest debate and something must change at some point because there is no reasoning with any group of people anywhere which are fundamentally unreasonable if not psychotic in their nature.

Again, you've said it well AC.  What you've just described,
either wittingly or unwittingly, applies precisely to radical
Islam and equally to radical Judah-ism.  The two 'religions'
share numerous ideologies in their writings.  So much so
that rabbinical scholars acknowledge that Islam has its
roots in Judah-ism.

What we see taking place upon the World Stage presently
is the culmination of centuries of planning, manipulations
and massive deceptions.  As was foretold in the prophecies;
prior to the end of the present age or system of the World
things are going to get really crazy.  The Synagogue of Satan
in all of its manifestations, including radical Islam and sadly,
modern Christendom, is/are doing all that they can to institute
the coming New World Order.  The craziness hasn't yet reached
its peak.

Wading through all of the lying propaganda disseminated by
'the West' makes Critical Thinking a very, very difficult chore.

Understanding the State of Israel and all that it represents;
its origins, its present ambitions, with particular attention
to those who support and promote it, will make very clear
the role that it plays in what is yet to come.  The peoples of
the world are gradually waking up to the deceptive powers
of Judah-ism and the State of Israel.  Except in North America
for the time being.

Quote from: muDped on 2014.11.19, 20:56:52
Again, you've said it well AC.  What you've just described,
either wittingly or unwittingly, applies precisely to radical
Islam and equally to radical Judah-ism.  The two 'religions'
share numerous ideologies in their writings.  So much so
that rabbinical scholars acknowledge that Islam has its
roots in Judah-ism.

What we see taking place upon the World Stage presently
is the culmination of centuries of planning, manipulations
and massive deceptions.  As was foretold in the prophecies;
prior to the end of the present age or system of the World
things are going to get really crazy.  The Synagogue of Satan
in all of its manifestations, including radical Islam and sadly,
modern Christendom, is/are doing all that they can to institute
the coming New World Order.  The craziness hasn't yet reached
its peak.

Wading through all of the lying propaganda disseminated by
'the West' makes Critical Thinking a very, very difficult chore.

Understanding the State of Israel and all that it represents;
its origins, its present ambitions, with particular attention
to those who support and promote it, will make very clear
the role that it plays in what is yet to come.  The peoples of
the world are gradually waking up to the deceptive powers
of Judah-ism and the State of Israel.  Except in North America
for the time being.

All I can say is what a crock! You don't fool me, you may have the others here fooled but I know what you are and what you are doing.  If no one here besides me thinks that this is a crock of __it you have certainly accomplished your mission quite well.

Quote from: Chadar3327
...but in this case you like everyone else is avoiding looking at the elephant in the room.  I would have no problem with Islam if they left everyone else alone. What the problem is, none of you understand that Islam is not going to leave you alone.  You need to understand the ideology of Islam which nobody does.
 We are not talking of the past but of today, these people are cutting off heads, machine gunning, blowing up and dismembering thousands of people for an antiquated religion that condones and blesses the murder of non-Muslims.  This is not in the past it is now, they are burning schools, churches,  synagogs,  and anything else that is not Islamic in nature, they are killing anyone who is not Islamic or even not Islamic enough for them.  They burn 100's of people alive inside churches, now not century's ago.

Chadar,

you do occasionally make some good points and express
commendable thoughts.  However, your perception of the
'elephant in the room' is incomplete.  In reality, the 'elephant'
you speak of is a family of elephants;  Zionism and its offspring.

In due time you will, as will all of the people, see how you've been
deceived.  If you dare to examine the Whole Truth that is...


Interesting thoughts about the 'leaders' of the West.

What do they have in common?  They are 'friends of Israel'
and do its bidding.  They have fallen victim to those who
practice the 'love of money.'

Doesn't matter what I say you are going to come back with 'it's the Jews, it's Zionism, it's America'  but the only people I see acting like savages are Muslims.  I don't see Christians or Jews acting like savages,  Israel bends over backwards to avoid civilian casualties when provoked into fighting.  Islam cuts off heads, and much worse, I don't care who started it, but it must be ended, and I think most would agree with this.

Personally I think all the arguments made here are flawed on almost every level as the rule of law states if you watch one man kill another without justification and do nothing you are just as guilty throught complicity.

Now we have over two million innocent civilians, women and children, dead in Afganistan and Iraq and it is a known fact, who exactly do you think is responsible?.

Personally I think it's ridiculous that everyone in all of these conflicts are running around with blood on their hands as they claim no responsibility or involvment. It is pathetic and while they may look civilized we can be sure they are little more than savages at heart because we are not judged on what we say but what we do.

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.11.20, 16:14:23
Personally I think all the arguments made here are flawed on almost every level as the rule of law states if you watch one man kill another without justification and do nothing you are just as guilty throught complicity.

Now we have over two million innocent civilians, women and children, dead in Afganistan and Iraq and it is a known fact, who exactly do you think is responsible?.

Personally I think it's ridiculous that everyone in all of these conflicts are running around with blood on their hands as they claim no responsibility or involvement. It is pathetic and while they may look civilized we can be sure they are little more than savages at heart because we are not judged on what we say but what we do.

AC

AC, Your government has been involved in these conflicts, does that make you a savage too, are all Americans savages because of what our government does.  If you really look at unrevised history you will clearly see the provocation in the majority of conflicts over the last 1400 years was expansionism by Islam. When countries are attacked by Islam do we not have a right to defend ourselves, should the Kurds lay down their weapons and refuse to defend themselves, you know what would happen if they did that, yes you do don't you.  We call it genocide Muslims call it ethnic cleansing.   You can say anything you want but when they come for my head I'm going to fight and they are currently doing just that, they are after your head to buddy.  I think we are all appalled by the blood and inhumanity of warfare so stop Islam from provoking these conflicts - oh that's right none of you believe Islam has anything to do with these conflicts (It's the Jews, it's Zionism, It's America, It's Christians, It's Poverty, It's always something other then Islam).  So really take a close hard look at what they DO and then decide who the really bad guys are.  Ask yourself would you rather live in an Islamic country or the one you are currently in?

@room3327

QuoteAC, Your government has been involved in these conflicts, does that make you a savage too, are all Americans savages because of what our government does.

It may help to explain my position, when writing my last post I expected you to respond in kind as you have and I had already formulated this response I am writing now and predicted your next response to this post as well as my next response to your future post which I figure might occurr in the next 30 minutes. It's easy to do because as much as we might think our thoughts are unique we are very much creatures of habit and about as predictable as Gravity. Now if we were face to face I might make the comment I did and you might feel threatened by it and point your finger at me as you have and I would point my finger back at you. We would become more aggresive at which point the name calling and personal attacks may start then aggresion which of course might lead to violence... again very predictable. At which point a little critical thinking might be helpful, now if we already know the outcome then why would anyone think they should participate?.

So yes I am complicit as are you and everyone else which was why I stated-- Quote "Personally I think it's ridiculous that everyone in all of these conflicts are running around with blood on their hands as they claim no responsibility or involvement.". Note I specifically used the term "everyone" to include myself because while I may disagree with the actions of my government I am still bound to them because I am Canadian and we as Canadians elected them. The difference is I am willing to admit that yes I am complicit and yes I am in some small way responsible. How could any person call themselves a responsible adult and then deny all responsibility for actions which in some small way they have participated in?. However we see this everywhere don't we, we see everyone pointing fingers at each other but apparently nobody is to blame and nobody is at fault in any way.

I also think it's important to connect the right dots, we are consumers who demand energy, resources , jobs etc... and our government not unlike a corporation is obligated to meet our needs by any means. So our demands force them to act as a matter of cause and effect but then when they do act we claim no responsibility for their actions. Not unlike the share holders who demand profits at any cost by any means from the corporation and then when the corporation goes too far the shareholders deny all responsibility and so does the corporation. It is comical because everyone has their hand in the cookie jar and all are saying it was not me... who then?, apparently nobody.

Your are not stuck in traffic you are the traffic... you just don't realize it, and that big pileup you know is coming is just around the corner.

AC

@AC,
I don't have a problem with you, I'm not bringing it on, I don't want a fight do you.  For the most part I agree with most of what you say, It's funny how nobody seems to be hearing what I say.  At this point I am tired of the battle, you can all think whatever you want.  I definitely do not enjoy this type of interaction never thought I'd be in this kind of position I'm sorry apparently my critical thinking is not as good as yours. As long as no one has my back here (very few know anything real about Islam) I will make myself scarce around here and you all can have your bash everyone but Islam fest. I used to think England, Canada and America were friends and allies but I can see that is no longer the case the lies of Islam have been believed it's like you all drank the koolaid I can only hope you wake up someday soon.
Bye!

@Room3327

QuoteI don't have a problem with you, I'm not bringing it on, I don't want a fight do you.

I know and I do not want a fight either I was just trying to point how easy it is for things to escalate and it is pretty easy to keep things under control once we understand our own thoughts and how we fit into the picture... it takes two to tango.

QuoteFor the most part I agree with most of what you say, It's funny how nobody seems to be hearing what I say.  At this point I am tired of the battle, you can all think whatever you want.  I definitely do not enjoy this type of interaction never thought I'd be in this kind of position I'm sorry apparently my critical thinking is not as good as yours. As long as no one has my back here (very few know anything real about Islam) I will make myself scarce around here and you all can have your bash everyone but Islam fest. I used to think England, Canada and America were friends and allies but I can see that is no longer the case the lies of Islam have been believed it's like you all drank the koolaid I can only hope you wake up someday soon.

I hope I understand your view point however I'm not sure what the solution is let alone how to approach the problem. I would agree there is a great deal of deception going on in regards to Islam and other religions which conceal their true motivations. Most indicators suggest Islam wants no part in peace and the only acceptable outcome is complete domination which obviously is never going to happen. However in a sense this is a monster of our own creation because the more we try to change them to be like us the more threatened they feel and the more extreme they become... kind of like a teenager.

What I know of teenagers having been one is that it is best to let them figure it out, give them our support and advice but let them make their own mistakes. Believe me I have seen some very bad kids who were worse as teenagers but then somewhere along the way they turned into some pretty awesome and very responsible parents. The real problem I have seen is when the parents will not let it go because they are psychopaths and unfortunately their children usually turn out just like them.

In any case I think many know perfectly well what your saying however there are more than a few religions with extreme views who will not back down and will not negotiate which is unfortunate. As well governments tend to dominate concentrating on re-election versus representation. Religions tend to dominate concrentrating on the number converted rather than the lives improved. People tend to dominate concentrating on taking from others rather than giving. All of us seem to have lost our way and what we say is not what we are doing. Obviously everyone cannot be right and dominate and nobody seems to want to give an inch so we can be almost certain disaster is on the horizon. It is no master plan nor conspiracy it is human nature and we are in big trouble.

AC

@all

Hmmmmmmm. Looks like this thread has calmed down from the recent topic of War and Peace, so I will use it to continue some CT. hehehe

This other particular thread was started by @Tommy Reed, but has probably been locked after 1 page (or maybe I was banned from posting further on that thread), I don't know. Anyways, further to my post there......
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2674.msg42855#msg42855

You see the drawing I prepared. Well this guy comes close....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gld25H-kHTg
except that he is using cored coils instead of just using a wire stator without a core. But even then, he does not indicated how he placed his magnets, but I see both magnet disks are aligned so the magnets hit each side of the cores at the same time. THAT IS NOT GOOD. You are basically pulling at atoms from each side simultaneously so you will get only the excess of two cancellation conditions showing as output, hehehe. He was better to at least put one magnet disk offset by half a magnet to magnet distance to have each hitting one side in succession, but in order to do that properly he needs to make sure the magnet are the same polarity pointing inwards from each disk. YOU ONLY NEED TO PLAY WITH ONE POLARITY since the other will be automatically set-up inside the coil.

Since all atoms are gravity sensitive to one degree or another, with conductive atoms at the top of the list, and since copper atoms reply or respond to changing magnetic (I am calling it magnetic but it is really a gravitic effect) forces, you are basically playing with the copper atom core just as if it was a small magnet itself inside a gyroscopic shell (degree of gyroscopic ability determines if an element is conductive or not). Same occurs in your energized coil. Basically, when you pulse a primary coil, the secondary sees it as Planet, No Planet, Planet, No Planet, Planet, No Planet, Planet, No Planet, Planet, etc., and the copper atoms respond in kind to put its opposing polarity towards the new planet each time it pops up. 

Some will say that is totally asinine to say atoms have gravitic cores that can do up to 6 different effects that I have identified as Stay, Show, Sway, Swing, Spin and Shoot or what I call the 6S's. The proof of this is very simple. If electricity was a conductive effect that involved "electrons" that flow, electrons that are also on all outside shells of all atoms, then a wire made of calcium should work the same as a wire made of copper, because in the world of the electrons, electrons are electrons no matter what the element, they are always the same electrons so the actual material should make no difference in how the particular atom is conductive. But they do make a difference so there has to be something else at play inside the copper atom that is not in play inside a calcium atom.

In the Spin Conveyance model, the difference between conductive and non-conductive atoms can be defined by using the Periodic Table of Elements (PTE) where, regardless if protons and neutrons exist or not, science has produced some empirical data that suggest some difference in core make-up that the PTE defines in particular numbers of each proton and neutron. We can then surmise that it is the slight variation of total protons and neutrons counts that define if an element will be conductive or not. Copper atoms have 29 protons and 35 neutrons making it slightly off balance and it is this slight imbalance that provides the atom core with the ability to do all 6S's since one half of the core will follow a gravity source more then the other half. The other factor, again regardless if electrons exist or not is the empirical data of the atomic shell that is defined by the PTE as electron counts. The first two layers of the copper atom show data as 2 and 8 and this produces the gyro mechanism that almost all atoms have. The remaining outer shells will define how transparent the core is to the effect of other cores beside it or from the outside, for copper, the 3rd layer is 18 and fourth is 1 so its outer shell after the gyro mechanism is transparent enough for the effect of one copper core to effect the next copper core beside it and this is where Spin Conveyance starts. Spin Conveyance can start anywhere in the line of copper atoms making up the wire hence when a magnet rotor turn inside a copper stator, it is spin conveyance that sends two distinctive spin orientations to the ends of the stator wire and it is those spins that you plug into to run your devices as readily available spin that can be conveyed via any other copper wire to another coil or to a load like a bulb.

The calcium atom has 20 protons and 20 neutrons so its core is well balanced hence there is no particular side of the core that has more gravitic response so the atom Stays impartial thus produces none or very little influence from gravity sources. All atoms have their own story to tell depending on the degree of balance or imbalance of the core make-up, plus the level of shielding around the core.  I am using the words proton/neutron/electron only to discuss this in standard terms without endorsing the existence of either of them, only to state that the empirical data indicates the differences in the PTE.

Yes proof is in the pudding and I am working on a proof of concept for this to show and experiment on our benches, see the various effects that will discount any form of electron travel or field to wire impartation effects and show that all such effects are purely gravity driven. hahaha Very soon.

One of my main present hindrances is to find spherical neo magnets 1/4", 3/8" and 1/2" dia. but they need to have a center hole going through the equator line between the north and south hemispheres. I just can't seem to find a supplier of this type of magnet and wonder why? It should be one of their best sellers since with this, you can make real gyroscopic demonstrations of the atomic core. I wonder why they are so hard to find?

wattsup

@All

It looks like finding spherical magnets with a hole in the center will be much more difficult then anticipated.

I sent out two email to known magnet providers and got these responses.

-----Original Message-----
Subject: Request for quote

Hello,

I am looking for spherical neo magnets 1/4", 3/8" and 1/2" dia. but they need to have a center hole going through the equator line between north and south hemispheres.

Hopefully you may have access to these but I cannot see them on your web site.

Any remark would be appreciated.

Kindest regards.
Leon Stepanian
=========================

Hello Leon,

We do not have a magnet like that in stock. We have not had very good success in making spheres with holes in them.

Regards,
Sales
Amazing Magnets, LLC

====================================

Leon,

Thank you for contacting us.  We do not have the capability to manufacture sphere magnets with holes.  It isn't possible to accurately align the magnetic field relative to the hole.  Also, the NdFeB material is very brittle, so the edges of the hole would be rough and very prone to chipping.

Best Regards,

Michael Paul
K&J Magnetics, Inc.
www.kjmagnetics.com

=========================================

The advent of not finding such magnets is not good at all. The other option is to make a gryo mechanism with a 3D printer or other method and have the magnets snap into an assembly. What a bummer.

wattsup

Make your own iron putty and anneal it under a control field?

wattsup,

How accurate do these need to be?

Can you stack different diameter speaker magnets up to make somewhat of a spherical shape?  Small ones at the poles; large one at the equator...

@GK

Hmmmmmm. Maybe if I can find some iron balls, drill them out, then magnetize them, but even then, they would never be a strong as neos. My other option is to see if using square neos with a hole will work as well but still would not provide the real spherical look.

@Matt Watts

No that would make them very big and not powerful enough to show the effect.

What I need to do is produce a length of spherical neo magnets that are each on a their own independent gyro structure to show how spin conveyance works at the atomic scale. Let's say you had 10 of these gyro magnets in a row from left to right. By approaching a strong magnet to the left side and turning that magnet, the first neo will start turning and turn the next that will turn the next and so on, like those long flexible drill extensions you use to make holes in hard to reach places. Also, let's say the strong magnet approaches and rotates next to magnets 5 and 6. You will see the other magnets turn from each end as well and this shows how a generator magnet rotor works on copper wire stators.

The gyro structure does two things. Provides spin at any angle as well as providing the binding method between gyros.

wattsup

Got it!
Drill the steel ball axis, Slice ball in half perpendicular to the axis, slip a ring magnet between the two. Slip steel collar down in axis. Of course the poles of the ring would be on the planar side and the not circumferal edge.

Way strong!

I've come across this old patent and wonder if anyone has any comments on it.
Essentially McFarland Cook claims a self running 4 coil system.
It's from 1871.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.11.20, 16:14:23
Personally I think all the arguments made here are flawed on almost every level as the rule of law states if you watch one man kill another without justification and do nothing you are just as guilty throught complicity.

Now we have over two million innocent civilians, women and children, dead in Afganistan and Iraq and it is a known fact, who exactly do you think is responsible?.

Personally I think it's ridiculous that everyone in all of these conflicts are running around with blood on their hands as they claim no responsibility or involvment. It is pathetic and while they may look civilized we can be sure they are little more than savages at heart because we are not judged on what we say but what we do.

AC

Which rule of law is that exactly, can you cite that in a law document or something. Sounds like a "law" made up by people and foisted on other people by force or threat of
force or incarceration. Is that the "good Samaritan" thing you speak of or the "guilt by association" thing. Because it is entirely possible I could see one man walk up to another man and kill him with apparently no justification, when in reality the killed guy could be "wanted dead or alive' by the law and i just don't know it, or the man killed could have done something that he deserved to be killed for.

To be sure I would need to know all the facts. Would I be expected to approach a man who just killed a man and ask if he is justified in his actions.

U.S, Canadian and Australian laws are not all the same, nor are the laws in Afganistan applicable here, the laws of any "country" in my opinion are "man made" and secondary to Natural Law, or Common Law.

..

This post is in response to @tinman's post at OU located here.....

http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg427569/#msg427569

Quote from: tinman on 2014.12.14, 04:24:52
Indeed TJ,but there are many here that will disagree. The fact is that not only can it be delayed,it can be completely reversed so as to add torque to the prime mover. The proof is in the fact that an electromagnetic field dose have a speed limit--it dose take some time to develope,as the speed is not infinite. Man has done many test to confirm the speed of light,but what about the speed of a magnetic field?-is it faster than the speed of light,or slower ???. One little hint is that if we apply a heavy load(low resistance) to the inductive kickback of an inductor when it becomes open circuit,the magnetic field around that inductor will collap's slower than if we applied a lite high resistive load to the inductive kickback.

Now-here is a question.
Dose the magnetic field invert when the inductor becomes open,and a load is applied to the inductive kickback,or dose it remain the same field orientation. Is it the voltage polarity of that inductor that determines the magnetic field orientation,or the direction of current flow through that inductor?.

@tinman

Instead of explaining a possible solution, I made a block diagram to show a possible working of flyback to use as a repulse. The idea is to use an inductive coil after P1 (SIC) that will provide more flyback potential while it leaves the primary on the B+ side for the initial pulse effect. When Mosfet 1 opens, the B+ will reclaim it's position inside P1 and SIC pushing flyback through the diode and to P2.

The idea is to never collect flyback but use it, as it is, on a second primary. Winding directions and all the finer points can be worked out but the general idea is to never use the flyback for storage since the process itself will generate more losses. So you are better off using it in the same system right away since the P2 will be able to use the flyback as it is.

The tricky part is Mosfet 2 that needs to be closed when Mosfet 1 opens and open when Mosfet 1 closes. This will cause a second flyback (optional) that will be of lower value that may be good for battery recharge since it will be of lower voltage, closer to the battery value.

So you can have a pulse motor with two primaries (P1/P2) or a magnet wheel with 8 drive coils (4P1/4P2) or even a standard transformer with two primaries will do the same thing. You can use this strictly as a motive system, or on transformers or toroids or E-cores with a secondary output. It can even be used in a cascading mode where P1 flyback to P2, then P2 flyback to P3, then P3 flyback to P4, etc., and see how far one initial pulse can go by the fourth pulse. There are so many ways to play.

There is some R&D to do to work out the best SIC coil value and I am sure a standard formula could be derived from such research.

As for your question, I no longer believe in magnetic fields, only pulsed coil or magnetic presence as a localized gravity source acting upon the actual atoms of copper and not on any electrons, so I can't say about your question. The field collapse we think is happening before flyback is only a nice story because everything in present EE has to include a field, electron flow and a never ending relation between voltage and current lag.

The other thing I am obliged to say at this point is that I am more then convinced now that wound coils will kill any chance of OU. Let's use the common analogy of a straight piece of wire with "electron flow" as being water flowing in a nice clean garden hose. But when wound in a coil, we always think the same garden hose analogy applies, were the electron flow is in the same unhindered manner. But that never winds up being true. The closest analogy is that the wound coil now becomes a garden hose with scale build-up inside causing a decrease in flow rate at the same applied pressure. It's not because the wire is scaling up but because the wire is wound next to other turns that cannot all react in the same direction and cause countering or cancellation. It's very simple, a 1000 foot straight piece of wire will have very low inductance and when wound in a coil will have much higher inductance. That inductance did not come from the wire itself but the topology of how it is used. Inductance is inter wind cancellation of potential. My use of the SIC is simply to take advantage of that hindrance to produce more flyback, which at Mosfet 1 off, is the immediate realignment of the copper atoms that causes the flyback phenomenon. NOT FIELD COLLAPSE.

But regardless, because the solutions for that are much more involved, the coil usage here should be enough to show the effects. Hmmmm. It is getting to be harder and harder for me to talk about Standard EE without adding Spin Conveyance Logic (SCL). Seems like I am beginning to be a bilingual OUer. hahahahaha

The other attachment is a good guide to wire usage and I could say so much about this relative to SCL, especially when you are using a certain wire size but pulsing at much lower maximum stress levels then the wire can actually handle. What happens to all those copper atoms that are not utilized? If you take a 12 AWG wire and pulse 10 watts, do you think all the copper atoms are being used? A streamer of a spark gap at 15000 volts and 0.001 amps will be very very thin. As you increase the amps and keep the voltage the same, the spark will grow thicker and thicker. The same applies in your wires. Low potential pulses in a 12 AWG wire will create a thin streamer of spin that continuously wiggles around in the wire thickness, just like it moves around in a spark gap (or like they move out from a Tesla Coil). Increase the amps and more of the copper atoms are now part of the streamer. Increase the amps much more and all the atoms will be affected until you get this nice red glow. So the more your wire is matched to its intended purpose, the less copper atoms will remain inactive and when on a core, the stronger the impartation from wire to core. If you don't use it, you lose it. These are logical notions that SCL has enabled me to develop as bases for future experiments. We always need to remember that we are dealing with atoms. The size of the copper atom compared to the thickness of your wire could be analogous to the width of the Grand Canyon in human terms. So those active atoms can be very far away from the core even if the wire is wound right onto it. Proximity has always been the silent basis for energy transfer so you need to think in atomic terms, because we are in fact manipulating atoms to do our bidding.

wattsup

@wattsup

QuoteAs for your question, I no longer believe in magnetic fields, only pulsed coil or magnetic presence as a localized gravity source acting upon the actual atoms of copper and not on any electrons, so I can't say about your question. The field collapse we think is happening before flyback is only a nice story because everything in present EE has to include a field, electron flow and a never ending relation between voltage and current lag.

That is a good start and it is not so much a matter of right or wrong, to conform to normality or not, but to take a fresh perspective on the subject. If we look closely many say they are reasonable and open minded but then when we hold a view outside the norm we are judged as being illogical at which point it would seem very few are as open minded as they claim. It would seem they are very open minded but only so long as our view should happen to agree with their view in some way. Which is where critical thinking comes into play and understanding many things we take for granted as being known and understood are simply preconceived perceptions.

QuoteThe other thing I am obliged to say at this point is that I am more then convinced now that wound coils will kill any chance of OU. Let's use the common analogy of a straight piece of wire with "electron flow" as being water flowing in a nice clean garden hose. But when wound in a coil, we always think the same garden hose analogy applies, were the electron flow is in the same unhindered manner. But that never winds up being true. The closest analogy is that the wound coil now becomes a garden hose with scale build-up inside causing a decrease in flow rate at the same applied pressure.

That is an interesting proposition, if we have a straight piece of wire then it is for the most part a singular process however when we add another turn then the current/voltage in each turn produces a magnetic field. Now if the field around one turn couples to the next then we could say they are bound to one another. One turn cannot change without inducing the other, the effect being that each turn couples to the next and all are coupled to each other forming a larger field. So it would seem we are trying to produce change in a device we have designed to hinder or limit change on every level. Then we add an iron core in which a magnetic field is induced and not only is each turn coupled to the next but to each section of the laminated iron core. In regards to change it would seem we have done our best to ensure the level of change in our devices remains within the limitations we have pre-defined. It is no wonder all our devices act the same because we have taken action to ensure they do without even knowing it in many cases.

AC

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.12.15, 14:06:14
This post is in response to @tinman's post at OU located here.....

http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg427569/#msg427569


@tinman

Instead of explaining a possible solution, I made a block diagram to show a possible working of flyback to use as a repulse. The idea is to use an inductive coil after P1 (SIC) that will provide more flyback potential while it leaves the primary on the B+ side for the initial pulse effect. When Mosfet 1 opens, the B+ will reclaim it's position inside P1 and SIC pushing flyback through the diode and to P2.

The idea is to never collect flyback but use it, as it is, on a second primary. Winding directions and all the finer points can be worked out but the general idea is to never use the flyback for storage since the process itself will generate more losses. So you are better off using it in the same system right away since the P2 will be able to use the flyback as it is.

The tricky part is Mosfet 2 that needs to be closed when Mosfet 1 opens and open when Mosfet 1 closes. This will cause a second flyback (optional) that will be of lower value that may be good for battery recharge since it will be of lower voltage, closer to the battery value.

So you can have a pulse motor with two primaries (P1/P2) or a magnet wheel with 8 drive coils (4P1/4P2) or even a standard transformer with two primaries will do the same thing. You can use this strictly as a motive system, or on transformers or toroids or E-cores with a secondary output. It can even be used in a cascading mode where P1 flyback to P2, then P2 flyback to P3, then P3 flyback to P4, etc., and see how far one initial pulse can go by the fourth pulse. There are so many ways to play.

There is some R&D to do to work out the best SIC coil value and I am sure a standard formula could be derived from such research.

As for your question, I no longer believe in magnetic fields, only pulsed coil or magnetic presence as a localized gravity source acting upon the actual atoms of copper and not on any electrons, so I can't say about your question. The field collapse we think is happening before flyback is only a nice story because everything in present EE has to include a field, electron flow and a never ending relation between voltage and current lag.

The other thing I am obliged to say at this point is that I am more then convinced now that wound coils will kill any chance of OU. Let's use the common analogy of a straight piece of wire with "electron flow" as being water flowing in a nice clean garden hose. But when wound in a coil, we always think the same garden hose analogy applies, were the electron flow is in the same unhindered manner. But that never winds up being true. The closest analogy is that the wound coil now becomes a garden hose with scale build-up inside causing a decrease in flow rate at the same applied pressure. It's not because the wire is scaling up but because the wire is wound next to other turns that cannot all react in the same direction and cause countering or cancellation. It's very simple, a 1000 foot straight piece of wire will have very low inductance and when wound in a coil will have much higher inductance. That inductance did not come from the wire itself but the topology of how it is used. Inductance is inter wind cancellation of potential. My use of the SIC is simply to take advantage of that hindrance to produce more flyback, which at Mosfet 1 off, is the immediate realignment of the copper atoms that causes the flyback phenomenon. NOT FIELD COLLAPSE.

But regardless, because the solutions for that are much more involved, the coil usage here should be enough to show the effects. Hmmmm. It is getting to be harder and harder for me to talk about Standard EE without adding Spin Conveyance Logic (SCL). Seems like I am beginning to be a bilingual OUer. hahahahaha

The other attachment is a good guide to wire usage and I could say so much about this relative to SCL, especially when you are using a certain wire size but pulsing at much lower maximum stress levels then the wire can actually handle. What happens to all those copper atoms that are not utilized? If you take a 12 AWG wire and pulse 10 watts, do you think all the copper atoms are being used? A streamer of a spark gap at 15000 volts and 0.001 amps will be very very thin. As you increase the amps and keep the voltage the same, the spark will grow thicker and thicker. The same applies in your wires. Low potential pulses in a 12 AWG wire will create a thin streamer of spin that continuously wiggles around in the wire thickness, just like it moves around in a spark gap (or like they move out from a Tesla Coil). Increase the amps and more of the copper atoms are now part of the streamer. Increase the amps much more and all the atoms will be affected until you get this nice red glow. So the more your wire is matched to its intended purpose, the less copper atoms will remain inactive and when on a core, the stronger the impartation from wire to core. If you don't use it, you lose it. These are logical notions that SCL has enabled me to develop as bases for future experiments. We always need to remember that we are dealing with atoms. The size of the copper atom compared to the thickness of your wire could be analogous to the width of the Grand Canyon in human terms. So those active atoms can be very far away from the core even if the wire is wound right onto it. Proximity has always been the silent basis for energy transfer so you need to think in atomic terms, because we are in fact manipulating atoms to do our bidding.

wattsup

Resonance is being limited to after the fact conditions, associated with L and C only.  Its not being applied to geometry of the system.  Careful examination of the circuits in question reveals that geometry is as important as the storage mechanisms (L and C) themselves.  We must see the significance of proper geometry if for no other reason because L and C manifest and predominate at very specific geometric points.  Resonance in the geometry is missing!

When we review our situation from a geometry based resonance standpoint, we observe that the induced potential and its associated current are not coincident with the the inducing flux.  The two manifest out of phase, even in the so-called series and parallel resonant condition!  The so-called resonant condition is not resonant!  

The polarities setup in accordance with the law dictates that we will have magnetic collisions!  A collision between the induced magnetic field and the field which induced it, this collision is scheduled to take place at the zero crossing or TDC however, owing to ignorance, among other things, the collision never takes place at this location!  We find the event(s) taking place just before and just after (in this case) the rotor magnet aligns with the coil.  Contrary to popular opinion, the collision is desired, because through it our generators transition from simple rotary induction machines to compound rotary-linear induction machines.  Two generators in one, the two sharing the fundamental, the latter operating at a frequency which is many orders higher than the prior.

Your mission should you choose to accept is to stop listening to folks like myself and the like, and listen to Nature.  The machines we work on obey no man made laws, this makes them perfect teachers.  Once the idea that these machines follow Nature and not man sunk in deep enough, I realized that what I was looking for was a magnetic configuration which gives you maximum induced potential at the zero crossing, while maintaining maximum coupling and field strength.  

Maximum opposition to change in current describes the behavior found in electromagnetic systems.  Methods based on this concept, dominate on all levels.  

Maximum opposition to change in voltage describes the behavior found in magneto-dielectric systems.  At present, none discuss how these systems could function and lead to methods for harvesting current without opposition.

To each his own.


Regards

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2014.12.15, 16:27:59
@wattsup
That is a good start and it is not so much a matter of right or wrong, to conform to normality or not, but to take a fresh perspective on the subject. If we look closely many say they are reasonable and open minded but then when we hold a view outside the norm we are judged as being illogical at which point it would seem very few are as open minded as they claim. It would seem they are very open minded but only so long as our view should happen to agree with their view in some way. Which is where critical thinking comes into play and understanding many things we take for granted as being known and understood are simply preconceived perceptions.

That is an interesting proposition, if we have a straight piece of wire then it is for the most part a singular process however when we add another turn then the current/voltage in each turn produces a magnetic field. Now if the field around one turn couples to the next then we could say they are bound to one another. One turn cannot change without inducing the other, the effect being that each turn couples to the next and all are coupled to each other forming a larger field. So it would seem we are trying to produce change in a device we have designed to hinder or limit change on every level. Then we add an iron core in which a magnetic field is induced and not only is each turn coupled to the next but to each section of the laminated iron core. In regards to change it would seem we have done our best to ensure the level of change in our devices remains within the limitations we have pre-defined. It is no wonder all our devices act the same because we have taken action to ensure they do without even knowing it in many cases.
AC

Sorry for delay in responding to your comments, which surround the problem very well. @Erfinder as well and I will respond more precisely in a day or so. I need to make sure these posts are saying what I need to convey without creating any  misunderstandings or as few as possible since there is another main quandary about our coils. Yes, there is much worst.

THE WOUND COILS AND THE CORE DILEMMA FOR OU

Besides the problem of tight inter-winding counter effects, that exist even in every straight piece of wire but is compounded when wire is wound in multi-turns and layers, we have this next problem when primary coils share a core with one or more secondaries.

The core of a transformer being laminated or ferrite type, itself, cannot function like any type of diode that could hold a shift in core potential from the primary side of the core to the secondary side of the core. The core is omni-directional in that you can place a primary anywhere on any type of core and wind a secondary anywhere as well, even at the most unseemly locations on the core and you will always get some level of coupling. Pulse either and the other will show coupling. The core works both ways or more precisely every way. As a central object between primary and secondary the core becomes a pivot point where the strongest force from either side pushes to the adverse side.

So, as soon as you ever arrive at a condition where the secondary is outputting more energy then what is fed in to the primary, the secondary will thereafter become the primary and the primary will become the secondary and in most cases, you start blowing primary driver mosfets and the system stops. The construct we have been running after is faulty from the very start. You cannot pulse a primary and expect OU on the secondary if both are on the same omni-directional coupling medium. Even if the secondary was wound with the most special wire in the world (future oriented copper wire) where outputs could reach many factors above OU, you could not get OU from that set-up simply because both share the same core where only the strongest wins the impress game.

Would this be considered a proper analysis of the problem?

For me, this has nothing to do with any Law of Conservation, it has to do with bench observations that we have been doing since many years. So if you are looking for OU in a primary/core/secondary (PCS) event, it's not that it will never happen, it's more that it cannot happen since that is the nature of the beasts we are designing and playing with if using conventional rules of engagement, which we are. We have been pounding our heads with PCS configurations for years and years now but this one basic PCS premise should have been first and foremost on our list of observations and considerations years ago. But all we were concerned with is Standard EE just saying "The Law of Conversation of Energy says this is impossible". But none have ever really come forward with a logical explanation of why this actually occurs so we can then really hone in on the real problems of OU production.

Instead, it seems a lot of time has been spent on trying to fight this by working to modify voltage to current lag, we try to fight against BEMF, we try to fight against flyback, but these effects are all natural parts of the topologies we choose to deploy and the results are not surprisingly just normal. And for what? Too ultimately arrive at OU levels where the secondary will become the primary and things will still go haywire. I am stunned by what I just wrote here, cause it really hits home and hard.

For me this one realization of this very real constraint in our efforts could be considered a sort of "personal discovery" or a major wake up call to all OUers. This does not, by any means, become a confirmation that OU is impossible. It only means OU is impossible if you play by regular rules. Unless you can invent a lamination or core that incorporates a diode type feature where, let's use the word "flux" for simplicity, only passes one way, PCS is doomed, it cannot go OU. This is not a confirmation of Standard EE Theory or an abdication to the Law of Conservation, although, for the former, all the empirical data is always valid where their interpretations are always open to perspective. hehehe

Based on this specific PCS problem, one option to the basic logic could then change from one of primary/core/secondary, to primary/core/secondary/tertiary where the tertiary means are designed to keep the secondary at its lowest level of charge while the secondary weans out the energy off the primary and core just as it was doing, but in smaller hence faster increments then the actual peak rising frequency of the secondary, so output is accomplished or produced where there is never a chance of the secondary coming close to any real potential rise and reversal.

A few years ago I made an animation of a Voltage Grabber (below) circuit that would show you what could be involved in weaning energy from a source without killing the dipole. This particular Grabber was to work with a small radiant energy feed but the basic idea is still valid for drawing power off of a secondary. There are surely more simpler methods then this animation. I just wanted to show the logic of loading small individual caps, then paralleling them to unload into a bigger set of caps, then when each bigger cap is full, all the bigger caps feed the load away from the input. This could be done mechanically with a wheel and micro contacts. Hmmmmm.  

Basically, energy production is not the problem. The main problem lies in how to draw energy away before it can rise in potential and reverse the effect. I mentioned this some where else but will mention it again here. Let's say your 60 hertz pulsed primary consumes 100 volts at 1 amp so it consumes 100 watts. The pulsing produces a secondary output of 200 volts at 1 amp which is great, sound the trumpets, but as soon as it reaches peak output the primary starts heating up and your primary mosfets blow. So the only way you can get this energy out is to remove the energy produced from the secondary each time the voltage rises to let's say 50 volts, it will still be 1 amp but now the secondary never reaches above the primary stage and can keep producing 50 volts at 1 amp but now at at 240 hertz indefinitely. But that 50 volts 1 amp has to be completely off the secondary before the next 50 volt rise otherwise you develop the same compounding problem.

The other option is to design the primary drive with enough robustness to really fight it out with the secondary as it reaches its full output potential and try to keep the system going. Let's say your aim is to pulse 12 volts at 1 amp (12 watts in) into the primary and the secondary will output 120 volts at .5 amp (60 watts out). Great plan indeed. But what is required is to design the primary pulse components to handle the 60 watts and not the 12 watts because in order to arrive at the final result, the secondary will be hammering the primary and if the primary cannot handle it, zap.

Another way is that you know you have 12 volts for the primary pulse so you place a zener diode of 15 volts coming out between the primary and the mosfet so that any return above 15 volts will discharge via the zener diode and become reusable on a second primary for transformers or second drive coil for motive wheels. This way when the secondary starts acting up, the zener will use that excess and send it to another part of the device to increase the primary push.  

Think of the primary and secondary as two boxers and the core is the impartially observant referee. The boxers can go at it any way they want and the core will let it happen as long as the blows are fair. The P can hit the S and the core will say go go go but the S starts getting mad and in one blow, the core sees this S come the other way and says go go go and the P is knocked out solid. Every Primary to Secondary is like Rocky and the Russian going at it, blow by blow until one or the other gets knocked out.

In general we could then say that all OU devices require at least three stages before the load. But, we usually do what? We usually hit a primary and send the secondary to a load or via a tank capacitor to load (same thing), when, we should be hitting the primary and sending the secondary to a constant accumulator stage that removes all output potential before it backs up into the core. If such a secondary output system could be devised to work at 2 to 10 times the primary pulse speed, even if at this stage it is not OU, that third stage could be used on 1000's of systems presently pounding on the OU barrier and provide us with a better chance of going OU.

The other choice is to stay away from PCS topologies completely to then work with the most far fetched designs you can think of since the PCS will always prove to be non-productive without the checks and balances required, so you are better off spending your time on anything else but that, and, your level of knowledge of effects will grow by leaps and bounds. I can go into that later.

I know this is a long post but there is just one more point to make here. If you consider the above as being even partially valid, where you now know any OU device has to fight between input and output, where if the output rises above the input, the output will attack the input, well, now we have a new perspective on how to look at purported OU devices like TK, Akula and many others and we now know to look for how the inventor has solved this problem. If there is nothing evident that solves the output problem, how is this possible? Seems to me their money model just got slimmer. hahaha

wattsup

OU is not possible in closed circuits so I advance a theory of open path ;-) and here we can get as many OU as you wish but "they" ruled the methods because it is simply radio transmitter we need  O0 even if strange 50-400Hz low frequency (but can be any frequency)
there is no OU if energy is only converted but what if our energy is only used to modulate omnipresent field   O0 ? open a valve without consuming much energy and you got a peak input, repeat and you got stream  ;D
really what we need is simple like a "stick" or magic wand  :D ;) but there is no magic really Tesla said ALL in his interview
and if you state there are other methods I would say , no - it's all the same , you can find it even in rotating generators or magnetic motors
"the place where there should be no electricity but it is there "

@wattsup

QuoteSo, as soon as you ever arrive at a condition where the secondary is outputting more energy then what is fed in to the primary, the secondary will thereafter become the primary and the primary will become the secondary and in most cases, you start blowing primary driver mosfets and the system stops. The construct we have been running after is faulty from the very start. You cannot pulse a primary and expect OU on the secondary if both are on the same omni-directional coupling medium. Even if the secondary was wound with the most special wire in the world (future oriented copper wire) where outputs could reach many factors above OU, you could not get OU from that set-up simply because both share the same core where only the strongest wins the impress game.
Would this be considered a proper analysis of the problem?

I would agree and to me everything we have ever done now seems backwards. We build things in order to invoke change and yet we seldom give thought to how this change may occur. We build and theorize how to invoke a mechanism for gain and yet we seldom consider where this gain may come from. As such I worked the problem backwards starting with the known universe understanding the how and why then started moving inwards down to our level. It is very hard to accomplish anything thinking at our level and having a more universal mind answers many questions.

QuoteFor me, this has nothing to do with any Law of Conservation, it has to do with bench observations that we have been doing since many years.

I would agree and those who feel obligated to conform to normalcy if not mediocrity take great strides to support the conservation of energy. I see it differently, if the theory cannot stand on it's own two feet and support itself then maybe we should rethink it. It is a very peculiar thing that so many would start with the conservation of energy as their foundation then work the problem within that framework which practically guarantee's failure. Once again I worked the problem backwards starting with the known universe which is seething with energy on every level then moving inward down to our level of thinking. At which point the conservation becomes a non-issue, it is no longer a question of "if" but a matter of how and why and on what level.

I believe the thing to keep in mind is a statement made by Faraday-- "it does not matter how the change occurs only that it does". Which I believe has universal application, how can we hope to invoke change around us if we refuse to change our thinking?, How can we change our thinking if we refuse to let go of the past and think of our future?. It would seem for every hurdle we jump we create ten more in front of us to take it's place in which case we are not really moving forwards but backwards. So yes I believe you are correct because when we change the rules and our thinking the hurdles we have created in our mind simply cease to exist.

AC

@AC and @Erfinder

Thanks for your posts which I had read and started preparing responses but both of them just started to get to long and too complicated for me to explaining certain effects, so I will hold off for now in responding. My main problem is my constant wish to say everything in one sentence so guys can get the gist of this new perspective that magnets are basically Localized Gravity Sources (LGS) and our atoms, depending on the element will have more or less affinity for the atomic core to respond to gravity sources other then the Earth and Sun which have been the only ones effecting our atoms on this planet for so long, until we started playing with magnets and coils.

For critical thinking, I have an idea and a question of feasibility.

I think with the use of a stereo audio output AC and a frequency generator software, if the two AC audio outputs were both full bridge rectified, you would have two channels of DC pulse that anyone could play with each left and right frequency and phase offset. Those DC signals could be used to drive two DC to DC SSRs that are battery fed. This will produce the ability to drive two or more sets of coils off phase at any angle and enable guys to do some pretty crazy R&D that would have required two frequency generators that I know have weak phase offset capabilities. The question is would an audio output accept to be full bridge rectified without blowing the audio output stage also understanding that the full rectifier will double the output frequency, or, is it best to use a half bridge to keep the software frequency the same. hehehe

wattsup

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.12.29, 16:34:52
@AC and @Erfinder

Thanks for your posts which I had read and started preparing responses but both of them just started to get to long and too complicated for me to explaining certain effects, so I will hold off for now in responding. My main problem is my constant wish to say everything in one sentence so guys can get the gist of this new perspective that magnets are basically Localized Gravity Sources (LGS) and our atoms, depending on the element will have more or less affinity for the atomic core to respond to gravity sources other then the Earth and Sun which have been the only ones effecting our atoms on this planet for so long, until we started playing with magnets and coils.

For critical thinking, I have an idea and a question of feasibility.

I think with the use of a stereo audio output AC and a frequency generator software, if the two AC audio outputs were both full bridge rectified, you would have two channels of DC pulse that anyone could play with each left and right frequency and phase offset. Those DC signals could be used to drive two DC to DC SSRs that are battery fed. This will produce the ability to drive two or more sets of coils off phase at any angle and enable guys to do some pretty crazy R&D that would have required two frequency generators that I know have weak phase offset capabilities. The question is would an audio output accept to be full bridge rectified without blowing the audio output stage also understanding that the full rectifier will double the output frequency, or, is it best to use a half bridge to keep the software frequency the same. hehehe

wattsup

DC.....that's a topic that is of real significance isn't it?  The adventures here in wonderland began with a public fight regarding DC, and in the end it wasn't the hero who won, the hero it seems was the antagonist, who later himself became a leader in phenomena associated with direct and impulse based systems. 

2014 was a great year for me, this year I have asked some of the toughest questions I have ever come  up with.  To the well learned, my questions are childish and or misguided, and in many cases delusional, and if I judged myself by these opinions, I would have given up long ago.  However, I digress....what if DC is AC and AC is DC?  I realize this is a strange question but a question that must be asked when you see what I have seen.  Under the proper conditions I have watched the most perfect sine wave I have ever generated instantly change into a square wave?  I have done this on more than one occasion, the most simple requiring only a full wave bridge and a high impedance generator.  I shared this before with this forum if memory serves, unfortunately, as it happens with many of my rants and long winded demonstrations, the presentation wasn't received well.

At any rate, It would seem we, or speaking for myself, I have missed something of extreme significance.  This something is taught by that which is taking  place in the system which facilitates the spontaneous transformation of a sine into a square.  Its funny when you think about all that it could imply, squaring the circle comes to mind over and over, the reasoning behind this eludes me, however the thought keeps me awake contemplating it when I should be sleeping. 

Wattsup, we all have our pet project, our pet idea that we covet and protect like a newborn, protect your ideas at all cost.  Don't let anyone convince you that you are in error, as there is literally no right or wrong in the grand scheme of things (my opinion).  Your ideas are yours, and as such sharing is all we can or should do.  We cannot prove the validity of the ideas, ergo, to each his own.  I think we all have pieces of some grand mosaic, and we need only listen to one another, really listen to one another and maybe we can begin to put this thing together.  That is my plan for the upcoming year, listening to others, better than I have in the past something I recommend.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.12.30, 12:14:44
Under the proper conditions I have watched the most perfect sine wave I have ever generated instantly change into a square wave?  I have done this on more than one occasion, the most simple requiring only a full wave bridge and a high impedance generator.

Here's another example of that phenomena:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq1ZNlmIsDk

At first I thought is was just clipping a high amplitude signal, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.30, 18:18:27
Here's another example of that phenomena:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq1ZNlmIsDk

At first I thought is was just clipping a high amplitude signal, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Cool.....close but no....the wave demonstrated in that video has absolutely no stability, in addition to this, there are no signs of the breakdown of the wave into the harmonics that make up the square, followed by a transformation of the wave back into a sine wave (sine to square to sine). Also, the square I generate is so clean that it appears as if it were being generated by a signal generator.  The sine wave is also the cleanest that I have ever seen.

Eventually I will shoot  a video....again.....maybe this time around folks will simply review the video and contemplate whats being demonstrated, (all I am interested in) and keep their interpretation of whats going on to themselves.  I haven't posted a video on it primarily because I'm not interested in hearing what I am more than capable of finding myself through researching the subject (research you must assume has been done).  I am looking for deeper insights, deeper impressions I am not satisfied with accepted explanations of the observed phenomena.


Regards

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.30, 18:18:27
Here's another example of that phenomena:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq1ZNlmIsDk

At first I thought is was just clipping a high amplitude signal, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Matt Watt,

Here is a fresh off the press video demonstrating what I am trying to say in my post.  What you see is exactly what I am talking about, this is what I would like to see taking place in the video link you presented.  If the presenter can re-shoot the video and show what I am showing that would be great.  Unfortunately, I am almost positive the presenter will not be able to do this.  At any rate, the purpose of my video is just to demonstrate the wave and its behavior, show the transitioning as I am experiencing it.

https://flic.kr/p/qzivgh


Regards

@Erfinder

I am posting this here instead of on the intended Flux Gate Interrupter, BEMF Redirector thread to not clutter it and also to keep some flow of posts I make in one location. This thread will do just fine from now on so I will always use this thread even if responding to other threads that I will identify as well.

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg44058#msg44058

Yes, yes and yes. Topology is the most important aspect of any device since it integrates all the present understandings of the builder to arrive at a certain level of simplicity or sophistication, does not matter. Change or add one base understanding and the topology will eventually change as well.

In @gotolucs' present build, some of the realities are;

1) The two C cores that are mounted on the drill chuck are welded together without any isolation materials to prevent crossing or cancellation zones in the armature that again would be very difficult to predict in the way the two cores are joined.

2) The coil has a pretty big neo magnet smack dab inside its belly so you now have a permanent orientation of the four bar armatures that will be very difficult to change any form of polarity shifting just with the passage of the two "shorted" rotating C cores.

3) Regardless of any topology, given the fact that the copper coil has zillions of atoms, in any type of build you will always have some level of output so just because a system produces output, it does not mean it is optimal.

4) The copper coil is tightly wound mag wire so you will always have inter wind cancellation that adds to the reduction of output. You do not need many winds and layers.

Example: You have a coil of 200 turns in 4 layers. The first layer is the closest and will feel the polarity changes in the core and also cloak the 2nd and other layers from the core impress proportionate to the impress the first layer received. After that it's a game of chance and push (sway, swing or spin) in one direction but now that energy has to pass through 3 additional layers and this is where we start to make our own problems.

Coil winding is an elastic sport. Many turns and layers produces higher voltage but lower amperage because amperage can only be the number of atoms in a given length of wire that react to a given impulse. So because you want higher voltage, you wind more turns that create more cancellation that reduces the amperage but increases the voltage.

The mundane task of winding coils is not so mundane in the transformer industry where best performance is a constant give and take of specs. The final objective is what is prime. You look at what you have as input and what you need as output and wind your coil accordingly without any real interest in efficiency because manipulating anything any more then that is not really on our books yet.

The logical method is guys will determine what the coil is required to output then wind a coil for that specific reason while bitting the bullet on amperage for each addition turn of the wire.

If you where to put yourself right inside the copper wire and could see the atoms and how they are arranged, the first thing you will realize is there are many defective atoms in the wire that have oblong forms where the center core cannot spin, but has enough elbow room to sway or with more room, to swing. So not all copper atoms are created equal. This you know when considering isotopes of any given element are slight variations of the main element. But you have so many copper atoms of all types, some almost perfectly round, others not but there is enough of everything for you to sweep your frequency generator and see different reactions and outputs at varying frequencies because at certain frequencies some more of the atoms can spin then others.

According to spin conveyance, super conductivity works in this way. The low temperature is enough to freeze some of the weaker atoms and holds them in check while the more perfect atoms can now spin without having the weaker frozen atoms that create a cancellation, so the freer atoms are left to spin without any hindrance. Super conductivity is the elimination of cancellation and in the freeze method, they are not really canceled but prevented to sway or swing which prevents them from spinning against the main impulse spin that now has free reign over all those atoms that can spin. So our wires work the same way. We have good atoms and bad atoms and in between atoms and all of them will react inside the wire at a given frequency. When I say spin, I always mean sway, swing or spin.

Resonance point is when all those atoms that can spin, do so. If looking at a clock, you have sway where the atomic core sways anywhere between 1 minute to 29 minutes or 31 minutes to 59 minutes, swing goes anywhere from 1 minute to 59 minutes or 31 minutes to 29  minutes, and spin occurs when the pulse timing is such that the swing has enough inertia to pass the 0 minute mark and continues in the same direction. You cannot get swing from 60 hertz. This will be enough to sway or swing the atoms since it is AC so both polarity impresses are fully controlled. Wonder why the army uses 400 hertz? Since the copper wire has less fully spinable atoms, then swing atoms and less swings atoms then sway atoms, when you get up to the resonance frequencies, those less spinable atoms will spin but produce much less amperage and this explains in the physical sense why resonance outputs are more reactive, higher volts (faster spin) low amps (less atoms spinning). It is the wire itself that cannot provide any more available spinable atoms to increase the amperage and that is exactly what we see on our benches everyday since 150 years. This is not a fault in method but materials.

So let's go again to the atoms scale and are able to see through the cross-section of the wire. The atoms at the bottom point where the wire and the core meet are at the closest impress, the atoms on the top curve of the wire are furthest away from the core and already at that small perceived distance for us, in the atomic scale could equal a distance of more then 2 football fields in human terms. So just that first layer of winding already has surpassed the practical distances that a perfect wire needs to become fully impressed. The fact that wire is round provides the builder with an even thinner layer of wire closest to the core so the wire never actually has full contact to the core.

If anyone is interested in seeing what the ramifications of this are, take any core, wind a primary of one layer, then over that another primary of one layer, then over that another primary of one layer. Then on another part of the core wind a secondary of one layer and on top of that another secondary of one layer and on top of that a third layer. So you have three primaries and three secondaries. Now play by pulsing the first layer primary and scope the first layer secondary, then scope only the second layer secondary, then only the third layer secondary and keep a log of results. Then pulse the second layer primary and scope again the secondaries. Then pulse the third layer primary and do the secs. Then pulse the 1st and 2nd layer primaries in series and scope again the secs. Then pulse again the 1st and 2nd layers but in parallel and scope the secs, then pulse the 1st, 2nd and 3rd primaries in series and scope the secs. Then put them in parallel and scope the secs. Then start over again but now put the 1st and 2nd secondaries in series, and scope them with the primary variables again. Then put the secondaries in parallel and do it again. The put the 1st, 2nd and 3rd secondaries in series and scope it again with all the primary variables. Once you have gone through all the possible variables and have tabled all the different data, all based on these same pieces of copper wire, it will start to show a portrait of exactly how each layer will change the dynamics of how energy is pulsed and removed from the system. Just this study would say so much of why and how we should be using our copper wire.

Why is Litz wire found to be the best wire for resonance? Because both that small insulation per wire (doubled with turns) is enough to prevent most of the inter wire cancellation and the very thin wire means a reduction in the less performing copper atoms around those atoms that can actually spin so you have a better super conductive reaction although it is still far from perfect.  

I guess all this boils down to watts. 20 watts can be generated at 100 volts and .2 amps or 10 volts at 2 amps. Both of these can be outputed by changing your wire turns but regardless, you will always get 20 watts. The thing is, does your system need 100 volts at .2 amps or are you trying to loop a 10 volts system, where using the former you will have to step it down and loose more efficiency. If the wire you are using is good till 200 watts, why do you care how it is served. You are always better off with the fewest copper wire turns possible.

Nature does not over build to then tear down. It builds only what is required to meet the task so the design has to start from step one to establish what are the working parameters desired and how can this be achieved using the least amount of wire possible, that will generate the least amount of cancellation potential possible in order to return the maximum amount of power back to the source.

Most of these observations of my own effects on the bench were never realized until I started realizing that Spin Conveyance played a more practical and physical role in how we play with our toys. This was just impossible for me to realize a few years ago when this was only a flicker of thought but today, these effects are becoming more and more "explainable" in the atomic sense for it to make human sense, much more then any current/voltage formulas could ever do. But once you start to equate formulas with actual physical reactions in copper wire the device starts to come alive and the human to machine intuitiveness increases by leaps and bounds.

If you could sort copper atoms and use only the most perfectly round atoms to produce FLAT, thin copper wire, this would be a huge leap forward in the evolution of conductive materials and these wires would produce OU very easily. But right now, it is like OUers are working with one arm tied to the back while fighting very hard for a knock out. So imagine going back a hundred years, what the quality of copper was then while they produced most of the EE laws. Give us better materials and we will rewrite those laws. One guy we all know summed it up very well as "wire is very important". Guess whoooooooooooooo? (Five point question.)

If there was a way to produce copper or any other conductive wire in the same manner as they produce aligned steel laminations, this would be such a plus. I would guess such wire is already available, copper or otherwise, but it is not available to the public. I guess if there was a way to reheat wire red hot and produce a magnetic influence on only one side of the wire as it cools, this will realign the copper atoms to a more favorable singular angle, this will provide more atoms that will react in the same way, hence produce more output as amperage at the same voltage. I'm not there yet. hehehe

Overunity will not be achieved by EE alone. Guys have to have touched on physics, alchemy, metallurgy, chemistry, engineering, astro physics and so many other disciplines in order to understand the vastness and the base simplicity of all the potential effects around us because each is interrelated to the atom itself. If you are stuck in Standard EE alone, it would be practically impossible for anyone to pass the mental OU threshold without major major luck.

Sorry for long post.

wattsup

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
@Erfinder

I am posting this here instead of on the intended Flux Gate Interrupter, BEMF Redirector thread to not clutter it and also to keep some flow of posts I make in one location. This thread will do just fine from now on so I will always use this thread even if responding to other threads that I will identify as well.

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg44058#msg44058

Call me layman, remind me of the fact that I have no idea what I am talking about, just bare in mind that unlike many I won't hold it against myself.  I am interested in what I am interested in, I have no interest in proving anything to anyone.  This gets my posts on the ignore list of many of the "authorities".  Like many I use my own language when discussing certain things.  Mine is what some have called an unhealthy mix of conflicting points of view, everyone is entitled to their opinion.  Often times, things that I say send mixed messages, and I think before I say more about what I feel I have found I should make one or two things clear.

I do not believe in overunity, I do not believe in free energy.  I think those who are seeking such a conditions are in for a rude awakening, we will need an independent energy source one day, maybe sooner than many of us imagine.   The sad truth, from my perspective is that we are collectively searching for something that just isn't there, we acknowledge the existence of that which is there, but are oblivious as to its significance.   Resonance between individuals in my opinion, begins with individual self oscillation.   Belief systems make up part of the mechanism which assists in sustaining the oscillation, it is not the oscillation itself.  In the noise I see you, your choice of word, and style of articulation are in a word.....immaterial.  

That which we have come to call reactive power, that condition where voltage and current are out of phase, where the values when calculated can reach into the thousands of kilowatts, is what I am after.  I have been told on more than one occasion that I am wasting my time, I disagree.  Nature in its infinite wisdom has revealed the store house of infinite power to us, and it is our ignorance which bars us from tapping into this natural resource.
We need to take this all seriously but not so seriously that we get lost and or caught up in the details.  

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
Yes, yes and yes. Topology is the most important aspect of any device since it integrates all the present understandings of the builder to arrive at a certain level of simplicity or sophistication, does not matter. Change or add one base understanding and the topology will eventually change as well.

Topology is important to me, (let the record reflect that I am speaking from my bench), because of the emphasis placed on geometry.  After reading lots of patents and lectures, both old and new, and not to mention my own time on the bench, I am left with the understanding that knowing exactly when certain events occur in time and in space is paramount.  Once we identify what these specific events are, we find that the geometry of the system will not change much afterwards.  When I look at a motor or a generator, what I look for are the locations, the literal geometric points where maximum opposition to change in flux will take place, this location is easy to identify, it is the point of maximum induced potential (voltage).   The point that I have tried to share is that the point of greatest opposition to change in flux is not coincident with the point of greatest flux density.  The reaction to this statement has been a loud and clear "DUH".  I smile because even though the response is expected, the folks making the response don't really comprehend the significance of the situation when the two become coincident.  This became a serious point of interest for me when I began to consider the system (motor or generator) as a tank circuit.  

This line of thinking was brought on by the idea that capacitance and inductance values aren't constant, this was followed by the realization that parasitic capacitance isn't the system capacitance, system capacitance in my opinion, had to be equal to system opposition to change in current.  I later found a formula which supports this idea, the formula basically shows that capacitance and inductance are one, and they are a function of rate of change, a wonderful thing.
A motor as I see it now is a DC biased AC generator (rotary Mag amp).  In my view there is no motor perse, only a motoring function, and effect, an undesired effect in generators.  The effect was seen for what it was and not for what the observer wanted it to be, in time the effect was isolated and the result is that today we use and identify with the effect as if it were a cause.  We must learn how to engineer system magnetics, both inducing and induced so that the motor function is limited in the generator.  This is not the approach of many in this area of research.  

Present day generators are designed to amplify the motor effect, this increased opposition facilitates greater electrical output, however the downside is that more mechanical has to be provided.  In the future, typologies must be discussed where the motor effect is reduced, it will be observed that the output of such a machine will be lower owing to the reduction of the motor effect, the thing to keep in mind here is that the output of the gen of this design is based on rate of change, and not by the amount of mechanical we put on the shaft.  How the change is made is where the rubber meets the road.  It's clear that there will be induction via interactions between the rotor field and stator, but as its been stated, the output will be less than in a conventional system consisting of the same number of turns and magnet strength for the same rpm.....an alternative induction method which will operate in concert with the conventional has to be contemplated and implemented.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
2) The coil has a pretty big neo magnet smack dab inside its belly so you now have a permanent orientation of the four bar armatures that will be very difficult to change any form of polarity shifting just with the passage of the two "shorted" rotating C cores.

This layout must be seen for what it is.  In truth (mine) its identical with what we are all well versed in, the wave as far as I am interpreting it is conventional for the most part.  The significance that I place on it is that the induced wave is predominantly positive, a point which few if any have acknowledged, and this property is given to it by the orientation of the permanent magnet between the laminate stacks.  The layout is special because of the orientation of the magnet in the stator, if the rotor is spun in the opposite direction the wave should be predominantly negative.  This in my opinion, is the most important aspect of the concept being discussed.
I generate similar waves in my machines, mind you I am dealing with air core systems, I don't think we need iron.  In the future I think we may move away from ferromagnetic materials in general because we will learn that we can concentrate the fields better and faster without them.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
3) Regardless of any topology, given the fact that the copper coil has zillions of atoms, in any type of build you will always have some level of output so just because a system produces output, it does not mean it is optimal.

Geometry is paramount, knowing the exact location where the greatest opposition to change in flux is a mission I have made my own.  I design around this, and it should be clear why.  As far as atoms go......I have no experience with them.  I haven't had a need to reference and or acknowledge their existence, that being said, an acceptance of their existence or an understanding of their behavior under certain circumstances as these things may relate to what I am after has not been a researched.  

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
4) The copper coil is tightly wound mag wire so you will always have inter wind cancellation that adds to the reduction of output. You do not need many winds and layers.

That which is being called cancellation is exactly what I find is most desirable.  I find it desirable because I would like to think that in my system this cancellation facilitates the reduction and or reversal of the mechanical output of the machine, mechanical here is the negative torque associated with the electrical output of the machine.  That which we deem bad is a good thing, the sighted cancellation between turns I liken to so called attraction between magnets, I do not differentiate between the two phenomena.  

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
Coil winding is an elastic sport. Many turns and layers produces higher voltage but lower amperage because amperage can only be the number of atoms in a given length of wire that react to a given impulse. So because you want higher voltage, you wind more turns that create more cancellation that reduces the amperage but increases the voltage.

At present we relate usable current with rate of change and turns experiencing change.  The flux operating in these systems is usually radiative.   I realize that the selected term makes little sense to those versed in such matters, what I am trying to say is I feel magnetism works in two ways, one is explosive, and the other is implosive.  The one we use in our existing technology is explosive, the one I feel I evolve in my device is implosive.  In systems where implosive working magnetism is evolved, the externalization of the force is suppressed, for all intents and purpose, the outward manifestation of the force is lacking.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
Resonance point is when all those atoms that can spin, do so. If looking at a clock, you have sway where the atomic core sways anywhere between 1 minute to 29 minutes or 31 minutes to 59 minutes, swing goes anywhere from 1 minute to 59 minutes or 31 minutes to 29  minutes, and spin occurs when the pulse timing is such that the swing has enough inertia to pass the 0 minute mark and continues in the same direction. You cannot get swing from 60 hertz. This will be enough to sway or swing the atoms since it is AC so both polarity impresses are fully controlled. Wonder why the army uses 400 hertz? Since the copper wire has less fully spinable atoms, then swing atoms and less swings atoms then sway atoms, when you get up to the resonance frequencies, those less spinable atoms will spin but produce much less amperage and this explains in the physical sense why resonance outputs are more reactive, higher volts (faster spin) low amps (less atoms spinning). It is the wire itself that cannot provide any more available spinable atoms to increase the amperage and that is exactly what we see on our benches everyday since 150 years. This is not a fault in method but materials.

We see resonance very differently.  I try to approach the concept from that of the layman.  Insodoing, I have found that parallel resonance is a kind of catalyst, one which as far as I can tell requires ridged fixed values, but isn't limited to them.  Series resonance is a condition which can be simulated using parameter variation, but here only when coupled with a system which is operating from, and not necessarily within parallel resonance.  There is much we don't and by we I mean I don't understand about resonance, it is a concept which is much more involved than the textbooks lead us to believe.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.02, 22:25:50
Overunity will not be achieved by EE alone. Guys have to have touched on physics, alchemy, metallurgy, chemistry, engineering, astro physics and so many other disciplines in order to understand the vastness and the base simplicity of all the potential effects around us because each is interrelated to the atom itself. If you are stuck in Standard EE alone, it would be practically impossible for anyone to pass the mental OU threshold without major major luck.

Sorry for long post.

wattsup

As I mentioned earlier, I am not looking for overunity, eventually we will come to the realization that all the energy we want is right at our fingertips, its surges around all of our devices, the dimension of the device in question is irrelevant.  Our task is to familiarize ourselves with this thing which is and always has been available to us and yet just out of our reach.  We must establish those conditions in our systems which allows it to manifest in our systems as useable power.  In my opinion it isn't about luck, or about being disciplined in many areas its more about knowing what you want, formulating and asking the right questions, and then moving heaven and earth trying to get those answers.


Lets not do anymore posts of this length.  


Regards

http://www.google.com/patents/US3913004

This is for the layman.  If you are a layman and you aren't investigating the patent in the link, forgive me for saying it but you are unnecessarily wasting your creative energy and resources.  This patent shows us how to get to where we want to go.  There will be a few who say I'm wrong, and others will ask me to back up the statement.  I will ignore them and ask the layman to look into the patent.  Its stated 3 times that the output is higher than the input.    Fact is, they use the words that all laymen love to hear, namely...more out than in. 

"and by adding the transformer and generator voltages and amperages the wattage is correspondingly increased at the output."

"to efficiently draw 48 volts D.C. at 25 amperes or 1200 Watts to rotate at 1750 RPM; while the secondary windings 11 are comprised of a number of turns of conductor to efficiently deliver 60 cycle (by transforming and generating) 110 volts A.C. at 32 amperes or 3520 Watts"

"It will be observed that the output wattage is approximately triple the input wattage, by virtue of the synchronous superimposing"

The patent doesn't spell it all out, but its better than guessing.  It is by far the best I have seen, and is all the proof that I need that there is no conspiracy.  I realize that some on this forum are familiar with this document, I'm asking those folks and the few who aren't familiar to take another look, take a good long look because it seems the powers let this one through?


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.14, 13:23:26
The patent doesn't spell it all out, but its better than guessing.  It is by far the best I have seen, and is all the proof that I need that there is no conspiracy.  I realize that some on this forum are familiar with this document, I'm asking those folks and the few who aren't familiar to take another look, take a good long look because it seems the powers let this one through?

Would you mind clarifying what conspiracy it is that you are referring to ?

Quote from: evolvingape on 2015.01.14, 16:40:15
Would you mind clarifying what conspiracy it is that you are referring to ?

I'm neither supporting the existence of one nor denying the existence of one.  What I am saying simply is that here is a patent describing a system capable of more out than in. 


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.14, 17:02:43
What I am saying simply is that here is a patent describing a system capable of more out than in. 

I understood that clearly from your original post, thankyou, which is why it did not form any part of my question to you.

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.14, 13:23:26
The patent doesn't spell it all out, but its better than guessing.  It is by far the best I have seen, and is all the proof that I need that there is no conspiracy .  I realize that some on this forum are familiar with this document, I'm asking those folks and the few who aren't familiar to take another look, take a good long look because it seems the powers let this one through?

The statement above highlighted in red, is directly contradicted by the statement below.

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.14, 17:02:43
I'm neither supporting the existence of one nor denying the existence of one.

So, I ask you again, what conspiracy is it that you allude to that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Quote from: evolvingape on 2015.01.14, 18:02:30
I understood that clearly from your original post, thankyou, which is why it did not form any part of my question to you.

The statement above highlighted in red, is directly contradicted by the statement below.

So, I ask you again, what conspiracy is it that you allude to that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Seriously?  The patent is the focus.....

Yes, seriously..!

This thread is entitled "Critical Thinking" and not "http://www.google.com/patents/US3913004".

If you are going to make obtuse statements claiming to have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy, I will ask you what conspiracy it is that you are alluding to.

So, for the third time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Quote from: evolvingape on 2015.01.14, 19:06:48
Yes, seriously..!

This thread is entitled "Critical Thinking" and not "http://www.google.com/patents/US3913004".

If you are going to make obtuse statements claiming to have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy, I will ask you what conspiracy it is that you are alluding to.

So, for the third time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Focus on the patent. 

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.14, 19:52:31
Focus on the patent. 

You obviously do not know me very well. You do not get to decide what I do.. ever!

For the fourth time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

@Evo

QuoteYou obviously do not know me very well. You do not get to decide what I do.. ever!
For the fourth time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Why exactly would you think anyone would want to know you considering your juvenile behavior here?, your drunk right?.....

@All
Now I have seen it all, I mean I think I have completely lost faith in the human race and their ability to show anything in regards to good judgement.

Soylent
https://faq.soylent.me/hc/en-us/articles/200836809-What-is-Soylent-

My guess is that the ignorant masses have never seen nor heard of the movie Soylent Green... welcome to the future, lol.
I guess they deserve to eat white gooy shit for the rest of there lives if there that stupid and can't stop breeding and consuming like a plague of rats. Why they can all move into the cities and revel in there own closed quarters mediocrity while watching TV and playing video games and facebooking there other stupid friends. They can all get together and have a big old white goo party and talk about reality TV and other nonsensical BS that is completely irrelevant to pass the time.
Me I'm going to stay where I am in the country as far away from those stupid SOB's as humanly possible.

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.01.14, 22:31:33
Why exactly would you think anyone would want to know you considering your juvenile behavior here?, your drunk right?.....

Irrelevant question.. whether I think anyone would want to know me or not is very different from whether they do know me or not. No I am not drunk, but nice try at ad hominem attack ;)

I interpret this interruption as a distraction from the simple question I asked to Erfinder based upon his statement.

So, for the fifth time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

Quote from: evolvingape on 2015.01.15, 00:46:32
So, for the fifth time of asking, what conspiracy is it that you allude to, that you now have all the proof you need that there is no conspiracy ?

From reading the patent it would appear power amplification doesn't fall under the auspices of perpetual motion, otherwise the patent would have never been granted.

Frankly, I don't see the conspiracy aspect here unless it is a little known fact you cannot loop (make a perpetual motion machine) using amplified power.  If that be the case, someone has some explaining to do.  Erfinder...?

Gentlemen

 yes Critical thinking and  conspiracy theories do go hand in hand so perhaps a mixing of topics has presented it self here ?

I was truly looking forward to a discussion here on this Patent   _yesterday_
  as some here may Know Erfinder has been researching and building these Motors
for as long as I have been a part of these forums and frankly he's got my attention
[as well as some others I spoke with yesterday].

besides that,  we have more people and resources than we EVER had working
_Together_On these motors ,and
here we have a Motor that shows "more out than In"
and here we have a _patent_      

 this more than meets  our usual criteria for investigation.


can we perhaps discuss the motor Patent?? If it needs its own thread ,maybe we can do that and separate the discussions ...


respectfully
Chet

Dear Erfinder.

I like pictures  :) ........ they paint a thousand words !!

What stood out to me was the second image of the low frequency sine wave with its high frequency signal superimposed upon it. I have seen this so many times, here there and everywhere around the forums.

This experiment however, for me, shows the implications.  http://home.dmv.com/~tbastian/ball.htm

Am I on the right track ?

Cheers Grum.

Here is something to consider, now let's say we had a switched motor/generator and we could vary the coil geometry, switching rate/frequency etc... and other parameters in known ways. If we had 52 discrete variables or components which could be interchanged then the possible permutations or combinations would be 80,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. The ways to arrange the circuit parameters would be greater than the number of atoms on Earth.

Thus we can see all the laws we know may very well apply however the context in which they are applied, the how, when, where and why, becomes incomprehensible when the number of variables increases by even a small amount. It is a numbers game stacked against us which is why I stopped doing random experiments with no real purpose or insight. The alexander patent which I built way back when me and dad were kids is a good example and while it may look very simple the possible variations in circuit parameters quickly approaches infinity unless we know exacly what were looking for... the how, when, where and why.

So we should understand replications can be a great learning tool however unless we go into it knowing what were looking for and the precise effects we think may be required to make it work the odds of success are virtually zero. Which is why intuition and insight are so important... pick a card any card.

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.01.15, 15:41:10
Here is something to consider, now let's say we had a switched motor/generator and we could vary the coil geometry, switching rate/frequency etc... and other parameters in known ways. If we had 52 discrete variables or components which could be interchanged then the possible permutations or combinations would be 80,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. The ways to arrange the circuit parameters would be greater than the number of atoms on Earth.

Only means you are going to be pulling some really long nights in the lab....

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.01.15, 15:41:10
Thus we can see all the laws we know may very well apply however the context in which they are applied, the how, when, where and why, becomes incomprehensible when the number of variables increases by even a small amount. It is a numbers game stacked against us which is why I stopped doing random experiments with no real purpose or insight.

I stopped trying to argue with mainstream, the laws work, no one has broken the ones that matter to me yet.  As far as the incomprehensible,  I leave the numbers to the mathematicians.  The way I see it, the numbers much like the odds are against you once you sit down to the table and are dealt in.  Personally, I don't recommend gambling.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.01.15, 15:41:10
The alexander patent which I built way back when me and dad were kids is a good example and while it may look very simple the possible variations in circuit parameters quickly approaches infinity unless we know exacly what were looking for... the how,when, where and why.

You got lots of practice.  The past is the past, the question is did you learn from those past experiences.  What do you see now when you look at the document?  Do you know exactly what you are looking for now?  If so what?  If not why not?  As far as those variations of or in circuit parameters reaching infinity......  What is your point?  If I had a point to make in this regard it would be that we have never allow the circuit the room it needs to adjust to the variations we force on it.  Knowing what we want must encompass what the circuit and the forces operating in it want.  We are informed, by the circuit, and are still blind.  This must change if we are to make any real progress in this particular direction.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.01.15, 15:41:10
So we should understand replications can be a great learning tool however unless we go into it knowing what were looking for and the precise effects we think may be required to make it work the odds of success are virtually zero. Which is why intuition and insight are so important... pick a card any card.

AC

What would one be replicating if one replicated the device in the document?  The document presents a case, and claim.  An idea is preserved for posterity.  Those who desire more out than in can find support in that patent.  We find the mechanism for achieving our goal in the description.  Make no mistake a patent is designed to protect the interest of the individual or company which filed it.  That being said, its clear that a replication would result in nothing out of the ordinary.  This is not the point however, the point is the mechanism for gain is presented, it is not hidden from the reader!  We are given the how, the when, the where, and the why.  Not necessarily in that order, and not in a manner that learned and novice alike can appreciate. 

My recommendation....take a fresh look and ask yourself the question you have asked others to ask themselves, and by all means share your answer.

What are you looking for?


Regards

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 13:25:16
Dear Erfinder.

I like pictures  :) ........ they paint a thousand words !!

What stood out to me was the second image of the low frequency sine wave with its high frequency signal superimposed upon it. I have seen this so many times, here there and everywhere around the forums.

This experiment however, for me, shows the implications.  http://home.dmv.com/~tbastian/ball.htm

Am I on the right track ?

Cheers Grum.

I've only seen one individual demonstrate the wave that's shown in the patent.  To my knowledge, the individual wasn't working on a replication of this device.  That happens often.  What it means to me is that the wave form presented isn't the waveform that we want, could also mean that there is more than one way to approach all of this.  The wave as its demonstrated in the patent doesn't fit well with my idea of how superimposition is operating in this and similar devices.  The questions I asked were what exactly am I superimposing into or onto, with what, and when?  These questions are answered in the patent.

Regarding your example, I can only speak from my bench, I therefore hope it applies, it may, but I have no experience in the area so I cannot say for sure. 


Regards

I think everyone has their own intellectual ladder which they must climb at their own pace with hopes of some grand insight at the end of it. However as we climb our ladder higher and higher the ladder seems to get progressively longer and longer so I decided to take the elevator instead.

The air here is crisp and clear and one can see for what seems an eternity, the people mulling about in the haze below walking in circles and some find the ladder and make the choice to leave the haze and start climbing. They climb and climb and some fall and start over while some return to their sanctuary in the haze never to be seen again. It gets progressively harder and slower as they ascend and some are always looking back to the past while some only look forward to the future but both are equally oblivious to the fact that regardless of their direction to ascend or descend they have both chosen the same path.
I made the choice to opt out, to let go, at which point I understood there is no getting anyone off the ladder because they believe they have to much too lose, they believe they have too much invested to turn back and start over at the beginning. I have come to understand that one path or the other is no better or worse but different and one has to see the the ladder and understand the scale of it before we see the futility in it. You have to opt out and let go before the door appears then it's as easy as pushing the button and enjoying the ride.
To each his own... .

AC

I was reading through this thread again and if I had to sum it up in a few words the only ones that come to mind are absolute incoherence. I mean when I read the posts and the responses there is no cohesion, no methodology only miscellaneous ramblings which have no progression in any sense of the word. It is like taking all the letters of the alphabet and putting them in a box and shaking them up and spilling them on the floor and expecting some grand insight to reveal itself.

So I will start at the beginning in hopes some of this makes sense to someone, who are you, what are you?. I understand this makes no sense but if you have no sense of your place in the universe then your basically screwed before you have even started, your hooped. What are you?, you have no idea nor what I'm talking about do you?. Let's put it this way, if we got rid of our body and oxygenated our blood with a machine to keep our brain functions working would you still be alive?, well yes you would be alive but you wouldn't have a body. Thus the body is not us it is an organic automation... a living machine.

Now what if we removed our senses then what?, your now a head with no eyes or ears but are you alive?, well yes because we are not those things we have removed we must be what's left. So that peculiar something we think is "us" must be inside our noggin somewhere should it not but where?. if we look deeper we find "we" are electrical impulses firing between cells called neurons in our brain which we refer to as our consciousness. All that we have ever seen, all our memories and thoughts and feelings are stored as differential charged states in these cells as an electrical network, we are electric, we are that charged space between what we call something.

I mean you, what you are is so fucking awesome and incomprehensible it defies the imagination and yet we consider ourselves as normal. Normal, Normalcy, the art of reducing the magnificent, the artistic, the creative to just another garden variety animal trying to survive. Know every piece of you is bound to everything in the universe, every part of you came from somewhere else way the hell out there in the cosmos, we are star stuff. There is nothing normal about you in an sense of the word and any degenerate half-wit who tries to tell you any different obviously doesn't have a god damn clue what there talking about.

This is your starting point, understanding your place in the universe and how you fit into the big picture.... all that stuff you see way up there on a calm, clear night. You are not separate from it and every part of you came from way out there. Every star in the cosmos infuses every particle in existence with energy and this energy is us. Those minute electrical impulses firing in an infinitely small space between those particles forming atoms, forming molecules, which we call cells is us, our mind, our consciousness, our being.

We , you, what we are is so god damn magnificent and awesome it defies description, it defies the imagination and if you believe any different then I do not think you have considered all the facts.

AC

Allcanadian

So what is the purpose of this thread ? I know I'm not the body I'm looking in the mirror, what next ? Can we focus on finding solutions ?

@forest

QuoteSo what is the purpose of this thread ? I know I'm not the body I'm looking in the mirror, what next ? Can we focus on finding solutions ?

Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally. It includes the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking.

Let's think clearly and rationally--you are not just another piece of meat, an object, and every piece of you came from the cosmos and every part of you is jiggling about and moving at the speed of light. It's not enough to say we understand because obviously we do not understand because we cannot comprehend it. There is no solidity in you or anything else and our level of observation, what we think we see, is for the most part a complete fabrication of our mind.

Consider what we know, we know when we use a microscope the closer we look the less we see. Everything we think we know is 99% empty space and yet if we use the alter ego to a microscope, a telescope, we find that all that empty space way out there is not empty but full of trillions of galaxies. The first insight we must embrace is that nothing is truly real and nothing is as it seems in reality, it is an illusion. I mean it is very strange that we know everything we see is simply a cloud of particles jiggling at the speed of light an yet we cannot comprehend it nor can we truly believe it.

I know everyone says they can believe it but the moment they walk away from their computer everything will become normal again so obviously they do not truly believe it nor have they embraced it. Normal is not normal, normal is denial, normal is believing something we know is not fundamentally true. What I did was simply to accept these facts and incorporate them into my life, into my way of thinking to establish a new normal. My normal is seeing everything as clouds of particles of differing density jiggling at the speed of light in a universe seething with energy on every level.

The first step is recognizing that we think we understand but we don't, ie.. critical thinking, because we will not believe what we already know. At which point we could address your question, " Can we focus on finding solutions?". Solutions... what solutions are you referring to?... there are no workable solutions. Playing with magnets and wires and switches to try to build something you obviously do not understand is not a solution to anything. I mean it may be a solution to that debt in your bank account if you succeed but even if you did manage to build something that works nobody would truly believe anything you have done or said anyways. What will happen is the crowd will beat you down to their level of thinking to retain some sense of normalcy. There are no real solutions that work because it has literally nothing to do with a simple machine it has to do with changing the way people think and what they believe.

I mean the whole god damn scenario really sucks, Hey look I finally understand how the universe works !.... but if I build something extraordinary it amounts to giving a three year old a photon cannon capable of vaporizing the neighbors house. Change must start within and work it's way outward, that is the way nature works, inward outward. If you have any doubts just watch the news for a few hours until the reality of what you are seeing sets in. You see all those wonderful people?, if you push them hard enough they are going to burn you at the stake as a witch. That is the unfortunate reality we happen to live in for the moment but I believe it can change, the how and why I'm not so sure of.

The purpose of this thread is to think clearly and rationally and engage in reflective and independent thinking. If you want to talk about coils of wire and magnets or patents this is not the place.

AC

[/quote]
I mean the whole god damn scenario really sucks, Hey look I finally understand how the universe works !.... but if I build something extraordinary it amounts to giving a three year old a photon cannon capable of vaporizing the neighbors house. Change must start within and work it's way outward, that is the way nature works, inward outward. If you have any doubts just watch the news for a few hours until the reality of what you are seeing sets in. You see all those wonderful people?, if you push them hard enough they are going to burn you at the stake as a witch. That is the unfortunate reality we happen to live in for the moment but I believe it can change, the how and why I'm not so sure of.

[/quote]

AC, I couldn't agree with you more.

I suppose to some extent its your perspective too,when we watch the news
I believe a good portion is meant to put and keep us in the above state of mind.
Fearful....   fearful of each other and our differences .

however When I actually go out and meet and great my neighbors shake hands and talk about whats important . yes I hear the above [Fear} but there is also something else........
and it really doesn't matter what neighborhood or what nationality or Race religion etc etc
[i Live in NYC area, one of the most diverse places on the planet.]

I've worked /volunteered in the worst places with the Worst people[worse than me !:'} ,,,what I've found is
if I stay on the couch and listen to the TV and news, that's the only perspective I'll have
If I read another mans Words or books ,again I get mostly his or her perspective.
get out into the world ,in some small way in _Person_ somewhere have a purpose to
make the change you want in the world,  meet and greet and press the flesh.

I guarantee you will be quite surprised just how much we all want the same things.
regardless of race, color ,nationality  or beliefs.

the real world is NOT on television..


respectfully
Chet

Chet,

You make very good points!

It is truly amazing to discover that the people all over
this World at the lower levels of economic advantage
really want and crave the same basic things.

As a young Seaman in the U.S. Navy exploring the various
ports and countries of Asia many years ago that realization
came to me very quickly.  Yes, even then, we Americans had
been 'brainwashed' to believe that the U.S.A. was exceptional
and that we were 'the best' in all things.  Needless to say, for
me at least, this feeling of 'exceptionalism' vanished as I came
to appreciate and love my brothers and sisters of the Human
Family in those distant lands.  Their way of life was much different
than the typical American way but it was fascinating to experience
as was the character of the peoples in each place.

It was a long while later that I discovered how rotten and corrupted
the society is at the highest levels of government, politics, business,
finance and justice.  What desires and craves to be at the top of the
pyramid with its privileges, power and wealth is truly evil.

For many who are 'locked' in the bubble of the Matrix as they're spoon
fed their daily doses of propaganda and pleasure via the 'system' waking
up and breaking out is a near impossible task.  Those who've come to
depend upon what the system offers as their reality and their joy are
content to be where they are.  Those who've attained some measure of
success in the 'illusion of the American Dream' find it very hard to let go.

Biting the hand of their master (waking up to the lies and deceptions)
is far removed from their list of potential activities.

The answer is blowin in the wind.

I was doing my yearly google of "Down Wind Faster Than the Wind" articles because there so damn funny and found some responses which seemed reminiscent of some of the responses I see in the forums. For instance....
http://www.skepticblog.org/2010/05/27/sailing-directly-downwind%E2%80%A6-faster-than-the-wind/

QuoteAndy Clitheroe says:
June 3, 2010 at 9:48 am
"saying that this is enough to keep the speed of the vehicle above the speed of the wind is akin to saying that the vehicle is capable of driving when there is *no* wind."

Actually no and to assume such a thing is about as absurd and unscientific as supposing that a free energy device must somehow get something from nothing. Now let's read the quote again until we can see the fantastic leap of faith this supposedly rational person has made. It helps if we break the statement down.

1) saying that this is enough to keep the speed of the vehicle above the speed of the wind
2) saying that the vehicle is capable of driving when there is *no* wind

Now how in the hell could any intelligent person assume a vehicle moving faster than the wind is just like a vehicle capable of moving in no wind?. Ah but we have heard all this before however we must put it into the proper context in which case an analogy may be in order.

Wind -- Faster than the wind must be equivalent to moving in no wind.
Energy-- Extra energy must be equivalent to energy from no energy.

In each case the the critic's mind has taken a blind leap of faith that anything extra they do not understand must come from nothing, why is this?. I mean they claim they know we cannot get something from nothing and yet the moment they see something they obviously do not understand they state it must come from nothing which they know cannot be true. As if to say if I see something I do not understand then it must be due to something I know cannot be true. Uhm... if there only explanation is something they know cannot be true then why would they believe what they are saying?. It would seem to be the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard and they have contradicted everything they say they believe.

I believe this relates to narcissistic personality disorder which has become rampant in society and moreso on the internet and is characterized by self-empowerment through a lack of consideration or empathy for others. Not unlike the statement -- If your not with us then your against us, which is extreme in it's nature as it leaves absolutely no room for doubt as doubt invokes a deeply rooted fear of the unknown. Which is not unlike some of the people here saying no person may make a claim without proof preferably by multiple independent third parties. No you cannot say those words even if they are true and even if you have proof because it may contradict my beliefs and that is unacceptable according to me. In my opinion this is essentially narcissism 101 disguised as logic and reason even if it is quite apparent there is little reasonable about it and it is in fact an extreme viewpoint. It is extreme because it always digresses towards a singular perspective leaving absolutely no room for doubt, It cannot be true unless you prove it to me because the know universe revolves around me, lol.

It boggles the mind how something so completely screwed up could somehow be considered the norm when it is anything but normal in my opinion, how did we get to this strange place?.

AC

How did we as a World Society get to this very
strange place?

Study the attachments and compare their
advocated plans and techniques to the
events which have taken place in our World
for the past several decades.

We have gotten to this strange place because
it was essential to those who actually control
this Planet.