Batteries and New Battery Technologies

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by CDK

Yes
Absolute nonsense.

Are you a god, to be able to say, never ?
It is the least i can say, about using, always, and, never, in science.
Did you study in deep, and prototyped yourself, O.U solutions, to be so certain it is nonsense ?

I guess, You did not studied O.U solutions.
I guess, you never prototyped any.

CDK, don't you think a wiser attitude, would rather be, to study, and try, before coming to a NO, or nonsense conclusion, about O.U ?

Originally Posted by CDK

Has not been possible in the past, isn't possible now and will never be in the future. Anybody with just some basic knowledge of thermodynamics knows why.

Ok, let's do some maths and physics, will you ?
www.halexandria.org/dward154.htm



2LT is the universal law that make any O.U industrial jobs impossible ?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb2kBFqrZx8&feature=player_embedded

Arguing O.U are impossible :-), as O.U are not industrial, is a great clue !

Steve started Apple as poor as Job with 1.300$
//imagesbible.com/ANGLAIS/ANG_FICHES/Ang_poor_Job.htm

Arguing O.U are just "garage" amateur devices is a joke that would certainly make Steve Jobs smile a lot.
www.theapplemuseum.com/index.php?id=49

ZPE is universe field
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

ZPE is Open, nothing is violated.
//jnaudin.free.fr/teptheo/teptheo.htm

2LT is ok for over unity orgasm !
//www.steorn.com/news/releases/

CDK...O.U is real Bomb ! Don't you think ?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=48waPFTXJvY
Only from the "pure fusion bomb" side approach, of course.
Hopefully, do not exist yet :-))

[Dave Gudeman]

Kistinie, free energy violates the first law of thermodynamics as well as the second.

Also, as I have said on this thread before, the argument about closed systems is a red herring. The system is just what the experimenter sets up. It makes no sense to say "this reaction is an open system". Any reaction at all can be treated as a closed system. All that means is that you isolate it from the environment.

[kistinie]

Dave
How do you explain all mathematical proof of O.U ?
How do you explain all working devices all over the world ?

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

When the flywheel was set on either end, it rolled down the slope and up the other (identical) slope on the other end, where it slammed into the far end and spun in place for a second or so until it stopped and headed the other way. Not only perpetual motion, but excess energy as well.

Lance, If you would do that trick in vacuum, you may have a chance that it will go on and on forever. The problem is, as soon you connect something to this vacuum "source of energy", you will have friction and then it will be the end of it. I still remember that University Stellenbosch had a flywheel running in vacuum, but it still needed energy to bring it at full speed.

[CDK]

Originally Posted by BertKu

The 3 x 12 cells is for your 12 Volt, 2 Ampere system, I assume. What current rating would you guess, can the interconnections handle? Love to know this.

Bert

There are 2 straps, each 2,5x0,1 mm from an alloy known as German silver.
Fusing current according to "Reference data for radio engineers" from McGraw-Hill is 29,4 Amps.

An autopsy on a 2N3055 will reveal an emitter tie with 2 prongs of the same size, so 15 Amps it can withstand indefinitely.

[SaltOntheBrain]

BertKu,

The guy in Oklahoma claims his microprocessor and polarity switches use only 5 watts of the power produced by his unit. It does require a battery and starter to get it up to speed, but he claims it will run indefinitely once started.

I'm not making any claims, just wanted to have a discussion.

Lance.

[kistinie]

Lance, What you talk about is a MEG or EASER.
This is also done in France, but here, the subject is quite unpopular.

http://www.byronwine.com/files/plans.pdf

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by SaltOntheBrain

BertKu,

The guy in Oklahoma claims his microprocessor and polarity switches use only 5 watts of the power produced by his unit. It does require a battery and starter to get it up to speed, but he claims it will run indefinitely once started.

I'm not making any claims, just wanted to have a discussion.

Lance.

Hi Lance,
Now let see whether I have it right. Somehow this guy has some metal and some windings. We call it an electric motor. On this "motor" he couples a generator. He start with the battery this "motor" by switching the polarities. The generator generates energy, which let the "motor" run by switching with the microprocessor the polarities.

Boy, will he be rich if he ask for every demonstration 10 dollars. But whether the automotive industry will be able to put this into an electric car and pay him a fortune for his invention is to be seen.

It reminds me to the guy who sold: "THE BEST COAT HANGER IN THE WORLD , 5 Dollar" , when you placed an order and paid your 5 dollars, you got a nail in the post, with a note: TAKE WITH LEFT THUMB AND FINGER THE NAIL, find a hammer and hammer with right hand the nail into the wall. YOU HAVE THE BEST COATHANGER.

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by CDK

There are 2 straps, each 2,5x0,1 mm from an alloy known as German silver.
Fusing current according to "Reference data for radio engineers" from McGraw-Hill is 29,4 Amps.

An autopsy on a 2N3055 will reveal an emitter tie with 2 prongs of the same size, so 15 Amps it can withstand indefinitely.

That is very good news. It means that we indeed could get some more power out of the solarpanel without to be worried about burning the interconnections. Like I said CDK, a reflector is damm cheaper than a second solar panel. And also lighter. Yes, you need more area space.
But what about the modern , latest manufacturered panels. Do you think it will be the same?

What is the average wattage of the today's mass production manufactured solarpanel per m2 180 watt?, 160 watt? at midday and bright sunshine.
Bert

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by BertKu

Hi Lance,
Now let see whether I have it right. Somehow this guy has some metal and some windings. We call it an electric motor. On this "motor" he couples a generator. He start with the battery this "motor" by switching the polarities. The generator generates energy, which let the "motor" run by switching with the microprocessor the polarities.

Boy, will he be rich if he ask for every demonstration 10 dollars. But whether the automotive industry will be able to put this into an electric car and pay him a fortune for his invention is to be seen.

It reminds me to the guy who sold: "THE BEST COAT HANGER IN THE WORLD , 5 Dollar" , when you placed an order and paid your 5 dollars, you got a nail in the post, with a note: TAKE WITH LEFT THUMB AND FINGER THE NAIL, find a hammer and hammer with right hand the nail into the wall. YOU HAVE THE BEST COATHANGER.

Meg means ....motion less
Don't you have the impression to be a little out of the subject ?

[BertKu]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Don't you have the impression to be a little out of the subject ?

No, explain it to me how it works. (sorry for the little joke, afterwards, please ignore) that is what I am after. But explain it to me in simple terms.

Does it has to do with the energy which comes free when a coil is switched off very fast, and is this energy used to carry on switching forward's and backward's??

[kistinie]

Yes you are right

The trick is to play on the back EMF hysteresis with triggered diodes.
Same on a Steorn motor were you play on this hysteresis of magnetic viscosity.

But this been said the real problem is that these machines impact the human spirit and unless you have a good spiritual anchorage, you will suffer a lot using them, as digging in Aether or dark energy with KW class devices is producing heavy diffractions to our spirit.

This aspect of physics is rather black listed, so i guess the best to do, is to answer to this i'm an idiot. No problemo, we are free to beleive what we feel right. Just be careful when testing, start with low power devices and in case of problem like electrosensitivity ask for help to a Reiki terrapist or any Lama or shaman or maybe EMDR terapist.

Regards

[Dave Gudeman]

Originally Posted by kistinie

Dave
How do you explain all mathematical proof of O.U ?
How do you explain all working devices all over the world ?

Kistinie, I've never seen a mathematical proof of O.U. so I can't comment on it.

As to the "working devices", as I'm sure you are aware, skeptics deny that there are any working devices. Of course we can't prove that there are no working devices, but we shouldn't have to prove it. It is up to the people making a positive claim to prove their side and no one has demonstrated any free-energy or over-unity device to my satisfaction or to the satisfaction of hardly any working physicists, engineers, or professional technology investors.

Look, I am a long way from a hardened scientific dogmatist. I have spent quite a bit of effort studying the history and philosophy of science and from that study I've concluded that enormous stretches of "settled" science are ill-founded. Besides that, I love science fiction and from an early age I have been conditioned to expect miraculous new scientific discoveries that will enable cheap energy, anti-gravity, faster-than-light travel, energy shields, and the other staples of SF (but not time travel, the idea of time travel is fundamentally confused).

I am willing to consider possible new sources of energy. Maybe dipping into another universe for energy or finding a way to convert matter directly into energy or something like that. But just because I'm skeptical of science, that does not mean that I'm not skeptical of anyone who claims to overthrow respected scientific theories. For a supposed invention to even be worth considering, it has to pass some basic credibility tests. For one thing the inventor is going to have to have a good foundation in modern physics or engineering because if such an invention is possible, it certainly is not simple. For another, a demonstration will have to be set up in a way to rule out obvious cheats.

I've yet to see a demonstration that passed these basic credibility tests.

[kistinie]

Originally Posted by Dave Gudeman

Kistinie, I've never seen a mathematical proof of O.U. so I can't comment on it.

Dave thank for your calm and remaining open. Serenity is a real gift in life.
May be i can help a little in this search for other solutions we seem to share ?

This one about MEG
http://jnaudin.free.fr/teptheo/teptheo.htm

This one about Steorn Orbo motor
http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm#EMF

And of course, even if it is far from new

Les annales de la fondation Louis de Broglie, volume 16, N°1, 1991
By TW Barret
About Tesla's nonlinear oscillator shuttle circuit theory (OSC) (P23 to 41)


About "garage" O.U prototypes, you may like this one, very acceptable as cop<1, but so close to 1 it is a good candidate for a gentleman discussion between pro and cons of O.U.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/ossiemotor/indexen.htm


Have you also given a look to studies about Matter-Spirit links ?
This study from Paris 6/7 Jussieu university is in this spirit. (Sorry in french)
http://www.ldi5.com/phys/psyche%20quantique.php

[kistinie]

Dave

This study of the Bedini machine by Evans is also very interesting