Steve

I think that it is not about massive amounts of hho gas you should look for.
It more about the type of isotopes of gas.
Bonding h1 with neutrons for example
More mass is more energy
Or browns gas with lots of monotomic ions....
As joe stated of the joe cell....he stated that the gas was more explosive when the power was off.....

Overunity

When  a solar cell is irradiated with sunlight, we can measure the amount of  watts generated
and  the efficiency.   If we measure the amount of light absorbed, the increase in temperature
the amount of electricity produced etc. ,we can determine its efficiency which is about 20%

When we talk about over unity devices,  a similar comparison may be occurring.
We theorize about the  source of this extra energy but we are not really sure of its origin.
Is the device tuning into the  energy of  neutrinos  or dark matter vibrations, quantum
vibrations or charges, or some other undiscovered source and converting it into electricity.

I think if we imagine the universe  as a box with everything contained within it
by definition  all the energy is equal to the mass and  square of the velocity of its expansion

Thank you, Jim.
I think that there are options to channel some of the energy towards certain systems, like the AC power that we are using.
We use magnets, wind or water or nuclear power togehter.
Meyer , Horvath and Anderson used the power of neutron accelerators in a waterbath to add neutrons to hydrogen atoms in a certan way that the outcome of energy was higher then the proces of creation took.

I am following the magnet motor , the muller dynamo etc etc systems for years. I even build one 8 years ago.
But after doing some study of people who studied Leeds Kalnin i figured some things out.
I ordered some parts. The setup is crazy simple. No Lenz law troubles.
You see, as soon as you are confronted with the LAWS of physics then you can forget it. No OU.
But as soon as you find a way around these laws, the world opens towards OU.
I am convinced that some other inventors already figured out work arounds for certain law of physics.
Laws of physics are just a description of fenomenons from nature.


cheers!

Is there a technic that alows Overunity? More power out then in?
I ll gues you all seen a lot of vidoe,s and perhaps also did a lot of research yourself.
On school, they tell that it is not possible. And i understand that they think like that.
However, the world is more complicated then that.

What are your idea,s on Overunity? We seen lot of un replicatable devices claiming OU....
Your comments please.

cheers
Steve

Answer for  patent series 302807

 xx/yyyyyy format
 
a search for patent series 6/302807 brings up US Pat 4613304A

I hope that you can continue searching for this patent, Jim. I think it will clarify a lot about the basic technic of Stan....

cheers!

I hope that you can help here, Jim.
You have all kinds of detective qualifications....

Please help to find the genisis patent of Meyer.
It will shine a light on a lot i think.

Thanks
Steve

Thanks and i will, as soon as i have it...

anybody?

Does anybody have this patent?
patent application, filed, Sept. 16, 1981, U.S. Ser. No. 302,807, for Hydrogen Generator, a hydrogen gas generating system

If so, please share it with me.
Thanks!

Steve

Let us consider the case of two platinum electrodes dipped in dilute sulphuric acid solution. When a small potential difference is applied across the electrodes, no current is found to flow. When, however, the applied voltage is increased, a time comes when a temporary flow of current takes place. The H+ ions move towards the cathodes and O- ions move towards the anode and are absorbed there. These adsorbed ions have a tendency to go back into the electrolytic solution, thereby leaving them as oppositely-charged electrodes. This tendency produces an emf that is in opposition to the applied voltage which is consequently reduced.
"This opposing emf which is produced in an electrolyte due to the absorption of gaseous ions by the electrolyte from the two electrodes is known as the back emf of electrolysis or polarization."

The value of this back emf is different from different electrolytes. The minimum voltage required to decompose an electrolyte is called the decomposition voltage for that electrolyte.

I just want to bring up what I see as the main difference in the alternator vs the EPG when it comes to producing power and efficiencies..   We will never get fully way from the counter electromotive force.. But we can work to get rid of a good amount of CEMF while maintaining the same power out.. The goal of any generator is to create strong fluxuating B fields within the loops of coils.. You cannot create a rotor on a armature that has strong fluxuating magnetic fields within the loop because the loop obstructs the ability of a iron material to pass through.. So Stan came up with a way to get strong fluxing magnetic material to pass through the loops without the need of a rotor/armature by using a tubular passage to carry strong B field generating materials like iron.  So now if we think about the alternator and what the purpose of a stator core is.. i think we can consider it a magnetic field amplifier.. it allows the rotors magnetic field to induce the needed strong magnetic field fluxuations in the center of the pickup coils.. the stator core carries an excess of CEMF to be able to work. so a stator core style generator has the inherent problem of how it goes about in getting strong B field fluxuations into the center of the pickup coils.

 If you read stans EPG patent and look into the reference patents you will see a patent from batelle where they created a unit a lot like a EPG but it used solid magnetic spheres being passed through a tube with pickup coils and the magnetic spheres are being propelled by air.

There are people claiming that Meyer was using the bemf.....not blocking it....

I get all 3 fields from the right hand rule and relativity.

You can get magnetism, static electric field, and inductive field (EM wave field) from the right hand rule, it's a polarization of gravitational waves, the gravitational waves make up every elementary particle and produce interference and this is the polarization that is the magnetic field, from the magnetic field you can get all the other fields, I haven't bothered with weak force and nuclear force because these fields are still not detailed  but since there is a gravity field, magnetic field, electric field, electromagnetic wave field a.k.a induction explained with this a unified field theory is possible. Superluminal magnetic field is also possible and it present everyday but it cannot be measured, it is true that magnetic flux lines are imaginary but these are the most real at the same time as the other two field static electric field and inductive electric field depends only on the relative movement of particles but the polarization is the same. In this model every particle has two QM states which describe the gravitational wave from the schrodinger equation instead of probability waves. you just replace probability with energy, the problem is that particles are said to have one qm state not two qm states, it's like combining every damn section of physics together, I ain't getting no money to do it so this hasn't been utilized, I'm sure no one will understand what I'm talking about , this demands an enormous amount of visualization and I still haven't finished with the proofs for everything. Motherfuckers are getting paid to do phds for more useless shit, I can't even get funding for some chemicals I'm developing in this corrupt shithole country, this has nothing to do with free energy, there's no such thing as free energy, you can only convert between energy, you cant get 1 from 0! I only made this post because I've already posted some shit here about this but I was wrong about the Y component for the lorrentz contraction, it was really a simple mechanism which can only be realized when observing how the interference patterns move. You can however make an advanced magnetic bottle with this so yay fusion reactors! 

Imagine rotating dots on a circle, the dots are the polarization points, when a particle moves on the X axis because of relativity the dots on one side expand due to lorrentz tranformation and the dots on the other side contract, because the dots move to the top Y side the dots gain a Y component velocity, so there is a) rotation of the dots (STATIC ELECTRIC FIELD)  b)when the particle moves the dots expand so the polarization is either more intense or less intense on one side (MOTIONAL MAGNETIC FIELD) c) when the particle accelerates the dots keep contracting or expanding and the dots move to the Y sides there is a Y component velocity (EM waves/induction)  this relativistic effect  happens for every speed v of the particle small or big

The electron spin model is entirely correct, they say the electron cant spin at speed c because the field must exceed the speed of light c but this model is correct for the energy of the electron and the energy of the gravitational waves which comprise the electron, the flux lines are the polarizations of positive and negative components of gravitational waves , can exceed speed of light c but can never be measured in our universe. The flux line is the only thing that can move higher than speed c without violating any physics law! There are no static fields as the waves keep moving , we cannot measure them as outside observers so they are only static to us until the particles start moving, this is also a relativistic phenomenon, the matter is either condensed or expanded and other matter wants to either fill or remove itself from the region so it moves to cancel everything out and reach equilibrium, the moment the last elementary particle stops moving it will be the death of our universe.


Ampere correctly assumed the flux lines as the prime mover of all fields, the solutions for the paradoxes of electromagnetism are ill-conceived only to agree with the current fashion so uni teachers can keep their fat pockets filling with cash, it's corruption everywhere.

Geon, thats an iteresting theory you have there....

First, I'm compared to a troll at ou, second I'm told by the admin of the forum I founded violent people will be removed from a forum I created shortly before you was a part of it Stevie, don't forget I gave you this forum that I was paying to host just after I started getting death threats. If this is the way you feel of me here, then please click the admin button that removes me from this forum! My post was in no way offensive as I included It was a j/k clearly in my post. This is disrespectful at its best, so feel free to ban me from this site I named and founded since you feel these ways about me.

Brian, did you see the sunnglasses in my post? It was a joke....
I would never remove you here.
Friends for life.

Fact check;

Let's assume we have a vertical inductor glued to a table top. Let's assume I connect the bottom inductor lead to the positive terminal of a battery, and the top terminal inductor lead to the negative terminal of the same battery, what pole field would the top of the bar be, and what pole field would the bottom of the bar be?

Please don't cheat and go assemble this, or test a inductor laying next to you. Please use the current knowledge you have on hand. If you're unable to do this in your head that's ok, just be honest and say I don't know without actually testing this. This thread posted here is a very sensitive post so please follow the requested rules, if this is done correctly there will be a reward for a number of members here.

And please each contributing member end your post/reply with a definition for the words oppose, and then initial. Thank you!

It would be very kind of you when you made a youtube of the coil test....
Just to teach us and because i dont have the time and access to my lab....
As said, my new job is too far from my home, so i stay not at home during the week....
I try to get some lab stuf over...but till then....no change...

We have two ways to generate an electrical potential.  One way is inductive, in which a magnetic field expands through a conductor.  (Or contracts).
The other way uses a motional field, in which a wire and a magnetic field move relative to each other, with flux cutting through the wire, or visa versa.

So does the Right Hand Rule apply in both situations?

Friction also produces a potential difference.....

Okay guys, what is your deal here? Now I'm getting violant! Lol j/k foreal, why are there no participates here on the questions I've ask?

Violent persons are removed from this forum....

B, i have a new job since 4 months.....I work day and night...Sorry for not having time here...

Hello Steve, it looks like it locks to whatever signal it receives, since the opamp and the diodes converts the signal to square wave.
Just need to be pulsed signal.

In my opinion it is just another FAS device... (Fake as $H..)

 

Hahahahaha....FAS....

The PLL is connected to the wfc alone.
It is not including the coil.
I have planned to build this device. Just ordered the parts, so wish me luck and i hope it adjusts to something it sees and senses when i play with bemf pulses into the wfc...

Can somebody explain how this circuit of DL is sensing what to do?

Thank you

Thats where it all started with.........
A motor and an alternator with a cell.

Look good again

We dont see anything, yet.....
There is no attachement, B....

It looks like that most of the members are hanging backwards.........
I know that this technology is one of the long breath....

We need builders. I need an engine....