Has Over Unity been achieved by anyone on this board?

[importfanatik]

[mrgalleria]

[waterbard]

Bob, wishing you a speeding healing. You will get no hugs and kisses from me, but 3 pats on the back, and a 'wishing you good health'.

I thought I would lift the proverbial leg on this subject of over unity.

We are trying to use little energy, to release big energy, right? Where is this big energy? Imagine there are two big rocks. One rock is on top of a 100 ft cliff, and the other same sized rock is below. With the top rock, we can expend little energy, by pushing it over the cliff, and mucho energy will be released as it edges over. What is the rock at the bottom of the cliff doing... Anything? What is the potential of that rock in respect of getting it on the top of the cliff?

I have been putting much thought on energy in general. I think about electrolysis, and how maybe, we are still stuck in the mindset of trying to haul that bottom rock to the top of the cliff, so we can see it release energy, kinda like some of these wahoos that build 'tesla coils' to watch them spark the shit outta anything in a 10ft radius. Takes much energy.

I am lazy. I just want to push rocks over the cliff all day. I don't wanna have to haulem back. I want the rocks to haul themselves back.

[olympios]

In the developement of any device, there is always the factor called "money" involved (unfortunately). Even the ones that say they will develop this and that, and make it public, when the time comes they say "hell, no. I'll be rich soon!!!" Sure. Look how rich Stanley Meyer and bunch of other inventors are! They own a 3x6 estate in a nice cemetery, lol.
I know, we honestly, are not after money... but we are! Every one I know working with hydroxy production, the only thing they care is how to make one and have it installed on their car!!! Here in the question: How much are you gonna save by installing one? The average american spends about $1,500 a year for gasoline. An electrolyzer, like the ones we know of today, will cost you over $1,000 to make, considering that everything has to be done in a trial and error basis, as there aren't any manufacturers of such devices yet. Next, the installation process will be done the same way. Trial and error. Have you checked the prices on carb or fuel injection systems for propane conversions? They go up to $6,000. What about the engine treatments (cylinders, valves, exhaust system). Car engines are not made to work with water, and they will rust extremely soon. So, where is the savings? By the time you make-up the difference (in quite a few years), your car is gonna be old and will need to be replaced. I don't think the engines will last as long as the gasoline powered ones.
"So", you gonna ask, "what are you insinuating, forget everything and go watch tv?" No, not at all! I have been cntinuously working on hydroxy production for almost two years. I haven't done any better that any of these people here in this forum, but I have concentrated all my efforts and experiments in the developent only. I never thought about installing one in my car, for many reasons, as I described above. None of these units are good enough to be installed on a car engine, and the total cost of conversion will be so high that makes them "not cost effective". Put one and one together and you will see that it will be chipper to use gasoline even at $3.50 a gallon.
I do not know what overunity means, I even looked it up in the dictionary and there isn't such thing listed in there. Who cares anyway? You can take the word "over" (as someone else did), and conect it with any other word and make a new one up! E.g: overwater, overcar, overbike, overenergy, overunity(!!!)...bla, bla, and give it any meaning you want.
Anyway, this is what I suggest: Lets forget the installation of these units on a car, and lets concentrate and spend time only on the developement. We know that some people have done it (at list we think it is true, I do), but they kept it secret. If we use our imagination and try different things, we will have possitive results. Remember, what Tesla did, he did it all by himself. He did not have internet to exchange ideas with thousands of other inventors. We do! All inventions came out of some stupid idea. Stupid because it was impossible, but the stupid idea turned out to be a great invention. A thousand brains can accomplish a lot more than just one brain. You may have a stupid idea that doesn't lead anywhere, but when you tell a friend about that, he may have the second part done but was missing what you just told him.
Anyway, for the past year or so, I am working with resonant frequencies. I have a freq generator which can manually produce freqs from 1hz up to several Ghz. It is one of them freq gens used in Rife machines. The out-put is only 5v and few mAMP but just for experimental purposes, it will do.
Dissassociation of water starts at about 50hz and continues at same pace, up to 5Mhz or more, as I haven't tested past that point. Duty cycle must be as close to 95% as possible, eventhough results seem to be the same after 75% (maybe because of the limitation of the out-put). Also, the freq gen has a second channel, where you can set it to, say, 1Mhz and use a pulsed freq of... 100hz from the other channel, to modulate that 1Mhz freq. I haven't got that far yet, I will soon.
Here is an idea: What if we attach electromagnets on the electrolyzer's plates and pulse them with different freqs? What will that do? Who knows, maybe nothing, or maybe... something. If any of you is an expert in electromagnets, try that and I will too.

[glenn_aircooled]

Olympios I will disagree on the " should not attach to car " idea.
Mine is only 7.2 A making probably only about 0.6 L per min but
it is still worth connected to my car.
Saving 6 % cost of fuel.
Motor runs cooler, smoother.
Can get as good performance on cheap Low octane 92 with Hyd/Oxy
as I could on High Octane 98 without.
Yes it may speed up rusting of my exhaust - doesnt worry me, I will
purchase stainless system if it does.
But my experimenting continues, I have already begun a better electrolyser
and begun electronics development.
By the way; I really think that nnn___nnn___nnn pulses with pauses is the
way to go. Also using inductors ( ok I'm a Meyers student) is a test worth doing.

[waterbard]

You have to be kinda careful on what car engine you apply a hydroxy booster. Older cars were a no-nonsense 'internal-combustion' Where you had an explosion in the piston chamber. I have worked on a family friend's minvan with a nissan 3L V6, and fuel doesn't explode in the chamber at all. It slowly ignites. If there were an actual explosion in the chamber, it would cause severe damage to the engine.

I haven't hooked up a booster at all to vehicle, but when that time comes, I feel more comfortable loading it up on my trusty pontiac 389 cui rather either one of my late model cars. 10.5:1 compression also helps.

So, just do some research on what type of engine you are putting this on, and don't assume anything, and happy boosting.

[olympios]

Glenn, hi.
I always respected peoples opinions. If you think a 6% savings is good, then fine with me. Also, we can say that savings is just a minor part, the major part is the experience.
As far as the inductors, I agree with you. Like I said above, any idea is a great idea when it comes to testing the unknown.
The nnn___nnn___nnn pulses is something we have to research. I can use different patterns with my freq gen but my limitation is the low output. I have to find an electronic circuit that will allow input from freq gen and amplify it to higher voltage and amperage. I will need some help on this. If anyone has any suggestions or a circuit or something, please let me know.

[glenn_aircooled]

Olympios , I probably underestimate the value of my reactor,
but I would expect materials would be $100 and labour 30 Hrs.
I guess writing it out......if I got paid my hourly wage rate that
would make $730, so you are fairly correct. But yes the trial and error
part when learning is right, I stuffed up my design on the first
cell and am fixing that on the second.
So economically I would be way behind if I wanted to recoupe my costs.
6% of $1500 = $90.............about 15 Years.....unless the new one suddenly
saves a lot more.
------------
Oh well just as well I love experimenting with this stuff. And dont value my
recreation time so highly.

[glenn_aircooled]

I ment to comment on the topic of thread.
My oppinion ( well wish full thinking really ) that any resonance
acting water cell would be an Over unity device.
Even say a 285% compared to Faraday , I would class as Over Unity.
To me we start with 30% loss of energy when converting from Electrical
to Hydrogen and then if this overcome by efficiency so that there is more
Hydrogen energy out than electrical energy in ....this is my Over Unity
yard stick.
The fact that no one is worried about making a small engine to run , only
using this extra energy is of no consequence to me.

[importfanatik]

[CJMOSS]

The comments regarding installing into a car, at least for me is not an economic question, not in the micro economic sense. I think auto applications are an important part of the energy equation. To that end, I'm willing to experiment to find safe and practical applications for the internal combustion engines of today and the past. Others who are better possessed of scientific knowledge will find better theory and technical applications. That is how we can move forward together, science then engineering in a reiterative process to make it better and safer. The goal being the practical and least expensive adaptations for those who can’t afford a new hydrogen powered BMW.

The question is energy. Both the social and geopolitical consequences of Big Oil dominating the resources of native populations. (It is perpetuation of the old violence). It is an illusion of democracy, of having consumer goods and leaders provided as mere options. This is not a real choice, a choice of a democratic plan for the future, respect for individualism or choice of economic development that is appropriate to a culture. Global corporatism dominates the chance for the native political systems, local ownership of economic production and local resource development. Global corporatism will always undermine democratic movements, if it threatens control of global corporate owned resources. This global economic force and the leadership it controls (buys) are beyond the powers of national sovereignty.
(The end of history and the last man, Francis Fukuyama) http://www.sais-jhu.edu/faculty/fukuyama/.

If it is Big Oil on a global scale, beyond national sovereignty and the emerging global empire, then real democracy means controlling your choices, your resources and your plan for a future, and not being controlled by the choices being made for you. Democratizing a country or people by force is contradiction and an exercise of empire. It is "double speak" to say globalization it is about democracy. To say it correctly, our democracies in UK, AU others and US have become the instruments of this global economic empire. Real democracy is a bottom up revolution against empires.


The new Hydrogen initiatives only perpetuates domination, a different means to covert the energy but the same oil, coal and gas being converted. And, that folks is the Big Oil plan, unless you make it otherwise. To that end, the democratization of energy is serious and revolutionary strategy.


What makes more pollution and uses more energy: the production of a new vehicle, or the continued use of a less fuel-efficient vehicle? I submit, it is a net increase in pollution and energy to produce a new car, than to make the already spent pollution and energy representing an old car more efficient. On demand hydrogen fuel is the stuff of a global democratic revolution.

[mrgalleria]

Aloha
While we are on the topic of weither or not to add hydrogen to autos lets not overlook the fact that:
Crude oil is probably the most disgusting organic substance on the planet.
We have been using gas, probably unnessesarily for over 100 years to care for a few superrich greedy individuals. Gas use in autos, in large part, is slowly killing all life on this planet. We are morally bound to find the solution, which already exists, that is being withheld from us by those same rich and powerful people who seem to care not for us nor this planet.
I think we all are aware of these facts. Conciously or subconsciously we are driven ahead by this same knowledge. The people on this forum and similar forums are despirate to come upon a solution. Eventually big business will release the solutions, but I hope it's not to late by then.
Bill

[mrgalleria]

Aloha,
Also, consider this.

Internal combustion engines contain dozens of moving parts, many fighting against each other, pushing stiff springs, moving heavy objects like the crankshaft, pistons rapidly moving mass up-stopping-moving down-stopping-etc, in a process very destructive. Try to spin that motor- how fast can you spin it? Well you can't, which means that it takes a very large amount of power just to run it, not even counting it's many assessories. So it's easy to see how this motor only effectively uses 10-20% of the fuel it consumes in a useful way.

How can anyone say that these engines do not emit a horrendous amount of negative energy? What could explain how people suddenly change personalities after starting that engine and going down the road? So far no one has measured that evil energy, but the evidence for it's existence is indesputable and overwelming.

Over a hundred years ago Tesla invented a powerful pump-engine with one moving part which would easily spin by hand. Even today many forms of this engine, now called a turbine, are in use with a practical fuel effieciency of 80-90%.

Such an engine would be much smaller and lighter than an internal combustion engine, making cars safer because of reduced weight and size (decreased braking distance, milder impacts, better suspension response, etc.). If you consider that over a one hundred year period of not using a engine of this design just in the loss of lives and injuries from accidents the cost is incalcuable. Not counting the effect on the enviroment from polution, and greatly reduced manufacturing and repair costs.
The turbine, a design over 100 years old, is just one of many options.
Bill

[Bart West-VL.]

[gary]

no