Errr… what you say!?
Not only was it authentic frontier gibberish, it expressed the courage little seen in this day and age.
Why is this thread still here? Shouldn’t it have long ago been moved to a more appropriate forum?
Oh, that’s right. We don’t have a Mundane Pointless Bullshit I Can’t Prove forum.
Isn’t that a quote from the Turbo-Encabulator datasheet?
You obviously don’t understand The Structural Dynamics Of Flow like a MacMillan man.
“This negative impedance conversion is the alternative approach to correcting a delinquent power factor of zero.”
If you say this loudly, repeatedly, and firmly to telemarketers, they will take you off their calling list.
Give the guy credit, at least he got one thing right in this thread.
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but it’s easy build a machine that generates more power than it uses. Capacitors do this all the time.
But a machine that generates more energy than it uses? Not so easy. 
I shudder to think that there probably is a “right crowd” to preach to.
The Law of the Conservation of Energy covers all energy. Yet, the Laws of Thermodynamics do not. These latter laws are supposed to cover all possibilities in which the Conservation of Energy applies. Well, there’s at least one thermodynamic option not covered which will produce lots of unlimited free energy and still uphold its conservation.
Each of three distinct areas of electricity are covered by the power factor according to conventional knowledge. As you may already know, the A/C cycle is divided into four quadrants each of whom define the phase angle between current (resulting from the impact which the magnetic field has upon a ‘live’ wire) and voltage (resulting from the impact which the electric field has upon a ‘live’ wire).
Besides any others, there are at least two components (which I know of) which have the ability of shifting phase angle of a sine wave: the capacitor which causes current to lead voltage by a factor of ninety degrees (synonymous with one-quarter of an A/C cycle), and the inductor (or a very long piece of wire) which causes current to lag voltage by a factor of ninety degrees. Whenever either of these two components act, individually, the positive power factor of an inputted source (which is a real number) is affected by its conversion into a zero power factored output into a complex number composed of the summation of a real number and some factor of an imaginary square root of negative one (of the form: a + bi wherein ‘a’ and ‘b’ are real and ‘i’ is imaginary). But whenever both come into play in a coordinated manner, then 180 degrees phase is shifted between both portions of a sine wave producing a negative power factor.
The reason why it is a negative real number is on account of the multiplication of two complex numbers resulting from two 90 degree shifts contributing from capacitance and inductance, simulataneously.
Positive power factors have practical value since they represent kinetic energy on the move. When a wave of energy moves, it is subject to the laws of thermodynamics since movement allows for change. And change allows for losses due to conversions from one form of energy into another. But most importantly, the real numbers of a positive power factor can be measured since they exist as tangible quantities affecting tangible energy exhibiting tangible results, such as: the radiation of heat from an electric heater or the rotation of a motor’s shaft.
Negative power factors have no immediate, practical benefit since they are a mathematical fiction representing two actual waves summed to create a net cancellation of movement. Their individual movements are still existent – so, the conservation law still applies, but the net cancellation turns their actualization (as kinetic energy) into fictionalized potential energy. So, in a sense, one could argue that the law of thermodynamics still applies. But our present understanding of how to interpret the laws of thermodynamics gets more fuzzy as we proceed along this line of reasoning…
No movement means a standing wave described, here, by Eric Dollard concerning Tesla’s Magnifying Transmitter…
http://vinyasi.info/energy/standing-wave.mp4
No movement is potential energy. It’s not kinetic. Yet, we can still use potential energy on one side of an isolation transformer to serve as a secondary voltage source built up from a primary input. My primary input, I like to use, is one micro volt carrying a sine wave of moderate frequency in the range from a low of 30k Hz up to 100k Hz – although I prefer to have my simulated devices hang out at either 50k or 70k Hz.
This energy cannot dissipate since it’s a standing wave. This is why I drain the secondary side of this isolation transformer into a D/C to A/C inverter. And I’ve learned how to use either another branch-circuit to effect this conversion, electrically, or I can use two of Tesla’s patents to effect a mechanical conversion. This drainage effectively becomes an unlimited supply of amp-hours since the stationary wave cannot become depleted so long as my moderate frequency sine wave generator (of one micro volt stimulation) is allowed to continue to excite this circuit at one micro volt of stimulation.
The primary side of this isolation transformer will take a few dozen milli seconds to accumulate enough energy until it’s sufficient to power whatever my intended load requires largely based on the size of my largest stator coils and the size of the rotor.
And since the load is isolated from this standing wave of potential energy, the kinetic energy traveling through the ‘load’s branch-circuit’ effectively becomes unlimited in its actualization of kinetic energy and thus produces an unlimited quantity of amp-hours.
The input – at the sine wave generator – can be as low as pico or nano watts. Yet, the output at the load can be as high as over 60k watts!
The conservation of energy has remained without violation since all I did was use the laws of thermodynamics to convert the positively, power factored, nano wattage of sine wave input (coming from the moderate frequency generator) into negatively, power factored standing waves (as a first stage of conversion) and then convert these standing waves into positively, power factored, kinetic energy at the load.
But where in the halls of thermodynamics does it say I can do this?
They should, but they don’t.
The only difference here, by comparison to – let’s say – a flashlight circuit, is that time is never manipulated in a flashlight circuit to get more energy out than energy in.
But by sustaining a negative power factor, I can continually sustain what amounts to being equivalent to a voltage source.
Batteries are what most people associate with voltage sources. Also, sine wave generators.
But a standing wave of negative power factor is also a voltage source. The difference is that batteries and sine wave generators will become drained of their voltage by way of a flow of current passing from one of their terminals and returning to the opposite terminal to equalize their voltage difference.
This is what Thomas Bearden warned us concerning voltage dipoles: don’t kill them; meaning, don’t equalize them via any flow of current from one terminal to its opposite terminal.
So, it seems to me that both the laws of thermodynamics and the law of the conservation of energy are both valid laws as they stand. The problem is how they’re interpreted. Specifically concerning our avoidance of putting negative power factors to any practical use.
Since electrical engineers and technicians are highly trained in the artistry of power factors, and since they’re also not trained in how to use negative power factors, then the obvious conclusions drawn from this lack of expertise is that “energy exiting an electrical system must always equal energy entering into it”…a false conclusion drawn from the three-fourths of an A/C cycle (comprising zero power factors and positive power factors) which we are formally trained to make use of) versus the single quadrant we have been habitually avoiding of negative power factors.
It’s obvious to me that time is a source, or another prime factor, of energy. It’s not enough to merely focus on the electric and magnetic fields surrounding a ‘live’ wire since holding apart the phase angular relationship of the electric and magnetic fields of the sine wave of electricity traveling along the length of a wire can manifest electricity for as long as these two fields are temporarily held apart for one-half cycle of an A/C cycle.
It’s also interesting if we assume that: as far as the perspective of each field is concerned, one field has advanced (in time) by one-quarter cycle of an A/C cycle while the other field has retarded (in time) by a similar amount to produce their one-half angular separation. So, we could also postulate that a fictional total of zero time has been shifted despite each field has been shifted by 1/240th of a second (in America) or by 1/200th of a second in Europe.
Interestingly enough, Wikipedia states (in its article on Conservation of Energy) that energy is not conserved if time should shift. Yet, I know that the energy is still there as a real number – as a mathematically fictitious quantity (if it’s a negative power factor). And since a negative power factor is a mathematical fiction resulting from the multiplication of two complex values (of ninety degree power factor) which are actually happening, then – in a sense – this intermediate stage of energy conversion within my circuit simulation does not physically exist yet is allowed to serve as an intermediate stage leading to its actualization into a real, negative quantity. So, any bypassing of conservation of energy is merely a temporary stage between a first and a last stage of energy conversions which are all conservable.
So, besides the very real electricity of a positive power factor, there also exists what is already recognized as a zero power factor of complex values. But what is not generally known is that a third state of electricity is negatively real, and a mathematical fiction. But being a fiction does not preclude it from actually affecting a transition between a very real, low energy input converting into a much higher, real energy output.
This is where the interpretation of thermodynamics has failed us along with the application of energy’s conservation.
Got a working model yet? Oh, I forgot, you don’t have the time to demonstrate the invention of the century. Put down your beer and roll up your sleeves.
Just build something already, or get it through your head that what you’re doing is misapplying physics and interpreting simulator flaws as more revealing of reality than … actual reality.
I actually programmed a circuit simulator in Basic Circuitry class in university. It worked perfectly on all the assigned test values, but we discovered later that with certain inputs the charge over a capacitor would increase after you stopped applying a voltage to it. It’s a pity I took that for an error in my programming or we would have NAITA enterprises flying electric cars by now.
Is there a Law of Conservation of Intelligence? Because I know less now than I did before I read this thread, and those IQ points must have gone somewhere.
Regards,
Shodan
Ah, is that were they came from. I thought I was getting them from the OP. I usually learn more from these threads, looking up the details to figure out exactly where someone’s haywire logic departs from reality.
You have to admit, this is a thing of beauty:
So many words, so little meaning.
It seems really odd that if an “over unity” macro machine is possible, an “over unity” micro (molecular) machine would be even easier. And such a machine would be so useful to life that one would have evolved by now. And would have won at evolution.
So, all this disproves Darwin as well? What next, a disproof of the 4 Color Theorem?
Since those links are not in any file format I recognize, why don’t you sum them up for us? and, most importantly…does that site have a working model?
They’re e-pub format books.
Just think, he’s giving his secrets away to the world for free and still nobody is bothering to become a zillionnaire by stealing his ideas.