But without the feedback.
So, maybe this simulation is potentially worthless due to a possible error on LTSpice’s part by its avoidance of conveying impedance on the coil, L1?
Using this link…
I did what was suggested. Now that I know what the impedance of the coil is: 616.88Kohm, what does this mean?
https://archive.org/download/TheEnergyMachineOfJosephNewmanChapterSix/ImpedanceOnTheCoil-L1.jpg
If Newman’s engine isn’t an overunity engine, then what good is it? How is it better than other engines?
As far as I know, nobody’s ever been able to actually build one of these engines and demonstrate that it actually works. Maybe you’ll be the first. But, you know, probably not.
You seem to think this machine can overcome friction losses without energy input. How is that not a claim of overunity?
Can you point to a single working version ever existing?
Because if it were possible, there would be one.
If you can’t, then you need to reconsider your insistence that this is do-able.
I don’t recall Cecil Adams claiming that this device doesn’t run. As I recall, he claimed that it did not run according to Newman’s claims of overunity.
I wouldn’t consider those videos proof of anything other than the gullibility of human nature.
The ball has to return on it’s own. The guy repeatedly placing the ball at the beginning is adding energy to the system.
The other two show nothing but a jury-rigged mess even I would be ashamed of.
True, my simulations avoid the factor of friction. But I never claimed overunity. I agree with Cecil Adams, whose namesake this message thread is named in honor of, that Newman’s device is not overunity.
It overcomes friction losses by three inputs, only the first two of which were used by Newman in one version or another of his working prototypes…
- Its rotating magnetic field.
- The capacitor connected in parallel with the coil.
- A neon bulb added to the capacitor’s sub-circuit. This last one is my suggestion.
I could say the same thing of peer reviews.
Out of ignorance, we can say anything.
You bring up a good point: only when you build it to demonstrate workability (not overunity) will you think that it works not as Newman claimed, but as I claim: getting its excess energy from one to three extra inputs depending on your build (rotating magnetic field, capacitor in parallel with its coil, neon bulb added as an additional benefit positioned where I place it.
Those are just as worthless as the first set.
So, what does impedance on the coil do to the performance of this device? Get in its way? How?
Not until you build a successful device will you know for sure. Opinions are not the last word. Not even scientific opinion.
Lack of positive proof does not equal disproof.
Consider this, expanding on what I said above.
If it were possible to build a machine that generated more power than it used, we would be over-run with the damned things. It would be a miracle energy source, a major wing of physics and a major industry. People are clever, and we USE things that benefit us. This isn’t a world of superscience where someone builds a shrink ray and no one else in the world ever does so. This is a world of reality and science, where if science proves beneficial, we exploit the fuck out of it.
The fact that there are not these machines anywhere but on some doubtful videos on YouTube (hardly a source or integrity or record), and we certainly do not see full production, energy producing models, should tell you that you’re following a dead end.
But then, if all the smart people on this board cannot convince you of this, then you’re barking up the tree and should look elsewhere for support of your vision.
Your claim, not mine.
Unless I validated this somewhere? That was not my intention. My intention is to agree with Cecil Adams. When did I make this not clear?
I would be remiss not to repeat myself…
Ok, so what is the point of this thread, other than for you to argue with and dismiss everything anyone says to you?
This is the point where I ask the mods if there is a point to allowing this thread to continue under such circumstances.
I think the error is on your part, LTSpice is just giving the results you’ve asked her to give …
It means you’re pushing half a milliamp at 300 Volts …
You didn’t answer my question, please explain your “positive feedback” … this term gets slung around like it means something* but IT DOESN’T* … it’s meaningless gibberish and is in gross violation of the laws of thermodynamics … unless we can explain where the energy comes from …
Jerry Garcia plucks the A-string on Tiger in front of a bank of speakers thirty feet tall and twenty-five feet wide … positive feedback ensues* … now follow all them 4 gauge power cords from the stage back to the five foot tall transformer … that’s the energy source … easy peasy …
Your turn …
- = I guess you’d have to have been there …