OH WOW!!! Gears with magnets instead of teeth?!?! What CAN'T magnets do?!?! Granted, you have a net negative open system there, so you can't get as many kWh out as you put in. In fact, averaged over the course of a run, you can't get as many watts out as you put in. The only thing you CAN do with that is convert voltage it's inverse-proportional friend, amperage. Technically speaking, you'd be more efficient with just an inverter and a transformer, but I like the Rube-Goldberginess here.
I invent the Future of Solar Light technology! There is nothing worldwide even come close to my Products! It saved 80%-90% of Material and Costs! It also can be used to grow up Foot! Full Waterproof, also and a complete Solar Revolution! SEE ALSO THE FIRST SOLAR LED FOOTBALL STADIUM LIGHTS! Have a look on my Chanel, if you like my Products! It is already Patent Pending! With my Invent its first Time possible to use Solar technology in Areas where they now Solar only from TV!
Good, I like that you share this video, I wish success always George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins
i cant read Email . please see my comments @PESWiki / CLaNZeR mike peine. .i use a small motor (see power wheels for compare ) water cooled,sm. batt. to power a alternator 12v @1200rpm = 220amps to power alot of things. @36v 60amps i power my Ebike .unlimited range untill my next flat. dont forget a good ground.
Also why don't you understand that the battery is supplying the power,and you are making yourself look very foolish saying this is going to upset the energy people,haha haha haha
Hello Sir,its nice that your trying however I have to agree with the other comments. You do not understand electrical principals at all, this is creating zero free energy the battery is the ONLY thing running your set up,
What he needs to know is how many amp hours the battery has. Of course he could measure the amps out put and then mesure the time till everything stops or am I missing something.
OMG are people really this ignorant. I see you using energy not making it. It's terrible, battery running out of juice at the end. Need to charge the battery, and run it again Sam!
Why not find a old ac motor from like a table saw , and an generator..
"gas powered sold in stores, but remove the gas engine"
..and use gear ratios ...or multi gears from an old C4 auto transmission to increase speed..... Find out the Rpm for the generator to work.Generator has to have a small gear and the motor a large gear.. Figuring out the pulley / gear size is up to you....Do not listen to those whom say it will not work do to friction.....Electricity can easily supply it-self.
congrats you got my attention....its not amazing at all- ..u have invented a magnetic gear, however, the friction in the gears comes frm the resistance of the generator. INVENT A GENERATOR without resistance and there will be no friction in the gears. They say it can't be done
Free Energy is only made by GOD, we feel every day, except at night, we call it SUN. just built a Sun Cell at you home , that is the real free energy.
seriously ive been looking into this for awhile now and these people never seem to get that they are putting more energy in then they are getting out. come on your powering it with a battery.
all i have to say is.... IF YOU WANTED TO TALK TO YOUR WIFE, YOU DIDNT HAVE TO VIDEO TAPE THE CONVERSATION FOR THE REST OF THE PEOPLE DOING RESEARCH
..problem is.. i couldn't make out what the hell was in the truck. all i heard was "ugu" "yeah" and that was all she said throughout you revving your engine and droning on and on about something
@MrGunnaras even for permanent magnetic motor you need a battery, but if the battery is charged from the motor, theoretically you need just first impuls, lets say, charging battery from standard electric site and its might be running for ever.
@higuys6 lol moron.. why dosnt he invert the charged battery and keep it running at full again.. simply collage physics... but you prob dont understand how it works therefor plzz dont comment on stuff you dont know
its so cool everytime i go to my favoured store i buy 2 bananas for the price of three and i get one banana for free! amazing. how much energy did you buy to get the free energy?
whats the battery for? what are all the components and how are they connected? .I know these questions must seem stupid but when you post stuff on youtube you must prepare for a assault from all walks of life. also put a circuit diagram explaining any modifications you have made so i can steal your idea :P naw im joking :)
another f whit - Free energy is not possible - energy can not be made or lost only transformed from one state to another, thus your ides is total fictions and just basically dumb, possibly matching your education level. Eg if any heat is generated this is a change of electrical energy into heat energy and this lost of energy has to come from somewhere eg the battery you idiot, you may be extending the life of the battery but in the end it will die. put some load on a what how quick it dies.
It was here before us, and will be here after us. It is said "We can't create it or destroy it" so if it always exists it must be free.
But really i think free energy is a good term. IMO if i don't have to pay for it it is free, like the sun's rays are free to us all. So IF this device really worked it would be fair to call Free energy. Just Saying
now if the drive motor was bedini circuit and switch batts back and forth, then youd have a pretty interesting set up, but powering two from one doesnt seem to make sense.
Pure comedy GOLD! "science" be damned! He got that thang thar up on the innernet. Can't believe no one dun stole his idea yet. Or that thur president aint come and shut dis guy down fore his invention destroys the oil business!!! This video had all the comedy of King of the Hill, combined with all the excitement of a Nascar race. I hope there's a sequel.
Simply love the concept with the loss of electrical power in New York City to charge Computer Systems cell phones this device would be helpful tremendously helpful. At this point he does not matter how many batteries it uses up or how long it runs. In my opinion it is needed in New York City right now. Simply the best way to advertise your product thousands and thousands of people need this product now, very intriguing and undoubtedly an unquestionably needed right now New York City
I am amazed at the total lack of electrical knowledge. He does not get that he is running a motor to run a generator to light 2 lights with an inverter. O my what is that a 60 % loss no wonder the battery goes dead in 10 to 20 min. O it is the magnet drive Space age science mystery?
This videos shows nothing at all! The guys behind this video admit they dont care to show anything.
Personally i think this is a pointless video. Another guys with a similar device, actually measures higher output than input, but he does not follow up with more tests. (look at "mindfreer" Free Energy Electric Power Generator Overunity Magnet Motor )
His output should be 60% of input, but he shows 200% higher output. could be a fraud or...
@EqualAndFree - Trouble is it would run off the second battery (for a short while) and that would be enough "proof" for him to say "look it works!", or he could put the output through a power conditioner then to the input. These backyard inventors follow no protocols and only see results that confirm their beliefs. I have seen other devices where they use the wrong methods to measure input and output power and only quote (obviously) erroneous numbers that support their beliefs.
@EqualAndFree - I asked him and he said there were "resonant harmonics" (or similar) that stopped the output driving the input. He may as well blamed unicorns stamping through his lounge room. Some of these inventors refuse to accept the reality of what they're doing.
@EqualAndFree - how it works versus how the inventor thinks it works.
What is happening: The battery powered motor drives two generators via magnetic couplings. The input power is more than the output power as one would expect.
What the inventor thinks is happening, but isn't: The battery powered motor is driving two generators via magnetic couplings. These couplings amplify the power & thus the two generators put out more power than the battery supplies.
This device is operating, but its not doing anything except draining your battery. Your device doesn't prove anything. In fact, while I agree that magnets (stored energy) probably can be used/unleashed to create electricity, your device/demonstration cannot do this and sets the cause back. This video is going to be used as an example to show how ignorant all the magnet guys are.
@Yourfishman comparing a heat pump and the 2SO is interesting but pointless. They both use entirely different means to transfer energy.
I was never taught gravity can't be harnessed. How do you think hydro-electric dams produce energy? My hallway clock uses gravity to drive the mechanism. I think you're confusing gravity as a force with it being able be continuously harnessed as an energy source much the same as people think magnetic motors are a viable energy source. Not now, not ever.
You can't argue laws of physics with these simple folks as they truly believe they are man made laws.
A great way to get them admit to being idiots is to ask them "If the laws were repealed/dropped would all the perpetual motion machines start to work?"
I'll say this Again, we agree, the 2SO is not > 100% efficient!
I think you have a handle on the Heat pump, & it’s plus 1 COP ability, but for some reason you don’t see the same COP possibility in the 2SO. I guess you need a theory before you can accept the repeatable evidence, that is unfortunate but maybe this theory might help you understand. Maybe not.
@Yourfishman - if, as you finally have concluded a 2SO is <100% efficient, therefore the power out is less than the power in. End of debate. The 2SO is merely an interesting device that seems to confuse people into believing it is breaking those laws of physics. It isn't and never will. As for any reference to COP and anything other than a heat pump...oh dear.
In short, Heat Pumps compress gas (mass) & decompress gas repeatedly. The decompressed gas captures heat (energy). Then the gas is compressed, & the energy is transferred inside via the evaporator. Repeatedly.
2 Stage Oscillator.
A 2SO compress & decompress Gravity Force repeatedly. The decompress point captures gravity (energy?) Then the mass is compressed (Max G Force), and the energy is transferred via a lever. Repeatedly.
@Yourfishman - "2SO compress & decompress Gravity Force repeatedly" - that is exactly where you are confused. Any gain made using gravity is exactly counteracted by having to return the mass to the starting point. No net gain. If you don't get that simple fact I'd say all is lost.
Why do you think COP +1 only applies to heat pumps? On the surface your logic about action / counter action applies pendulum part. But it does not apply to the centrifugal force that moves the lever, the 2nd stage of the 2 Stage Oscillator.
@Yourfishman - the text book definition of COP only applies to heat pumps, air-conditioners and other heating and cooling devices. Look up the definition and you'll see that is a fact. That is why talk of COP and non heat pump devices is not only pointless but it is incorrect. The only term that can be applied to the 2OS is "efficiency" in terms of energy in divided by energy out. You need to accept all that and stop listening to other people trying to redefine standard engineering terms.
"the text book definition of COP only applies to heat pumps."
Then the problem is a catch 22 for you.
No such thing as over 100% efficiency, & ONLY a heat pump can collect energy from a outside source. Evidence be dammed.
Max Planck once said.
"The truth of a science does not triumph by convincing it's opponents and making them see the light. But rather that it's opponents eventually die, & a new generation grow up that are familiar with it.
@Yourfishman - what is the catch 22? The text book definition is the industry definition. Who said only a heat pump can collect energy from an outside source? I didn't say it or imply it. Wind turbines and hydroelectric systems are indirectly driven by the sun's energy, solar panels use it directly. You still seem to confuse COP and efficiency, stop comparing apples and pears. COP can be >1. What device has an efficiency >1?
@Yourfishman -wrong. Google COP and look at the scientific & industry definition, it is not my definition. Anyone who uses the term "COP" for anything other than heat pumps and the like, is totally incorrect. I don't see the Catch 22. COP>1 is not higher output than input as a heat pump operates in an open system - you do understand that? I have answered the question before - what device do you think uses energy to harnesses outside energy?
@Yourfishman - I worked out why the measurements of input & output for the 2OS are incorrect if you're interested. I found a way to describe the operation that proves what I have said all along. The measurements are incorrect and the supposed ratio of output to input is meaningless. In fact the hand power supplied is equal to the system's frictional losses & the output is zero (provided it is not driving any other mechanism). I discussed this with another guy who posts & he agrees totally.
@Yourfishman - "Rhead100' 2SO move 4lbs 4" = 16in lbs. and gets 70+ lbs moving 2" twice = 280 in lbs. 17.5 Xs GAIN" - there's your problem. You're confusing leverage with power. Unless you factor in time (power = ft lbs/min) you're kidding yourself. I'll bet the time to move the small weight 4" is way shorter than the time the heavier mass moves 2". It is a leverage issue, with the inclusion of the time factor your whole argument is blown out of the water. Score one more for mathematics.
@zzytrewq - yep, he's a member of that exclusive club. "Ain't Done Much Skoolin' But Ah Believes What Ah Sees Club". You can't talk physics and maths with people who don't believe in it.
"no mechanical device can harness gravity to povide free energy."
The case for GRAVITY OU, “Milklovics Two Stag Oscillator” has already been discussed. Many PHDs of physics and mathematics have acknowledged this as fact. Many more like liam still don't accept it. The proof is self-evident. Look at this youtube video “ Higher pendulum more weight lifted A of A&B ” Pushes 2 lbs of force, lifts 49 Lbs. Then adds 23lbs, and then has to push with 4 lbs of force.
@Yourfishman - the oscillator doesn't provide free energy. If it did then it would pass the standard test. i.e. use the output power to drive the input. I doubt any genuine PHDs believe the oscillator provides free energy. I have read all the posts and watched the other videos. No one has ever made such a device self run. It looks like it is giving something for nothing but it doesn't.
@Yourfishman - rather than pursue this pointless argument quoting what are meaningless figures how about you make one of these devices and have it self run. That is the only test as far as I can see. We can't rely on YT posters putting accurate figures as they all clearly contradict what is established scientific fact. I see you remove many of your posts and are becoming more obstinate with each post. Is everyone wrong and you right?
I removed posts, because I was trying to edit my last statement on leverage vs 2SO, just to make it clearer. It still did not post as written, with proper spacing...
I never said this magnetic gears works as described. I just think it could possibly work. Your equal shaft speed & torque is a valid point, with only 1 exception. That exception does narrow down what could be happening, if it is not a hoax.
You're correct on the language. Free-OU->1COP... they seem to merge at times
@Yourfishman - the cogging device may not be a hoax, but a well intentioned exercise, but besides all that it doesn't work and for it to work would require clearly impossible one sided force action from pairs of magnets.
" We can't rely on YT posters putting accurate figures as they all clearly contradict what is established scientific fact."
If you don't except what you see with your eyes because it contradicts "Established Scientific Facts" then this is a pointless conversation. The E-S-F are exactly whats in question. The 2SO challenges Newton. You can see he only pushes the smallest amount, and you see, and hear, the results over & over.
@Yourfishman - accepting things with your eyes from a YT video is a bit naive isn't it? You prefer to believe what you see rather than what has been established by science over the last several hundred years? I saw a magnetic motor "working" on YT some time back. So of the posters were like you - there it was spinning away and clearly self running and I was an idiot for sticking with my dumb laws of physics. After some months the guy who posted it revealed the hidden motor & battery.
@Yourfishman - accepting things with your eyes is one thing - but these guys don't provide figures that stand up to scrutiny either. They are trying to promote something that is clearly impossible and so are they going to state figures that support that notion? Not likely. As to who is right or wrong - you choose to miss the point don't you? Proponents of these devices are wrong because they don't understand physics, it is as simple as that. People have been fooled by what they see.
@Yourfishman - so what about responding to my comment that you're only seeing the leverage aspect of the oscillator and not seeing the power aspect. Torque (ft lbs) is not power, and efficiency is measured by (power out)/(power in) so unless accurate times etc are provided all the quoted figures mean very little. Few supporters of "free energy" devices accept that math and physics have a role to play and that is why they make these wild unsubstantiated claims.
I asked my son to import Rhead's 2SO video into his computer and run his editing program on it to give us some real times. But at a brief visual study w/o slow motion, the weight dropping time looks very similar to the push time, maybe even faster. The upward motion appears to be much slower. Time is a great point that i did not consider ; )
I accept Rhead100 ball park numbers, because they are consistent with my own test i made with my 2SO.
@Yourfishman - all this is getting rather academic now. Get the one you made to self run - despite what you think that is the definition of a perpetual motion machine/over unity device. Unless you do that you're kidding yourself about the free energy business. You think it is possible but won't test it.
@Yourfishman - LOL. Selectively seeing numbers that support your unscientific argument. This is headed no where. Stop the nonsense and get the output to drive the input. The very definition of an over unity device, (especially one that has a claimed efficiency of several 100%) is that it self runs. Until you prove it self runs you will continue to be deluded.
EFFICIENCY = Total energy out, compared to total energy in.
( no device have every shown over 100%)
COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE COP = total energy the OPERATOR supplies compared to total energy out.
(look at COP Wikipedia for more)
OVER-UNITY OU = More than 1. Period
There are many devices that show OU of COP. Nothing has every shown OU of efficiency don't confuse this. Whether you believe or not the 2SO is "OU of COP" is up to you, all the evidence is there.
@Yourfishman - heat pumps have a COP>1 but are not over-unity devices. Learn the language.
Whether you understand it or not the 2SO is not an over-unity device as the numbers quoted are obviously incorrect. Until you get it to self run it is not an over-unity device. You are deluded. Ask yourself why no one has got one to self run (the ONLY test for perpetual motion machines).
@Yourfishman - oh man are you so wrong there. Remove the rose coloured glasses. If you believe in ghosts long enough you'll see one. If the oscillator did produce more power than it took to run it then it could be made to run by itself. Seeing as you have shown it has a lot of excess power then make a connection to the input side. Just a note of warning though - thousands have tried. By the way your figures are so full of holes I'd remove them as you have 2 + 2 = 5 like all PPM inventors.
Refrigerators are OU COP devices. Input energy from OPERATOR supplies 25 parts . The heat supplies 75 parts of input energy. That is the total of 100 parts input energy. With friction, conservation of energy, etc... the actual work done in cooling is only 50 parts work energy.
TOTAL IN = 100 PARTS - TOTAL OUT 50 PARTS = 50% EFFICIENT.
Op - IN 25. TOTAL OUT 50 PARTS = That is 200% COP or 2.0 COP.
A refrigerator is a OU COP device, but doesn't run itself! Some friges have COP of 6
@Yourfishman - thank you Captain Obvious but your'e still missing the point. A COP>1 has nothing to do with "free energy" machines. The language of heat pumps and the like uses "COP" but over unity machines and PPM uses output/input power in a different context.
Put a fridge in an insulated box and after a while it will have a COP of zero. Put a PPM in the same box and (provided it works) it will demonstrate its efficiency (or over unity).
@Yourfishman - or to put it more simply, a heat pump operates in an open system, a OU/PPM device operates in a closed system. That is why people can't grasp a solar panel isn't free energy, or a wind turbine. They don't speak the language of physics and then confuse themselves and those they talk to.
I went searching for 2OS videos/papers/forums etc where numerous people have tried to get them to self run. Strangely none do. Energy in > energy out, as expected.
No-one claims or even suggested that 2SO are PPM or OU (of efficiency). The claim is always been that the extra energy is coming from another source. If you remove gravity this device does nothing.
It is not that they can't grasp it . To most people these words are just semantics. It is a little silly to me that folks get hung up on the term "OU" or free energy applying only to efficiency, and not COP or..., when you no good and well what they are talking about.
@Yourfishman "No-one claims or even suggested that 2SO are PPM or OU (of efficiency). The claim is always been that the extra energy is coming from another source" say what? You claimed they had a COP(!!!) >1 now you say they're not PPM or OU. "Extra energy from another source" - based on that I now can't see where you're going nor agree with any of your reasoning. Take up night school and study Physics. You're going around in circles.
You are right, this is going around in circles. i think you are being selective with which words you read. nothing i have said has changed. but your conclusions skip the point over and over.
I just pointed out how the heat pump and the 2SO are not PPM or OU (of efficiency devices) but they are both COP +1. Is that hard to understand?
@Yourfishman - you are the confused one. The 2OS is not PPM or OU though you believe they have a higher output power than input power. Mmm, let me think about that for a nanosecond. And you aren't convinced they need to self run to demonstrate that and yet you still believe the output power exceeds the input power.
COP only applies to heat pumps and is not related to PMM or OU devices though your posts say otherwise.
You've lost it now, you need to talk to a physics teacher.
Spend $30 and a few hours in the shop and you too could build one and verify his evidence first hand, as i did.
Funny thing is, I brought up that 2SO just because it is easy to visually understand and verify. I was going to connect to dots, as to how the 2SO effects relates to the Interactive Gears system in this video. But if you can't understand what is clear and obvious to me, you will never understand a theory of how these Interactive gears could also harness energy.
@Yourfishman - the "interactive gears" do nothing more than transfer power. May as well use pulleys. If you think there is a net power gain from such "gears" then you simply are kidding yourself. Put a set together and test it for yourself and you'll see I'm right.
@zzytrewq (If you choose to believe "evidence" from a YouTube video against all of the established related laws of physics then go for it.)
Repeatable evidence from test results is by definition a fact. If facts go against A Law, it does not change the fact, but it may change the Law, or at least our understanding of that Law.
Now if you could point out the testing was flawed... then that would be constructive. But your "I’m smarter than you, go back to school, " is childish & a waste of time
@Yourfishman - repeatable evidence could be facts. But the "evidence" collected from these devices is intending to imply they produce more energy than they consume. In that case the data are incorrect. You pig-headedly refuse to acknowledge the only real test is for them to self power. That to me confirms you just don't get it.
The laws of conservation of energy say they cannot be >100% efficient. Would it run if those laws were revised?
@zzytrewq - found this on the the Rhead video post about the 2SO BS.
This is priceless: "The machine does put out more energy than it takes to run it. IT DOES NOT create energy. It simply changes potential energy to kinetic energy."
Now the world knows a kinetic kilowatt is more than a potential kilowatt the energy problems are solved. LOL
Rhead needs to look up oxymoron in the dictionary. Him and his fans need to go to night school.
For 800 years top academia taught that a larger objects will fall faster than a smaller a objects.
Something so simple to disprove went unchallenged until Newton. That blunder happened because we ignored evidence that contradicted what we have been taught.
You go ahead & stick with your school taught physics and ignore eveidence. I'll continue to consider real evidence when presented whether it questions the school taught physics or not.
@Yourfishman - your evidence is not real. Make it self run and prove me wrong.
I assumed you made up the 800 year old reference. When I went to school we were taught it was Galileo Galilei in the 1600's who did the experiment (even though this is probably a myth) and demonstrated that Aristotle was wrong 2000 years earlier. You are confusing it with Newton's theory on gravity confirming it theoretically. You can ignore the evidence... LOL
It is not my evidence, it is the evidence. What part is not real? and why?
You continue to miss the point, 800 years or 2000 years the point is the same. Highly schooled Folks have been wrong about many thing though out history. Look for the real, repeatable evidence, and come to your own conclusion.
When you make a heat pump self run, I'll do the same with the 2SO ; )
Galileo discovered and presented the evidence. Another 50-100 years goes by until someone finds the math... to support the theory, Go figure. I wonder how long it took academia to except Galileo's evidence.
I have been very specific about 1 person's Two Stage Oscillator; it belongs to YouTube's Rhead100. His, Higher pendulum more weight lifted A of A&B, video. That video is very straight forward & he is very open with solid details. Other attempts at 2SO don't matter.
@Yourfishman - you are now showing a distinctive anti-intellectual streak. That chip on your shoulder must be such a burden. If you choose to believe "evidence" from a YouTube video against all of the established related laws of physics then go for it. No one can change your mind except. Find a Two Stage Oscillator that self runs and the world of science will be turned upside down.
@jimmyhoffa9 - wrong. To get work out of magnets one must apply an opposing or attracting magnetic force. This requires one of the fields to be turned on and off. That is how electric motors work. The same thing cannot be accomplished with magnets alone. It is not possible to turn a permanent magnet off without using energy greater than can be recovered. The laws of conservation of energy have yet to be defeated by any device - magnetic motors are never going to self run.
One question... What happens when you take the output and connect it to the input in place of the battery and inverter. If it continues to run continuously, at that point, you may have something. The problem is that, in any system there will be loss due to friction and heat loss. Even if you were to eliminate all friction and heat loss you will never get out more than you put in.
@wperry1 if the generator produces enough energy it will power itself and it is produces enough energy you will have a fuelless generator. I saw a demo when they had 40kw's being produced and powering a bank of lightbulbs and everything was laid out clearly in a plastic case to prove it was real. you would really just need a capacitor or battery to get it going and you'd have free energy. the magnetic will lose energy over time though. . . .say 400 years so its not a super long investment. lol
@jimmyhoffa9 - none of these devices self power and yet the inventors insist they produce extra energy (over-unity). They use way more power than they produce - it's simple to measure but they don't do that either. A case of being blinded by belief.
@jimmyhoffa9 - magnets do not attract because they have energy. That is a myth from the "free energy" sites. They do not "tap into the magnetic energy..." - oh God where do you get that stuff?
@LiamXaoh you get the idea hopefully. . .magnets attract each other and repel each other. . if you can "harness" that power in a useful form, like electricity you essentially have "free" energy.
If you want FREE ENERGY plans, just google 'I should just put my finger in my ass'. Click the first or second link, it doesn't matter.
adisharr 3 days ago
Your friends qwere so impressed they left. So whats the concept, you can run a electric motor with a 12v battery?
electronicdawg 3 days ago
he said "Ah had it runnin for 10 minutes thu other dayee" 10 minutes? How come not all night? How come not all week?
waterwart 4 days ago
dude....where's the corn mash at fool?
waterwart 4 days ago
and that huge accumulator at left does not affect at all?
RutinaRottis 5 days ago
Fucken Bullshit...
Another Scam
abm3152 5 days ago
OH WOW!!! Gears with magnets instead of teeth?!?! What CAN'T magnets do?!?! Granted, you have a net negative open system there, so you can't get as many kWh out as you put in. In fact, averaged over the course of a run, you can't get as many watts out as you put in. The only thing you CAN do with that is convert voltage it's inverse-proportional friend, amperage. Technically speaking, you'd be more efficient with just an inverter and a transformer, but I like the Rube-Goldberginess here.
NBoole 6 days ago
Excellent video......
If you want to Get the Plans for the Free energy generator
Go To Google and Search for "Top Magnetic Generator"
Select the First Result (Skip The Advertisements)
I have found it to be a great resource......
DanielBrown89 1 week ago
I invent the Future of Solar Light technology! There is nothing worldwide even come close to my Products! It saved 80%-90% of Material and Costs! It also can be used to grow up Foot! Full Waterproof, also and a complete Solar Revolution! SEE ALSO THE FIRST SOLAR LED FOOTBALL STADIUM LIGHTS! Have a look on my Chanel, if you like my Products! It is already Patent Pending! With my Invent its first Time possible to use Solar technology in Areas where they now Solar only from TV!
solarpanellights 1 week ago
Sometimes you're too smart for your own friends.
Scorpion85629 1 week ago
you are a big lier you are asholt lol!!!!
loudis1979 1 week ago
Great, I like video George Mitchell is second coming to christ. NOT! You fucking faggot.
Nemisis99 1 week ago
Wow someone obviously spent money to buy some comments for their video... loser.
Nemisis99 1 week ago
Stick your finger in it.
FarceTheory 1 week ago
I Love The Video It Can Increase My Knowledge George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins.
ownerheard 2 weeks ago
Good, I like that you share this video, I wish success always George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins
ayamsory 2 weeks ago
Nice Video That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins.
Destayear 2 weeks ago
I Really Like The Video From Your George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins.
cTianroy 2 weeks ago
Your Video Is Very Useful Sharing George Mitchell offers an alternative to our dependence on fossil fuels and other toxins.
anakmudajaman 2 weeks ago
i cant read Email . please see my comments @PESWiki / CLaNZeR mike peine. .i use a small motor (see power wheels for compare ) water cooled,sm. batt. to power a alternator 12v @1200rpm = 220amps to power alot of things. @36v 60amps i power my Ebike .unlimited range untill my next flat. dont forget a good ground.
perpetualmotion100 2 weeks ago
Redneck power generator !!!!!!
labka2 2 weeks ago
So... how much free energy do you get out of it once the gasoline runs out?
adolphbot 2 weeks ago
Moon shine killed his brain cell !!!!!
1rucrazy 2 weeks ago
tarded!
1rucrazy 2 weeks ago
hello,we are interested for business,if you are interested send your contact information please
sajetavna 2 weeks ago
How long can i use the Magnets??? 20 years and the Magnetic Effect is gone??? greetings from East Germany!
HipHopNobby 2 weeks ago
What is wrong with the old reliable free energy?
jules2c 3 weeks ago
Also why don't you understand that the battery is supplying the power,and you are making yourself look very foolish saying this is going to upset the energy people,haha haha haha
CORYLEEMAY3 3 weeks ago
Hello Sir,its nice that your trying however I have to agree with the other comments. You do not understand electrical principals at all, this is creating zero free energy the battery is the ONLY thing running your set up,
CORYLEEMAY3 3 weeks ago
rubbish
sweetgyy 3 weeks ago
Is this for attracting the deer at night?
dougspair 3 weeks ago
What he needs to know is how many amp hours the battery has. Of course he could measure the amps out put and then mesure the time till everything stops or am I missing something.
SidneyBoud 3 weeks ago
OMG are people really this ignorant. I see you using energy not making it. It's terrible, battery running out of juice at the end. Need to charge the battery, and run it again Sam!
richataman 3 weeks ago
you're more obsessed with calling people idiots than free energy. Must be insecurity of your own lack of intelligence. Stupid waste of brain cells.
cgavigan 3 weeks ago
@cgavigan what a comment! bravo!!!
hugejoint 3 weeks ago
Why not find a old ac motor from like a table saw , and an generator..
"gas powered sold in stores, but remove the gas engine"
..and use gear ratios ...or multi gears from an old C4 auto transmission to increase speed..... Find out the Rpm for the generator to work.Generator has to have a small gear and the motor a large gear.. Figuring out the pulley / gear size is up to you....Do not listen to those whom say it will not work do to friction.....Electricity can easily supply it-self.
LegendaryThoughts 1 month ago
The point is no gas retards this is awesome
michaelcrockett40 1 month ago
congrats you got my attention....its not amazing at all- ..u have invented a magnetic gear, however, the friction in the gears comes frm the resistance of the generator. INVENT A GENERATOR without resistance and there will be no friction in the gears. They say it can't be done
stacealamode 1 month ago
its totatly fail...
İt's not possible to get more output energy according to in put energy....
system has a magnetic friction...
stabil voltage but more amperage = big watts
fatihhancerli 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Another Video illustration that might be true or disputable as a Toy & Video Clip.
But not in a position to manufacture Generator System that needs no Fuel, Sun or Wind to Supply Electricity such as:
Shahin Electro Magnet Generator System
Whenever Electricity is needed with no Extra Costs to get Electricity.
For further information see:
Web: shahin-kadir.diytrade.com
Youtube:
- youtube.com/watch?v=JNW0ZyiVC20
- youtube.com/watch?v=7Z5nrA_8uTs
- youtube.com/watch?v=llJkasfo_q0
ShahinGenerator 1 month ago
Free Energy is only made by GOD, we feel every day, except at night, we call it SUN. just built a Sun Cell at you home , that is the real free energy.
silabanpolres 1 month ago
people the only free energy is solar panels and water turbines
mapukmapuk 1 month ago
@mapukmapuk so thats very limited, isnt it? there is WAY more free energy then solar and water turbines.
hugejoint 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mapukmapuk so thats very limited, isnt it? there is WAY more free energy then solar and water turbines.
hugejoint 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mapukmapuk so thats very limited, isnt it? there is WAY more free energy then solar and water turbines.
hugejoint 1 month ago
what can that power? what's the output on that?
frontdesk123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice Set Up.....
If you want to get the Plans for the Free Energy Generator
Go to Google and Search for "Best Magnetic Generator Review"
Click the First Results (just Skip the Advertisements)
ThomasCampbell2012 1 month ago
Free energy? It's called "The Sun".
npsit1 1 month ago
33860airman when will you.come up with plans out to build one from the start. I wan't one hgm14@live.com
ruddy4901 1 month ago
build your own power source at home to power your own home and car
jimmy6wire 1 month ago
Dis be dat hill-billy fysics god-damn for sure. We gots us sum free energy at long last. No more cold baths.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
Another Video illustration that might be true or disputable as a Toy & Video Clip.
But not in a position to manufacture Generator System that needs no Fuel, Sun or Wind to Supply Electricity such as:
Shahin Electro Magnet Generator System
Whenever Electricity is needed with no Extra Costs to get Electricity.
For further information see:
Web: shahin-kadir.diytrade.com
Youtube:
- youtube.com/watch?v=JNW0ZyiVC20
- youtube.com/watch?v=7Z5nrA_8uTs
- youtube.com/watch?v=llJkasfo_q0
ShahinGenerator 2 months ago
seriously ive been looking into this for awhile now and these people never seem to get that they are putting more energy in then they are getting out. come on your powering it with a battery.
ronin51670 2 months ago
Call the patent office. OKed by the president. Really?
Philip88888888 3 months ago
this is shit :)
DJ4geodeath 3 months ago
well it goes right to da president Clinton.... it's gettin a lil weaker, my batree is dyin. we are all just a bit dumber now.
zenderson 3 months ago
remove the battery, stop talking and I would be more impressed
1emailer 3 months ago
Sorry George
stashwe54 3 months ago
all i have to say is.... IF YOU WANTED TO TALK TO YOUR WIFE, YOU DIDNT HAVE TO VIDEO TAPE THE CONVERSATION FOR THE REST OF THE PEOPLE DOING RESEARCH
..problem is.. i couldn't make out what the hell was in the truck. all i heard was "ugu" "yeah" and that was all she said throughout you revving your engine and droning on and on about something
gambit6431 3 months ago
Omg! Its free energy tapped right of a battery... Omg! Its free because he stole that baterry!
MrGunnaras 3 months ago 66
@MrGunnaras even for permanent magnetic motor you need a battery, but if the battery is charged from the motor, theoretically you need just first impuls, lets say, charging battery from standard electric site and its might be running for ever.
hugejoint 1 month ago
Comment removed
g7txu 3 weeks ago
@hugejoint fucktard
g7txu 3 weeks ago
@g7txu you seems to be skilled debater ;) tell us some more deep ideas what you have for us.
hugejoint 3 weeks ago
@MrGunnaras he is charging the batteri idoit
higuys6 5 days ago
@higuys6 lol moron.. why dosnt he invert the charged battery and keep it running at full again.. simply collage physics... but you prob dont understand how it works therefor plzz dont comment on stuff you dont know
MrGunnaras 4 days ago
@MrGunnaras very funny
MyHoratius 3 days ago
look at @8:47
then restart the video 0:00
the whole pile of shit is running off the battery...
FAILURE
bmw2go11 3 months ago
its so cool everytime i go to my favoured store i buy 2 bananas for the price of three and i get one banana for free! amazing. how much energy did you buy to get the free energy?
berlin36moto 3 months ago
whats the battery for? what are all the components and how are they connected? .I know these questions must seem stupid but when you post stuff on youtube you must prepare for a assault from all walks of life. also put a circuit diagram explaining any modifications you have made so i can steal your idea :P naw im joking :)
UniversalExpanse 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
★★★★★
If you want to get the Magnetic-Generator plans
Just search Google for "Best Magnetic Generator"
Click the First result (Skip the Advertisements)
I found it to be a great resource
FlowerVendingMachine 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FlowerVendingMachine
If you want to get the Magnetic-Generator Plans
Just search Google for "Best Magnetic Generator Review"
Click the First result (Skip the Advertisements)
snathanmax 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@snathanmax
If you want to get the Magnetic Generator Plans
Just search Google for
"Top Magnetic Generator Review"
Click the First Result (and Skip the Advertisements)
TopMagneticGenerator 1 month ago 3
another f whit - Free energy is not possible - energy can not be made or lost only transformed from one state to another, thus your ides is total fictions and just basically dumb, possibly matching your education level. Eg if any heat is generated this is a change of electrical energy into heat energy and this lost of energy has to come from somewhere eg the battery you idiot, you may be extending the life of the battery but in the end it will die. put some load on a what how quick it dies.
gottobesaid 4 months ago
@gottobesaid "Free energy is not possible "
I would argue all energy is "free"
It was here before us, and will be here after us. It is said "We can't create it or destroy it" so if it always exists it must be free.
But really i think free energy is a good term. IMO if i don't have to pay for it it is free, like the sun's rays are free to us all. So IF this device really worked it would be fair to call Free energy. Just Saying
Yourfishman 3 months ago
It don't work?
guitartec 4 months ago
now if the drive motor was bedini circuit and switch batts back and forth, then youd have a pretty interesting set up, but powering two from one doesnt seem to make sense.
ddddcheaper 4 months ago
Pure comedy GOLD! "science" be damned! He got that thang thar up on the innernet. Can't believe no one dun stole his idea yet. Or that thur president aint come and shut dis guy down fore his invention destroys the oil business!!! This video had all the comedy of King of the Hill, combined with all the excitement of a Nascar race. I hope there's a sequel.
tevryan 4 months ago
@tevryan lol yeah, straight from mah and pah kettle.
UniversalExpanse 3 months ago
keep the illusion alive
claudelebel55 4 months ago
The guy got the big Pb battery seen on left for free? Wow, free energy for real!
zapparello 4 months ago
This prick is abusing the naive peoples knowledge of electricity & physics. The BATTERY is making them spin, DUH! NET ENERGY LOSS!
madjimms 4 months ago
Simply love the concept with the loss of electrical power in New York City to charge Computer Systems cell phones this device would be helpful tremendously helpful. At this point he does not matter how many batteries it uses up or how long it runs. In my opinion it is needed in New York City right now. Simply the best way to advertise your product thousands and thousands of people need this product now, very intriguing and undoubtedly an unquestionably needed right now New York City
dadhadit 4 months ago
@dadhadit - you do realise it doesn't work as described?
zzytrewq 4 months ago
Nothing special hear. Motors run and as power is consumed from the battery, they run slower.
valveman12 5 months ago
I am amazed at the total lack of electrical knowledge. He does not get that he is running a motor to run a generator to light 2 lights with an inverter. O my what is that a 60 % loss no wonder the battery goes dead in 10 to 20 min. O it is the magnet drive Space age science mystery?
33860AIRMAN 5 months ago 13
At least try to hide that big battery where the power is coming from.
drijfkip1 5 months ago 2
Comment removed
Yourfishman 5 months ago in playlist More videos from newfreeenergydotcom
both fake, and gay
Xero555000 5 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 5 months ago
@EqualAndFree
This videos shows nothing at all! The guys behind this video admit they dont care to show anything.
Personally i think this is a pointless video. Another guys with a similar device, actually measures higher output than input, but he does not follow up with more tests. (look at "mindfreer" Free Energy Electric Power Generator Overunity Magnet Motor )
His output should be 60% of input, but he shows 200% higher output. could be a fraud or...
Yourfishman 5 months ago 2
@EqualAndFree - Trouble is it would run off the second battery (for a short while) and that would be enough "proof" for him to say "look it works!", or he could put the output through a power conditioner then to the input. These backyard inventors follow no protocols and only see results that confirm their beliefs. I have seen other devices where they use the wrong methods to measure input and output power and only quote (obviously) erroneous numbers that support their beliefs.
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@EqualAndFree - I asked him and he said there were "resonant harmonics" (or similar) that stopped the output driving the input. He may as well blamed unicorns stamping through his lounge room. Some of these inventors refuse to accept the reality of what they're doing.
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@EqualAndFree - how it works versus how the inventor thinks it works.
What is happening: The battery powered motor drives two generators via magnetic couplings. The input power is more than the output power as one would expect.
What the inventor thinks is happening, but isn't: The battery powered motor is driving two generators via magnetic couplings. These couplings amplify the power & thus the two generators put out more power than the battery supplies.
Strangely it doesn't self power. LOL
zzytrewq 5 months ago
This device is operating, but its not doing anything except draining your battery. Your device doesn't prove anything. In fact, while I agree that magnets (stored energy) probably can be used/unleashed to create electricity, your device/demonstration cannot do this and sets the cause back. This video is going to be used as an example to show how ignorant all the magnet guys are.
daandrewda 6 months ago
Just think about that for a few moments.
Why do you think a Heat pump has COP +1 abilities?
Is the 2SO very different in that mater?
pendulum / compressor
gas / mass
energy gaining potential of decompressed gas, of heat.
energy gaining potential of decompressed mass, of gravity.
energy transferred due to compression
energy transferred due to compression
I know we are taught that gravity can not be harnessed but think outside of that box for a moment. Does any evidence supports this?
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman comparing a heat pump and the 2SO is interesting but pointless. They both use entirely different means to transfer energy.
I was never taught gravity can't be harnessed. How do you think hydro-electric dams produce energy? My hallway clock uses gravity to drive the mechanism. I think you're confusing gravity as a force with it being able be continuously harnessed as an energy source much the same as people think magnetic motors are a viable energy source. Not now, not ever.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
You can't argue laws of physics with these simple folks as they truly believe they are man made laws.
A great way to get them admit to being idiots is to ask them "If the laws were repealed/dropped would all the perpetual motion machines start to work?"
Of course they would...makes sense to me. LOL
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq @zzytrewq
I'll say this Again, we agree, the 2SO is not > 100% efficient!
I think you have a handle on the Heat pump, & it’s plus 1 COP ability, but for some reason you don’t see the same COP possibility in the 2SO. I guess you need a theory before you can accept the repeatable evidence, that is unfortunate but maybe this theory might help you understand. Maybe not.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - if, as you finally have concluded a 2SO is <100% efficient, therefore the power out is less than the power in. End of debate. The 2SO is merely an interesting device that seems to confuse people into believing it is breaking those laws of physics. It isn't and never will. As for any reference to COP and anything other than a heat pump...oh dear.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq Do you know how a heat pump works?
In short, Heat Pumps compress gas (mass) & decompress gas repeatedly. The decompressed gas captures heat (energy). Then the gas is compressed, & the energy is transferred inside via the evaporator. Repeatedly.
2 Stage Oscillator.
A 2SO compress & decompress Gravity Force repeatedly. The decompress point captures gravity (energy?) Then the mass is compressed (Max G Force), and the energy is transferred via a lever. Repeatedly.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - "2SO compress & decompress Gravity Force repeatedly" - that is exactly where you are confused. Any gain made using gravity is exactly counteracted by having to return the mass to the starting point. No net gain. If you don't get that simple fact I'd say all is lost.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
Why do you think COP +1 only applies to heat pumps? On the surface your logic about action / counter action applies pendulum part. But it does not apply to the centrifugal force that moves the lever, the 2nd stage of the 2 Stage Oscillator.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - the text book definition of COP only applies to heat pumps, air-conditioners and other heating and cooling devices. Look up the definition and you'll see that is a fact. That is why talk of COP and non heat pump devices is not only pointless but it is incorrect. The only term that can be applied to the 2OS is "efficiency" in terms of energy in divided by energy out. You need to accept all that and stop listening to other people trying to redefine standard engineering terms.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
"the text book definition of COP only applies to heat pumps."
Then the problem is a catch 22 for you.
No such thing as over 100% efficiency, & ONLY a heat pump can collect energy from a outside source. Evidence be dammed.
Max Planck once said.
"The truth of a science does not triumph by convincing it's opponents and making them see the light. But rather that it's opponents eventually die, & a new generation grow up that are familiar with it.
I use to find that hard to accept
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - what is the catch 22? The text book definition is the industry definition. Who said only a heat pump can collect energy from an outside source? I didn't say it or imply it. Wind turbines and hydroelectric systems are indirectly driven by the sun's energy, solar panels use it directly. You still seem to confuse COP and efficiency, stop comparing apples and pears. COP can be >1. What device has an efficiency >1?
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@zzytrewq
We both know that over 100% efficiency is not possible.
You BELIEVE that COP only can apply to the heat-pump category.
Sooo, (aside form HP) +1 COP can't exist , therefore "Higher Output Than Input" can't exist = CATCH 22.
So for you, "HOTI" is a impossibility, and there is no reason to give any such claims of any device a second thought regardless of ...
If i misunderstand you, tell me what you would call a device that use energy to harnesses a outside energy?
Yourfishman 5 months ago
@Yourfishman -wrong. Google COP and look at the scientific & industry definition, it is not my definition. Anyone who uses the term "COP" for anything other than heat pumps and the like, is totally incorrect. I don't see the Catch 22. COP>1 is not higher output than input as a heat pump operates in an open system - you do understand that? I have answered the question before - what device do you think uses energy to harnesses outside energy?
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@Yourfishman - Considering all you have said to date if only you could see the irony in M Planck's words. They apply to you, not me.
Until you do you will go on believing that there are devices (e.g. 2OS) that put out more energy than they consume.
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@Yourfishman - I worked out why the measurements of input & output for the 2OS are incorrect if you're interested. I found a way to describe the operation that proves what I have said all along. The measurements are incorrect and the supposed ratio of output to input is meaningless. In fact the hand power supplied is equal to the system's frictional losses & the output is zero (provided it is not driving any other mechanism). I discussed this with another guy who posts & he agrees totally.
zzytrewq 5 months ago
@zzytrewq
Now your talking, I would love to hear something that explain the measurements.
That has always been the issue for me, Everything else is secondary, the measurements have always been are my main concern.
Yourfishman 5 months ago
battery?
TheReasonWhyGuy 6 months ago
FREE PLANS?
crafter2u 6 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 6 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 6 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - "Rhead100' 2SO move 4lbs 4" = 16in lbs. and gets 70+ lbs moving 2" twice = 280 in lbs. 17.5 Xs GAIN" - there's your problem. You're confusing leverage with power. Unless you factor in time (power = ft lbs/min) you're kidding yourself. I'll bet the time to move the small weight 4" is way shorter than the time the heavier mass moves 2". It is a leverage issue, with the inclusion of the time factor your whole argument is blown out of the water. Score one more for mathematics.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks - I see why you gave up. Oh boy.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
Comment removed
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@zzytrewq - yep, he's a member of that exclusive club. "Ain't Done Much Skoolin' But Ah Believes What Ah Sees Club". You can't talk physics and maths with people who don't believe in it.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 6 months ago
"no mechanical device can harness gravity to povide free energy."
The case for GRAVITY OU, “Milklovics Two Stag Oscillator” has already been discussed. Many PHDs of physics and mathematics have acknowledged this as fact. Many more like liam still don't accept it. The proof is self-evident. Look at this youtube video “ Higher pendulum more weight lifted A of A&B ” Pushes 2 lbs of force, lifts 49 Lbs. Then adds 23lbs, and then has to push with 4 lbs of force.
4in : 72out, or 2in: 23 out etherway
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - the oscillator doesn't provide free energy. If it did then it would pass the standard test. i.e. use the output power to drive the input. I doubt any genuine PHDs believe the oscillator provides free energy. I have read all the posts and watched the other videos. No one has ever made such a device self run. It looks like it is giving something for nothing but it doesn't.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - rather than pursue this pointless argument quoting what are meaningless figures how about you make one of these devices and have it self run. That is the only test as far as I can see. We can't rely on YT posters putting accurate figures as they all clearly contradict what is established scientific fact. I see you remove many of your posts and are becoming more obstinate with each post. Is everyone wrong and you right?
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks
I removed posts, because I was trying to edit my last statement on leverage vs 2SO, just to make it clearer. It still did not post as written, with proper spacing...
I never said this magnetic gears works as described. I just think it could possibly work. Your equal shaft speed & torque is a valid point, with only 1 exception. That exception does narrow down what could be happening, if it is not a hoax.
You're correct on the language. Free-OU->1COP... they seem to merge at times
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - the cogging device may not be a hoax, but a well intentioned exercise, but besides all that it doesn't work and for it to work would require clearly impossible one sided force action from pairs of magnets.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks
2SO
" We can't rely on YT posters putting accurate figures as they all clearly contradict what is established scientific fact."
If you don't except what you see with your eyes because it contradicts "Established Scientific Facts" then this is a pointless conversation. The E-S-F are exactly whats in question. The 2SO challenges Newton. You can see he only pushes the smallest amount, and you see, and hear, the results over & over.
"Is everyone wrong and you right?" Everyone?
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - accepting things with your eyes from a YT video is a bit naive isn't it? You prefer to believe what you see rather than what has been established by science over the last several hundred years? I saw a magnetic motor "working" on YT some time back. So of the posters were like you - there it was spinning away and clearly self running and I was an idiot for sticking with my dumb laws of physics. After some months the guy who posted it revealed the hidden motor & battery.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - accepting things with your eyes is one thing - but these guys don't provide figures that stand up to scrutiny either. They are trying to promote something that is clearly impossible and so are they going to state figures that support that notion? Not likely. As to who is right or wrong - you choose to miss the point don't you? Proponents of these devices are wrong because they don't understand physics, it is as simple as that. People have been fooled by what they see.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - so what about responding to my comment that you're only seeing the leverage aspect of the oscillator and not seeing the power aspect. Torque (ft lbs) is not power, and efficiency is measured by (power out)/(power in) so unless accurate times etc are provided all the quoted figures mean very little. Few supporters of "free energy" devices accept that math and physics have a role to play and that is why they make these wild unsubstantiated claims.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks
Time. Work vs Power.
I asked my son to import Rhead's 2SO video into his computer and run his editing program on it to give us some real times. But at a brief visual study w/o slow motion, the weight dropping time looks very similar to the push time, maybe even faster. The upward motion appears to be much slower. Time is a great point that i did not consider ; )
I accept Rhead100 ball park numbers, because they are consistent with my own test i made with my 2SO.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - all this is getting rather academic now. Get the one you made to self run - despite what you think that is the definition of a perpetual motion machine/over unity device. Unless you do that you're kidding yourself about the free energy business. You think it is possible but won't test it.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks Rhead100 's 2 stage oscillator. I did the frame by frame review here are the results. The Facts.
Input; 4 lbs push x 4" D / 0.1 sec = 160.
Output; 70 lbs X 1.5 "D X 2 times / 0.1 sec = 2100. (for the downward movement)
Power Ratio input to output of downward movement 1 :13.125.
Power Ratio for upward lift 1 : 4.375
These are conservative numbers. Even if Rhead100 under estimated his pushing force by 100% the output power is still 6 times greater than the input.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - LOL. Selectively seeing numbers that support your unscientific argument. This is headed no where. Stop the nonsense and get the output to drive the input. The very definition of an over unity device, (especially one that has a claimed efficiency of several 100%) is that it self runs. Until you prove it self runs you will continue to be deluded.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@ZoeMarks
Language
EFFICIENCY = Total energy out, compared to total energy in.
( no device have every shown over 100%)
COEFFICIENT OF PERFORMANCE COP = total energy the OPERATOR supplies compared to total energy out.
(look at COP Wikipedia for more)
OVER-UNITY OU = More than 1. Period
There are many devices that show OU of COP. Nothing has every shown OU of efficiency don't confuse this. Whether you believe or not the 2SO is "OU of COP" is up to you, all the evidence is there.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - heat pumps have a COP>1 but are not over-unity devices. Learn the language.
Whether you understand it or not the 2SO is not an over-unity device as the numbers quoted are obviously incorrect. Until you get it to self run it is not an over-unity device. You are deluded. Ask yourself why no one has got one to self run (the ONLY test for perpetual motion machines).
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - oh man are you so wrong there. Remove the rose coloured glasses. If you believe in ghosts long enough you'll see one. If the oscillator did produce more power than it took to run it then it could be made to run by itself. Seeing as you have shown it has a lot of excess power then make a connection to the input side. Just a note of warning though - thousands have tried. By the way your figures are so full of holes I'd remove them as you have 2 + 2 = 5 like all PPM inventors.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
Refrigerators are OU COP devices. Input energy from OPERATOR supplies 25 parts . The heat supplies 75 parts of input energy. That is the total of 100 parts input energy. With friction, conservation of energy, etc... the actual work done in cooling is only 50 parts work energy.
TOTAL IN = 100 PARTS - TOTAL OUT 50 PARTS = 50% EFFICIENT.
Op - IN 25. TOTAL OUT 50 PARTS = That is 200% COP or 2.0 COP.
A refrigerator is a OU COP device, but doesn't run itself! Some friges have COP of 6
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - thank you Captain Obvious but your'e still missing the point. A COP>1 has nothing to do with "free energy" machines. The language of heat pumps and the like uses "COP" but over unity machines and PPM uses output/input power in a different context.
Put a fridge in an insulated box and after a while it will have a COP of zero. Put a PPM in the same box and (provided it works) it will demonstrate its efficiency (or over unity).
OU/PPM devices are not related to heat pumps.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - or to put it more simply, a heat pump operates in an open system, a OU/PPM device operates in a closed system. That is why people can't grasp a solar panel isn't free energy, or a wind turbine. They don't speak the language of physics and then confuse themselves and those they talk to.
I went searching for 2OS videos/papers/forums etc where numerous people have tried to get them to self run. Strangely none do. Energy in > energy out, as expected.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
Exactly.
No-one claims or even suggested that 2SO are PPM or OU (of efficiency). The claim is always been that the extra energy is coming from another source. If you remove gravity this device does nothing.
It is not that they can't grasp it . To most people these words are just semantics. It is a little silly to me that folks get hung up on the term "OU" or free energy applying only to efficiency, and not COP or..., when you no good and well what they are talking about.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman "No-one claims or even suggested that 2SO are PPM or OU (of efficiency). The claim is always been that the extra energy is coming from another source" say what? You claimed they had a COP(!!!) >1 now you say they're not PPM or OU. "Extra energy from another source" - based on that I now can't see where you're going nor agree with any of your reasoning. Take up night school and study Physics. You're going around in circles.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
You are right, this is going around in circles. i think you are being selective with which words you read. nothing i have said has changed. but your conclusions skip the point over and over.
I just pointed out how the heat pump and the 2SO are not PPM or OU (of efficiency devices) but they are both COP +1. Is that hard to understand?
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - you are the confused one. The 2OS is not PPM or OU though you believe they have a higher output power than input power. Mmm, let me think about that for a nanosecond. And you aren't convinced they need to self run to demonstrate that and yet you still believe the output power exceeds the input power.
COP only applies to heat pumps and is not related to PMM or OU devices though your posts say otherwise.
You've lost it now, you need to talk to a physics teacher.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
Spend $30 and a few hours in the shop and you too could build one and verify his evidence first hand, as i did.
Funny thing is, I brought up that 2SO just because it is easy to visually understand and verify. I was going to connect to dots, as to how the 2SO effects relates to the Interactive Gears system in this video. But if you can't understand what is clear and obvious to me, you will never understand a theory of how these Interactive gears could also harness energy.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - the "interactive gears" do nothing more than transfer power. May as well use pulleys. If you think there is a net power gain from such "gears" then you simply are kidding yourself. Put a set together and test it for yourself and you'll see I'm right.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq (If you choose to believe "evidence" from a YouTube video against all of the established related laws of physics then go for it.)
Repeatable evidence from test results is by definition a fact. If facts go against A Law, it does not change the fact, but it may change the Law, or at least our understanding of that Law.
Now if you could point out the testing was flawed... then that would be constructive. But your "I’m smarter than you, go back to school, " is childish & a waste of time
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - repeatable evidence could be facts. But the "evidence" collected from these devices is intending to imply they produce more energy than they consume. In that case the data are incorrect. You pig-headedly refuse to acknowledge the only real test is for them to self power. That to me confirms you just don't get it.
The laws of conservation of energy say they cannot be >100% efficient. Would it run if those laws were revised?
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq - found this on the the Rhead video post about the 2SO BS.
This is priceless: "The machine does put out more energy than it takes to run it. IT DOES NOT create energy. It simply changes potential energy to kinetic energy."
Now the world knows a kinetic kilowatt is more than a potential kilowatt the energy problems are solved. LOL
Rhead needs to look up oxymoron in the dictionary. Him and his fans need to go to night school.
ZoeMarks 6 months ago
Comment removed
zzytrewq 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
For 800 years top academia taught that a larger objects will fall faster than a smaller a objects.
Something so simple to disprove went unchallenged until Newton. That blunder happened because we ignored evidence that contradicted what we have been taught.
You go ahead & stick with your school taught physics and ignore eveidence. I'll continue to consider real evidence when presented whether it questions the school taught physics or not.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - your evidence is not real. Make it self run and prove me wrong.
I assumed you made up the 800 year old reference. When I went to school we were taught it was Galileo Galilei in the 1600's who did the experiment (even though this is probably a myth) and demonstrated that Aristotle was wrong 2000 years earlier. You are confusing it with Newton's theory on gravity confirming it theoretically. You can ignore the evidence... LOL
zzytrewq 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zzytrewq
It is not my evidence, it is the evidence. What part is not real? and why?
You continue to miss the point, 800 years or 2000 years the point is the same. Highly schooled Folks have been wrong about many thing though out history. Look for the real, repeatable evidence, and come to your own conclusion.
When you make a heat pump self run, I'll do the same with the 2SO ; )
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@zzytrewq
Galileo discovered and presented the evidence. Another 50-100 years goes by until someone finds the math... to support the theory, Go figure. I wonder how long it took academia to except Galileo's evidence.
I have been very specific about 1 person's Two Stage Oscillator; it belongs to YouTube's Rhead100. His, Higher pendulum more weight lifted A of A&B, video. That video is very straight forward & he is very open with solid details. Other attempts at 2SO don't matter.
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@Yourfishman - you are now showing a distinctive anti-intellectual streak. That chip on your shoulder must be such a burden. If you choose to believe "evidence" from a YouTube video against all of the established related laws of physics then go for it. No one can change your mind except. Find a Two Stage Oscillator that self runs and the world of science will be turned upside down.
zzytrewq 6 months ago
Comment removed
Yourfishman 6 months ago
@jimmyhoffa9 - wrong. To get work out of magnets one must apply an opposing or attracting magnetic force. This requires one of the fields to be turned on and off. That is how electric motors work. The same thing cannot be accomplished with magnets alone. It is not possible to turn a permanent magnet off without using energy greater than can be recovered. The laws of conservation of energy have yet to be defeated by any device - magnetic motors are never going to self run.
LiamXaoh 6 months ago
One question... What happens when you take the output and connect it to the input in place of the battery and inverter. If it continues to run continuously, at that point, you may have something. The problem is that, in any system there will be loss due to friction and heat loss. Even if you were to eliminate all friction and heat loss you will never get out more than you put in.
wperry1 7 months ago
@wperry1 if the generator produces enough energy it will power itself and it is produces enough energy you will have a fuelless generator. I saw a demo when they had 40kw's being produced and powering a bank of lightbulbs and everything was laid out clearly in a plastic case to prove it was real. you would really just need a capacitor or battery to get it going and you'd have free energy. the magnetic will lose energy over time though. . . .say 400 years so its not a super long investment. lol
jimmyhoffa9 6 months ago
@jimmyhoffa9 - none of these devices self power and yet the inventors insist they produce extra energy (over-unity). They use way more power than they produce - it's simple to measure but they don't do that either. A case of being blinded by belief.
LiamXaoh 6 months ago
@jimmyhoffa9 - plus magnets do not have energy. Where do people get that idea from?
LiamXaoh 6 months ago
@LiamXaoh yes they do. how do you think they attract and repel each other. more correctly they tap into the magnetic energy that is natural.
jimmyhoffa9 6 months ago
@jimmyhoffa9 - magnets do not attract because they have energy. That is a myth from the "free energy" sites. They do not "tap into the magnetic energy..." - oh God where do you get that stuff?
LiamXaoh 6 months ago
@LiamXaoh you get the idea hopefully. . .magnets attract each other and repel each other. . if you can "harness" that power in a useful form, like electricity you essentially have "free" energy.
jimmyhoffa9 6 months ago
Comment removed
LiamXaoh 6 months ago