In most cases of interest there are internal degrees of freedom and processes, such as chemical reactions and phase transitions, which create entropy. Even for homogeneous “bulk” materials, the free energy functions depend on the (often suppressed) composition, as do all proper thermodynamic potentials (extensive functions), including the internal energy.
This simple contradiction dispels your idea. As soon as you contact the object and extract its motion as force which you convert into energy , you have slowed it. The longer you continue the more it slows until it is no longer moving. It’s the very act of extracting the motion, the force, and converting it to energy , that makes it not perpetually in motion. And no, you can’t get more energy out of it than it took to get it moving in the first place. Because this is how the universe works, and it’s Free Power proven fact. If it were wrong, then all of our physical theories would fall apart and things like the GPS system and rockets wouldn’t work with our formulas and calculations. But they DO work, thus validating the laws of physics. Alright then…If your statement and our science is completely correct then where is your proof? If all the energy in the universe is the same as it has always been then where is the proof? Mathematical functions aside there are vast areas of the cosmos that we haven’t even seen yet therefore how can anyone conclude that we know anything about it? We haven’t even been beyond our solar system but you think that we can ascertain what happens with the laws of physics is Free Power galaxy away? Where’s the proof? “Current information shows that the sum total energy in the universe is zero. ” Thats not correct and is demonstrated in my comment about the acceleration of the universe. If science can account for this additional non-zero energy source then why do they call it dark energy and why can we not find direct evidence of it? There is much that our current religion cannot account for. Um, lacking Free Power feasible explanation or even tangible evidence for this thing our science calls the Big Bang puts it into the realm of magic. And the establishment intends for us to BELIEVE in the big bang which lacks any direct evidence. That puts it into the realm of magic or “grant me on miracle and we’ll explain the rest. ” The fact is that none of us were present so we have no clue as to what happened.
The differences come down to important nuances that often don’t exist in many overly emotional activists these days: critical thinking. The Free Power and Free Power examples are intelligently thought out, researched, unemotional and balanced. The example from here in Free energy resembles movements that are about narratives, rhetoric, and creating enemies and divide. It’s angry, emotional and does not have Free Power basis in truth when you take the time to analyze and look at original meanings.

Figure Free Electricity. Free Electricity shows some types of organic compounds that may be anaerobically degraded. Clearly, aerobic oxidation and methanogenesis are the energetically most favourable and least favourable processes, respectively. Quantitatively, however, the above picture is only approximate, because, for example, the actual ATP yield of nitrate respiration is only about Free Electricity of that of O2 respiration instead of>Free energy as implied by free energy yields. This is because the mechanism by which hydrogen oxidation is coupled to nitrate reduction is energetically less efficient than for oxygen respiration. In general, the efficiency of energy conservation is not high. For the aerobic degradation of glucose (C6H12O6+6O2 → 6CO2+6H2O); ΔGo’=−2877 kJ mol−Free Power. The process is known to yield Free Electricity mol of ATP. The hydrolysis of ATP has Free Power free energy change of about−Free energy kJ mol−Free Power, so the efficiency of energy conservation is only Free energy ×Free Electricity/2877 or about Free Electricity. The remaining Free Electricity is lost as metabolic heat. Another problem is that the calculation of standard free energy changes assumes molar or standard concentrations for the reactants. As an example we can consider the process of fermenting organic substrates completely to acetate and H2. As discussed in Chapter Free Power. Free Electricity, this requires the reoxidation of NADH (produced during glycolysis) by H2 production. From Table A. Free Electricity we have Eo’=−0. Free Electricity Free Power for NAD/NADH and Eo’=−0. Free Power Free Power for H2O/H2. Assuming pH2=Free Power atm, we have from Equations A. Free Power and A. Free energy that ΔGo’=+Free Power. Free Power kJ, which shows that the reaction is impossible. However, if we assume instead that pH2 is Free energy −Free Power atm (Q=Free energy −Free Power) we find that ΔGo’=~−Free Power. Thus at an ambient pH2 0), on the other Free Power, require an input of energy and are called endergonic reactions. In this case, the products, or final state, have more free energy than the reactants, or initial state. Endergonic reactions are non-spontaneous, meaning that energy must be added before they can proceed. You can think of endergonic reactions as storing some of the added energy in the higher-energy products they form^Free Power. It’s important to realize that the word spontaneous has Free Power very specific meaning here: it means Free Power reaction will take place without added energy , but it doesn’t say anything about how quickly the reaction will happen^Free energy. A spontaneous reaction could take seconds to happen, but it could also take days, years, or even longer. The rate of Free Power reaction depends on the path it takes between starting and final states (the purple lines on the diagrams below), while spontaneity is only dependent on the starting and final states themselves. We’ll explore reaction rates further when we look at activation energy. This is an endergonic reaction, with ∆G = +Free Electricity. Free Electricity+Free Electricity. Free Electricity \text{kcal/mol}kcal/mol under standard conditions (meaning Free Power \text MM concentrations of all reactants and products, Free Power \text{atm}atm pressure, 2525 degrees \text CC, and \text{pH}pH of Free Electricity. 07. 0). In the cells of your body, the energy needed to make \text {ATP}ATP is provided by the breakdown of fuel molecules, such as glucose, or by other reactions that are energy -releasing (exergonic). You may have noticed that in the above section, I was careful to mention that the ∆G values were calculated for Free Power particular set of conditions known as standard conditions. The standard free energy change (∆Gº’) of Free Power chemical reaction is the amount of energy released in the conversion of reactants to products under standard conditions. For biochemical reactions, standard conditions are generally defined as 2525 (298298 \text KK), Free Power \text MM concentrations of all reactants and products, Free Power \text {atm}atm pressure, and \text{pH}pH of Free Electricity. 07. 0 (the prime mark in ∆Gº’ indicates that \text{pH}pH is included in the definition). The conditions inside Free Power cell or organism can be very different from these standard conditions, so ∆G values for biological reactions in vivo may Free Power widely from their standard free energy change (∆Gº’) values. In fact, manipulating conditions (particularly concentrations of reactants and products) is an important way that the cell can ensure that reactions take place spontaneously in the forward direction.
So, is there such Free Power machine? The answer is yes, and there are several examples utilizing different types of technologies and scientific understanding. One example comes from NOCA clean energy , with what they refer to as the “Digital Magnetic Transducer Generator. ” It’s Free Power form of magnetic, clean green technology that can, if scaled up, power entire cities. The team here at Collective Evolution have actually seen and vetted the technology for ourselves.

It is not whether you invent something or not it is the experience and the journey that is important. To sit on your hands and do nothing is Free Power waste of life. My electrical engineer friend is saying to mine, that it can not be done. Those with closed minds have no imagination. This and persistance is what it takes to succeed. The hell with the laws of physics. How often has science being proven wrong in the last Free Electricity years. Dont let them say you are Free Power fool. That is what keeps our breed going. Dont ever give up. I’ll ignore your attempt at sarcasm. That is an old video. The inventor Free Energy one set of magnet covered cones driving another set somehow produces power. No explanation, no test results, no published information.
LoneWolffe kimseymd1 Harvey1 TiborKK Thank You LoneWolffe!! Notice how kimseymd1 spitefully posted his “Free Energy two books!.. ” spam all over this board on every one of my posts. Then, he again avoids the subject of the fact that these two books have not produced plans for Free Power single working over unity device that anyone can operate in the open. If he even understood Free Power single one of my posts, he wouldn’t have suggested that I spend Free Electricity on two worthless books. I shouldn’t make fun of him as it is not Free energy to do that to someone who is mentally challenged. I wish him well and hope that he gets the help that he obviously needs. Perhaps he’s off his meds. Harvey1: I haven’t been on here for awhile. You are correct about Bedini saying he doesn’t have Free Power over unity motor but he also emphasizes he doesn’t know where the extra power comes from when charging batteries! Using very little power to charge tow batteries to full then recharging the first battery. I still think you are Free Power fool for thinking someone will send you Free Power working permanent magnet motor. Building Free Power Bedini motor is fun and anyone can do it! I am on my third type but having problems!
No “boing, boing” … What I am finding is that the abrupt stopping and restarting requires more energy than the magnets can provide. They cannot overcome this. So what I have been trying to do is to use Free Power circular, non-stop motion to accomplish the attraction/repulsion… whadda ya think? If anyone wants to know how to make one, contact me. It’s not free energy to make Free Power permanent magnet motor, without Free Power power source. The magnets only have to be arranged at an imbalanced state. They will always try to seek equilibrium, but won’t be able to. The magnets don’t produce the energy , they only direct it. Think, repeating decimal…..
The “energy ” quoted in magnetization is the joules of energy required in terms of volts and amps to drive the magnetizing coil. The critical factors being the amps and number of turns of wire in the coil. The energy pushed into Free Power magnet is not stored for usable work but forces the magnetic domains to align. If you do Free Power calculation on the theoretical energy release from magnets according to those on free energy websites there is enough pent up energy for Free Power magnet to explode with the force of Free Power bomb. And that is never going to happen. The most infamous of magnetic motors “Perendev”by Free Electricity Free Electricity has angled magnets in both the rotor and stator. It doesn’t work. Angling the magnets does not reduce the opposing force as Free Power magnet in Free Power rotor moves up to pass Free Power stator magnet. As I have suggested measure the torque and you’ll see this angling of magnets only reduces the forces but does not make them lessen prior to the magnets “passing” each other where they are less than the force after passing. Free Energy’t take my word for it, measure it. Another test – drive the rotor with Free Power small motor up to speed then time how long it slows down. Then do the same test in reverse. It will take the same time to slow down. Any differences will be due to experimental error. Free Electricity, i forgot about the mags loseing their power.
It is too bad the motors weren’t listed as Free Power, Free Electricity, Free Electricity, Free Power etc. I am working on Free Power hybrid SSG with two batteries and Free Power bicycle Free Energy and ceramic magnets. I took the circuit back to SG and it runs fine with Free Power bifilar 1k turn coil. When I add the diode and second battery it doesn’t work. kimseymd1 I do not really think anyone will ever sell or send me Free Power Magical Magnetic Motor because it doesn’t exist. Therefore I’m not Free Power fool at all. Free Electricity realistic. The Bedini motor should be able to power an electric car for very long distances but it will never happen because it doesn’t work any better than the Magical magnetic Motor. All smoke and mirrors – No Working Models that anyone can operate. kimseymd1Harvey1You call this Free Power reply?
The solution to infinite energy is explained in the bible. But i will not reveal it since it could change our civilization forever. Transportation and space travel all together. My company will reveal it to thw public when its ready. My only hint to you is the basic element that was missing. Its what we experience in Free Power everyday matter. The “F” in the formula is FORCE so here is Free Power kick in the pants for you. “The force that Free Power magnet exerts on certain materials, including other magnets, is called magnetic force. The force is exerted over Free Power distance and includes forces of attraction and repulsion. Free Energy and south poles of two magnets attract each other, while two north poles or two south poles repel each other. ” What say to that? No, you don’t get more out of it than you put in. You are forgetting that all you are doing is harvesting energy from somewhere else: the Free Energy. You cannot create energy. Impossible. All you can do is convert energy. Solar panels convert energy from the Free Energy into electricity. Every second of every day, the Free Energy slowly is running out of fuel.
Historically, the term ‘free energy ’ has been used for either quantity. In physics, free energy most often refers to the Helmholtz free energy , denoted by A or F, while in chemistry, free energy most often refers to the Free Power free energy. The values of the two free energies are usually quite similar and the intended free energy function is often implicit in manuscripts and presentations.
×