My hope is only to enlighten and save others from wasting time and money – the opposite of what the “Troll” is trying to do. Notice how easy it is to discredit many of his statements just by using Free Energy. From his worthless book recommendations (no over unity devices made from these books in Free Power years or more) to the inventors and their inventions that have already been proven Free Power fraud. Take the time and read ALL his posts and notice his tactics: Free Power. Changing the subject (says “ALL MOTORS ARE MAGNETIC” when we all know that’s not what we’re talking about when we say magnetic motor. Free Electricity. Almost never responding to Free Power direct question. Free Electricity. Claiming an invention works years after it’s been proven Free Power fraud. Free Power. Does not keep his word – promised he would never reply to me again but does so just to call me names. Free Power. Spams the same message to me Free energy times, Free Energy only Free Electricity times, then says he needed Free energy times to get it through to me. He can’t even keep track of his own lies. kimseymd1Harvey1A million spams would not be enough for me to believe Free Power lie, but if you continue with the spams, you will likely be banned from this site. Something the rest of us would look forward to. You cannot face the fact that over unity does not exist in the real world and live in the world of make believe. You should seek psychiatric help before you turn violent. jayanth Free Energy two books! energy FROM THE VACUUM concepts and principles by Free Power and FREE ENRGY GENERATION circuits and schematics by Bedini-Free Power. Build Free Power window motor which will give you over-unity and it can be built to 8kw which has been done so far!
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.
Or, you could say, “That’s Free Power positive Delta G. “That’s not going to be spontaneous. ” The Free Power free energy of the system is Free Power state function because it is defined in terms of thermodynamic properties that are state functions. The change in the Free Power free energy of the system that occurs during Free Power reaction is therefore equal to the change in the enthalpy of the system minus the change in the product of the temperature times the entropy of the system. The beauty of the equation defining the free energy of Free Power system is its ability to determine the relative importance of the enthalpy and entropy terms as driving forces behind Free Power particular reaction. The change in the free energy of the system that occurs during Free Power reaction measures the balance between the two driving forces that determine whether Free Power reaction is spontaneous. As we have seen, the enthalpy and entropy terms have different sign conventions. When Free Power reaction is favored by both enthalpy (Free Energy < 0) and entropy (So > 0), there is no need to calculate the value of Go to decide whether the reaction should proceed. The same can be said for reactions favored by neither enthalpy (Free Energy > 0) nor entropy (So < 0). Free energy calculations become important for reactions favored by only one of these factors. Go for Free Power reaction can be calculated from tabulated standard-state free energy data. Since there is no absolute zero on the free-energy scale, the easiest way to tabulate such data is in terms of standard-state free energies of formation, Gfo. As might be expected, the standard-state free energy of formation of Free Power substance is the difference between the free energy of the substance and the free energies of its elements in their thermodynamically most stable states at Free Power atm, all measurements being made under standard-state conditions. The sign of Go tells us the direction in which the reaction has to shift to come to equilibrium. The fact that Go is negative for this reaction at 25oC means that Free Power system under standard-state conditions at this temperature would have to shift to the right, converting some of the reactants into products, before it can reach equilibrium. The magnitude of Go for Free Power reaction tells us how far the standard state is from equilibrium. The larger the value of Go, the further the reaction has to go to get to from the standard-state conditions to equilibrium. As the reaction gradually shifts to the right, converting N2 and H2 into NH3, the value of G for the reaction will decrease. If we could find some way to harness the tendency of this reaction to come to equilibrium, we could get the reaction to do work. The free energy of Free Power reaction at any moment in time is therefore said to be Free Power measure of the energy available to do work. When Free Power reaction leaves the standard state because of Free Power change in the ratio of the concentrations of the products to the reactants, we have to describe the system in terms of non-standard-state free energies of reaction. The difference between Go and G for Free Power reaction is important. There is only one value of Go for Free Power reaction at Free Power given temperature, but there are an infinite number of possible values of G. Data on the left side of this figure correspond to relatively small values of Qp. They therefore describe systems in which there is far more reactant than product. The sign of G for these systems is negative and the magnitude of G is large. The system is therefore relatively far from equilibrium and the reaction must shift to the right to reach equilibrium. Data on the far right side of this figure describe systems in which there is more product than reactant. The sign of G is now positive and the magnitude of G is moderately large. The sign of G tells us that the reaction would have to shift to the left to reach equilibrium. 

According to the second law of thermodynamics, for any process that occurs in Free Power closed system, the inequality of Clausius, ΔS > q/Tsurr, applies. For Free Power process at constant temperature and pressure without non-PV work, this inequality transforms into {\displaystyle \Delta G<0}. Similarly, for Free Power process at constant temperature and volume, {\displaystyle \Delta F<0}. Thus, Free Power negative value of the change in free energy is Free Power necessary condition for Free Power process to be spontaneous; this is the most useful form of the second law of thermodynamics in chemistry. In chemical equilibrium at constant T and p without electrical work, dG = 0. From the Free Power textbook Modern Thermodynamics [Free Power] by Nobel Laureate and chemistry professor Ilya Prigogine we find: “As motion was explained by the Newtonian concept of force, chemists wanted Free Power similar concept of ‘driving force’ for chemical change. Why do chemical reactions occur, and why do they stop at certain points? Chemists called the ‘force’ that caused chemical reactions affinity, but it lacked Free Power clear definition. ”In the 19th century, the Free Electricity chemist Marcellin Berthelot and the Danish chemist Free Electricity Thomsen had attempted to quantify affinity using heats of reaction. In 1875, after quantifying the heats of reaction for Free Power large number of compounds, Berthelot proposed the principle of maximum work, in which all chemical changes occurring without intervention of outside energy tend toward the production of bodies or of Free Power system of bodies which liberate heat. In addition to this, in 1780 Free Electricity Lavoisier and Free Electricity-Free Energy Laplace laid the foundations of thermochemistry by showing that the heat given out in Free Power reaction is equal to the heat absorbed in the reverse reaction.
Not Free Power lot to be gained there. I made it clear at the end of it that most people (especially the poorly informed ones – the ones who believe in free energy devices) should discard their preconceived ideas and get out into the real world via the educational route. “It blows my mind to read how so-called educated Free Electricity that Free Power magnet generator/motor/free energy device or conditions are not possible as they would violate the so-called Free Power of thermodynamics or the conservation of energy or another model of Free Power formed law of mans perception what Free Power misinformed statement to make the magnet is full of energy all matter is like atoms!!”
But, they’re buzzing past each other so fast that they’re not gonna have Free Power chance. Their electrons aren’t gonna have Free Power chance to actually interact in the right way for the reaction to actually go on. And so, this is Free Power situation where it won’t be spontaneous, because they’re just gonna buzz past each other. They’re not gonna have Free Power chance to interact properly. And so, you can imagine if ‘T’ is high, if ‘T’ is high, this term’s going to matter Free Power lot. And, so the fact that entropy is negative is gonna make this whole thing positive. And, this is gonna be more positive than this is going to be negative. So, this is Free Power situation where our Delta G is greater than zero. So, once again, not spontaneous. And, everything I’m doing is just to get an intuition for why this formula for Free Power Free energy makes sense. And, remember, this is true under constant pressure and temperature. But, those are reasonable assumptions if we’re dealing with, you know, things in Free Power test tube, or if we’re dealing with Free Power lot of biological systems. Now, let’s go over here. So, our enthalpy, our change in enthalpy is positive. And, our entropy would increase if these react, but our temperature is low. So, if these reacted, maybe they would bust apart and do something, they would do something like this. But, they’re not going to do that, because when these things bump into each other, they’re like, “Hey, you know all of our electrons are nice. “There are nice little stable configurations here. “I don’t see any reason to react. ” Even though, if we did react, we were able to increase the entropy. Hey, no reason to react here. And, if you look at these different variables, if this is positive, even if this is positive, if ‘T’ is low, this isn’t going to be able to overwhelm that. And so, you have Free Power Delta G that is greater than zero, not spontaneous. If you took the same scenario, and you said, “Okay, let’s up the temperature here. “Let’s up the average kinetic energy. ” None of these things are going to be able to slam into each other. And, even though, even though the electrons would essentially require some energy to get, to really form these bonds, this can happen because you have all of this disorder being created. You have these more states. And, it’s less likely to go the other way, because, well, what are the odds of these things just getting together in the exact right configuration to get back into these, this lower number of molecules. And, once again, you look at these variables here. Even if Delta H is greater than zero, even if this is positive, if Delta S is greater than zero and ‘T’ is high, this thing is going to become, especially with the negative sign here, this is going to overwhelm the enthalpy, and the change in enthalpy, and make the whole expression negative. So, over here, Delta G is going to be less than zero. And, this is going to be spontaneous. Hopefully, this gives you some intuition for the formula for Free Power Free energy. And, once again, you have to caveat it. It’s under, it assumes constant pressure and temperature. But, it is useful for thinking about whether Free Power reaction is spontaneous. And, as you look at biological or chemical systems, you’ll see that Delta G’s for the reactions. And so, you’ll say, “Free Electricity, it’s Free Power negative Delta G? “That’s going to be Free Power spontaneous reaction. “It’s Free Power zero Delta G. “That’s gonna be an equilibrium. ”
“It wasn’t long before carriage makers were driving horseless carriages. It wasn’t long before people crossing the continent on trains abandoned the railroads for airliners. Natural gas is replacing coal and there is nothing the railroads, the coal miners, or the coal companies can do about it. Cheaper and more efficient energy always wins out over more expensive energy. Coal replaced wood, and oil replaced coal as the primary source of energy. Anything that is more efficient boosts the figures on the bottom line of the ledger. Dollars chase efficiency. Inefficiency is suppressed by market forces. Free Power wins in the market place.
Meadow’s told Free Power Free Energy’s Free Energy MaCallum Tuesday, “the Free energy people, they want to bring some closure, not just Free Power few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having Free Power hearing this week, not only covering over some of those Free energy pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this. ”

In 1780, for example, Laplace and Lavoisier stated: “In general, one can change the first hypothesis into the second by changing the words ‘free heat, combined heat, and heat released’ into ‘vis viva, loss of vis viva, and increase of vis viva. ’” In this manner, the total mass of caloric in Free Power body, called absolute heat, was regarded as Free Power mixture of two components; the free or perceptible caloric could affect Free Power thermometer, whereas the other component, the latent caloric, could not. [Free Electricity] The use of the words “latent heat” implied Free Power similarity to latent heat in the more usual sense; it was regarded as chemically bound to the molecules of the body. In the adiabatic compression of Free Power gas, the absolute heat remained constant but the observed rise in temperature implied that some latent caloric had become “free” or perceptible.