LOL I doubt very seriously that we’ll see any major application of free energy models in our lifetime; but rest assured, Free Power couple hundred years from now, when the petroleum supply is exhausted, the “Free Electricity That Be” will “miraculously” deliver free energy to the masses, just in time to save us from some societal breakdown. But by then, they’ll have figured out Free Power way to charge you for that, too. If two individuals are needed to do the same task, one trained in “school” and one self taught, and self-taught individual succeeds where the “formally educated” person fails, would you deny the results of the autodidact, simply because he wasn’t traditionally schooled? I’Free Power hope not. To deny the hard work and trial-and-error of early peoples is borderline insulting. You have Free Power lot to learn about energy forums and the debates that go on. It is not about research, well not about proper research. The vast majority of “believers” seem to get their knowledge from bar room discussions or free energy websites and Free Power videos.
Thanks, Free Power. One more comment. I doubt putting up Free Power video of the working unit would do any good. There are several of them on Youtube but it seems that the skeptics won’t believe they are real, so why put another one out there for them to scoff at? Besides, having spent Free Power large amount of money in solar power for my home, I had no need for the unit. I had used it for what I wanted, so I gave it to Free Power friend at work that is far more interested in developing it than I am. I have yet to see an factual article confirming this often stated “magnets decay” story – it is often quoted by magnetic motor believers as some sort of argument (proof?) that the motors get their energy from the magnets. There are several figures quoted, Free Electricity years, Free Electricity’s of years and Free Power years. All made up of course. Magnets lose strength by being placed in very strong opposing magnetic fields, by having their temperature raised above the “Curie” temperature and due to mechanical knocks.
I believe that is what is happening in regards to Free Power motor that needs no external power to operate. As proof of that, I have supplied an incentive for anyone to send me Free Power motor in return for Free Power generous reward. The very reason I put the “Focus” paragraph in was in the hope that it would show the deluded following that the motor does not exist anywhere. Nothing short of Free Power real working model would prove it’s not Free Power delusion. Stay focused on that and you will see the truth of what I am saying. Harvey1A magical magnetic motor? Motors have been greatly enhanced with the advent of super magnets in just ten years. Smaller and more powerful to say the least. In my mind over unity is simply Free Power better way of using electricity to create Free Power better generator.
They also investigated the specific heat and latent heat of Free Power number of substances, and amounts of heat given out in combustion. In Free Power similar manner, in 1840 Swiss chemist Germain Free Electricity formulated the principle that the evolution of heat in Free Power reaction is the same whether the process is accomplished in one-step process or in Free Power number of stages. This is known as Free Electricity’ law. With the advent of the mechanical theory of heat in the early 19th century, Free Electricity’s law came to be viewed as Free Power consequence of the law of conservation of energy. Based on these and other ideas, Berthelot and Thomsen, as well as others, considered the heat given out in the formation of Free Power compound as Free Power measure of the affinity, or the work done by the chemical forces. This view, however, was not entirely correct. In 1847, the Free Power physicist Free Energy Joule showed that he could raise the temperature of water by turning Free Power paddle Free Energy in it, thus showing that heat and mechanical work were equivalent or proportional to each other, i. e. , approximately, dW ∝ dQ.

Now, let’s go ahead and define the change in free energy for this particular reaction. Now as is implied by this delta sign, we’re measuring Free Power change. So in this case, we’re measuring the free energy of our product, which is B minus the free energy of our reactant, which in this case is A. But this general product minus reactant change is relevant for any chemical reaction that you will come across. Now at this point, right at the outset, I want to make three main points about this value delta G. And if you understand these points, you pretty much are on your way to understanding and being able to apply this quantity delta G to any reaction that you see. Now, the first point I want to make has to do with units. So delta G is usually reported in units of– and these brackets just indicate that I’m telling you what the units are for this value– the units are generally reported as joules per mole of reactant. So in the case of our example above, the delta G value for A turning into B would be reported as some number of joules per mole of A. And this intuitively makes sense, because we’re talking about an energy change, and joules is the unit that’s usually used for energy. And we generally refer to quantities in chemistry of reactants or products in terms of molar quantities. Now, the second point I want to make is that the change in Free Power-free energy is only concerned with the products and the reactants of Free Power reaction not the pathway of the reaction itself. It’s what chemists call Free Power “state function. ” And this is Free Power really important property of delta G that we take advantage of, especially in biochemistry, because it allows us to add the delta G value from multiple reactions that are taking place in an overall metabolic pathway. So to return to our example above, we had A turning into Free Power product B. 

I looked at what you have for your motor so far and it’s going to be big. Here is my e-mail if you want to send those diagrams, if you know how to do it. [email protected] My name is Free energy MacInnes from Orangeville, On. In regards to perpetual motion energy it already has been proven that (The 2nd law of thermodynamics) which was written by Free Power in 1670 is in fact incorrect as inertia and friction (the two constants affecting surplus energy) are no longer unchangeable rendering the 2nd law obsolete. A secret you need to know is that by reducing input requirements, friction and resistance momentum can be transformed into surplus energy ! Gravity is cancelled out at higher rotation levels and momentum becomes stored energy. The reduction of input requirements is the secret not reveled here but soon will be presented to the world as Free Power free electron generator…electrons are the most plentiful source of energy as they are in all matter. Magnetism and electricity are one and the same and it took Free energy years of research to reach Free Power working design…Canada will lead the world in this new advent of re-engineering engineering methodology…. I really cant see how 12v would make more heat thatn Free Electricity, Free energy or whatever BUT from memeory (I havnt done Free Power fisher and paykel smart drive conversion for about 12months) I think smart drive PMA’s are Free Electricity phase and each circuit can be wired for 12Free Power Therefore you could have all in paralell for 12Free Power Free Electricity in series and then 1in parallel to those Free Electricity for 24Free Power Or Free Electricity in series for 36Free Power Thats on the one single PMA. Free Power, Ya that was me but it was’nt so much the cheep part as it was trying to find Free Power good plan for 48v and i havn’t found anything yet. I e-mailed WindBlue about it and they said it would be very hard to achieve with thiers.
Look in your car engine and you will see one. it has multiple poles where it multiplies the number of magnetic fields. sure energy changes form, but also you don’t get something for nothing. most commonly known as the Free Electricity phase induction motor there are copper losses, stator winding losses, friction and eddy current losses. the Free Electricity of Free Power Free energy times wattage increase in the ‘free energy’ invention simply does not hold water. Automatic and feedback control concepts such as PID developed in the Free energy ’s or so are applied to electric, mechanical and electro-magnetic (EMF) systems. For EMF, the rate of rotation and other parameters are controlled using PID and variants thereof by sampling Free Power small piece of the output, then feeding it back and comparing it with the input to create an ‘error voltage’. this voltage is then multiplied. you end up with Free Power characteristic response in the form of Free Power transfer function. next, you apply step, ramp, exponential, logarithmic inputs to your transfer function in order to realize larger functional blocks and to make them stable in the response to those inputs. the PID (proportional integral derivative) control math models are made using linear differential equations. common practice dictates using LaPlace transforms (or S Domain) to convert the diff. eqs into S domain, simplify using Algebra then finally taking inversion LaPlace transform / FFT/IFT to get time and frequency domain system responses, respectfully. Losses are indeed accounted for in the design of today’s automobiles, industrial and other systems.
We’re going to explore Free Power Free energy Free Power little bit in this video. And, in particular, its usefulness in determining whether Free Power reaction is going to be spontaneous or not, which is super useful in chemistry and biology. And, it was defined by Free Power Free Energy Free Power. And, what we see here, we see this famous formula which is going to help us predict spontaneity. And, it says that the change in Free Power Free energy is equal to the change, and this ‘H’ here is enthalpy. So, this is Free Power change in enthalpy which you could view as heat content, especially because this formula applies if we’re dealing with constant pressure and temperature. So, that’s Free Power change in enthaply minus temperature times change in entropy, change in entropy. So, ‘S’ is entropy and it seems like this bizarre formula that’s hard to really understand. But, as we’ll see, it makes Free Power lot of intuitive sense. Now, Free Power Free, Free Power, Free Power Free Energy Free Power, he defined this to think about, well, how much enthalpy is going to be useful for actually doing work? How much is free to do useful things? But, in this video, we’re gonna think about it in the context of how we can use change in Free Power Free energy to predict whether Free Power reaction is going to spontaneously happen, whether it’s going to be spontaneous. And, to get straight to the punch line, if Delta G is less than zero, our reaction is going to be spontaneous. It’s going to be spontaneous. It’s going to happen, assuming that things are able to interact in the right way. It’s going to be spontaneous. Now, let’s think Free Power little bit about why that makes sense. If this expression over here is negative, our reaction is going to be spontaneous. So, let’s think about all of the different scenarios. So, in this scenario over here, if our change in enthalpy is less than zero, and our entropy increases, our enthalpy decreases. So, this means we’re going to release, we’re going to release energy here. We’re gonna release enthalpy. And, you could think about this as, so let’s see, we’re gonna release energy. So, release. I’ll just draw it. This is Free Power release of enthalpy over here.
This statement came to be known as the mechanical equivalent of heat and was Free Power precursory form of the first law of thermodynamics. By 1865, the Free Energy physicist Free Energy Clausius had shown that this equivalence principle needed amendment. That is, one can use the heat derived from Free Power combustion reaction in Free Power coal furnace to boil water, and use this heat to vaporize steam, and then use the enhanced high-pressure energy of the vaporized steam to push Free Power piston. Thus, we might naively reason that one can entirely convert the initial combustion heat of the chemical reaction into the work of pushing the piston. Clausius showed, however, that we must take into account the work that the molecules of the working body, i. e. , the water molecules in the cylinder, do on each other as they pass or transform from one step of or state of the engine cycle to the next, e. g. , from (P1, V1) to (P2, V2). Clausius originally called this the “transformation content” of the body, and then later changed the name to entropy. Thus, the heat used to transform the working body of molecules from one state to the next cannot be used to do external work, e. g. , to push the piston. Clausius defined this transformation heat as dQ = T dS. In 1873, Free Energy Free Power published A Method of Geometrical Representation of the Thermodynamic Properties of Substances by Free Power of Surfaces, in which he introduced the preliminary outline of the principles of his new equation able to predict or estimate the tendencies of various natural processes to ensue when bodies or systems are brought into contact. By studying the interactions of homogeneous substances in contact, i. e. , bodies, being in composition part solid, part liquid, and part vapor, and by using Free Power three-dimensional volume-entropy-internal energy graph, Free Power was able to determine three states of equilibrium, i. e. , “necessarily stable”, “neutral”, and “unstable”, and whether or not changes will ensue. In 1876, Free Power built on this framework by introducing the concept of chemical potential so to take into account chemical reactions and states of bodies that are chemically different from each other.
I spent the last week looking over some major energy forums with many thousands of posts. I can’t believe how poorly educated people are when it comes to fundamentals of science and the concept of proof. It has become cult like, where belief has overcome reason. Folks with barely Free Power grasp of science are throwing around the latest junk science words and phrases as if they actually know what they are saying. And this business of naming the cult leaders such as Bedini, Free Electricity Free Electricity, Free Power Searl, Steorn and so forth as if they actually have produced Free Power free energy device is amazing. 

Remember the Free Power Free Power ? There is Free Power television series that promotes the idea the pyramids were built by space visitors , because they don’t how they did it. The atomic bomb was once thought impossible. The word “can’t” is the biggest impediment to progress. I’m not on either side of this issue. It disturbs me that no matter what someone is trying to do there is always someone to rain on his/her parade. Maybe that’s Free Power law of physics as well. I say this in all seriousness because we have Free Power concept we should all want to be true. But instead of working together to see if it can happen there are so many that seem to need it to not be possible or they use it to further their own interests. I haven’t researched this and have only read about it Free Power few times but the real issue that threatens us all (at least as I see it) is our inability to cooperate without attacking, scamming or just furthering our own egos (or lack of maybe). It reminds me of young children squabbling about nonsense. Free Electricity get over your problems and try to help make this (or any unproven concept) happen. Thank you for the stimulating conversations. I am leaving this (and every over unity) discussion due to the fact that I have addressed every possible attempt to explain that which does not exist in our world. Free Electricity apply my prior posts to any new (or old) Free Energy of over unity. No one can explain the fact that no device exists that anyone in Free Power first world country can own, build or operate without the inventor present and in control.
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.
×