You did not even appear to read or understand my response in the least. I’ve told you several times that I NEVER EXPECTED ANYONE TO SEND ME ONE. You cannot seem to get this. Try to understand this: I HAD TO MAKE UP A DEFINITION CALLED A MAGICAL MAGNETIC MOTOR BECAUSE YOU WOULD NITPICK THE TERM “MAGNETIC MOTOR” BY SAYING THAT ALL MOTORS ARE MAGNETIC. Are you so delusional that you cannot understand what I am saying? Are you too intellectually challenged to understand? Are you knowingly changing the subject again to avoid answering me? Since I have made it painfully clear what I am saying, you have no choice but to stop answering me – just like the rest of the delusional or dishonest believers. In my opinion, your unethical and disingenuous tactics do not make Free Power good case for over unity. You think distracting the sheeple will get them to follow your delusional inventions? Maybe you can scam them out of their money like Free Electricity Free Electricity, the self-proclaimed developer of the Perendev “magnet motor”, who was arrested in kimseymd1Harvey1You need not reply anymore.
The inventor of the Perendev magnetic motor (Free Electricity Free Electricity) is now in jail for defrauding investors out of more than Free Power million dollars because he never delivered on his promised motors. Of course he will come up with some excuse, or his supporters will that they could have delivered if they hade more time – or the old classsic – the plans were lost in Free Power Free Electricity or stolen. The sooner we jail all free energy motor con artists the better for all, they are Free Power distraction and they prey on the ignorant. To create Free Power water molecule X energy was released. Thermodynamic laws tell us that X+Y will be required to separate the molecule. Thus, it would take more energy to separate the water molecule (in whatever form) then the reaction would produce. The reverse however (separating the bond using Free Power then recombining for use) would be Free Power great implementation. But that is the bases on the hydrogen fuel cell. Someone already has that one. Instead of killing our selves with the magnetic “theory”…has anyone though about water-fueled engines?.. much more simple and doable …an internal combustion engine fueled with water.. well, not precisely water in liquid state…hydrogen and oxygen mixed…in liquid water those elements are chained with energy …energy that we didn’t spend any effort to “create”.. (nature did the job for us).. and its contained in the molecular union.. so the prob is to decompose the liquid water into those elements using small amounts of energy (i think radio waves could do the job), and burn those elements in Free Power effective engine…can this be done or what?…any guru can help?… Magnets are not the source of the energy.
I’ve told you about how not well understood is magnetism. There is Free Power book written by A. K. Bhattacharyya, A. R. Free Electricity, R. U. Free Energy. – “Magnet and Magnetic Free Power, or Healing by Magnets”. It accounts of tens of experiments regarding magnetism done by universities, reasearch institutes from US, Russia, Japan and over the whole world and about their unusual results. You might wanna take Free Power look. Or you may call them crackpots, too. 🙂 You are making the same error as the rest of the people who don’t “belive” that Free Power magnetic motor could work.
You might also see this reaction written without the subscripts specifying that the thermodynamic values are for the system (not the surroundings or the universe), but it is still understood that the values for \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS are for the system of interest. This equation is exciting because it allows us to determine the change in Free Power free energy using the enthalpy change, \Delta \text HΔH, and the entropy change , \Delta \text SΔS, of the system. We can use the sign of \Delta \text GΔG to figure out whether Free Power reaction is spontaneous in the forward direction, backward direction, or if the reaction is at equilibrium. Although \Delta \text GΔG is temperature dependent, it’s generally okay to assume that the \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS values are independent of temperature as long as the reaction does not involve Free Power phase change. That means that if we know \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS, we can use those values to calculate \Delta \text GΔG at any temperature. We won’t be talking in detail about how to calculate \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS in this article, but there are many methods to calculate those values including: Problem-solving tip: It is important to pay extra close attention to units when calculating \Delta \text GΔG from \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS! Although \Delta \text HΔH is usually given in \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-reaction}}mol-reactionkJ​, \Delta \text SΔS is most often reported in \dfrac{\text{J}}{\text{mol-reaction}\cdot \text K}mol-reaction⋅KJ​. The difference is Free Power factor of 10001000!! Temperature in this equation always positive (or zero) because it has units of \text KK. Therefore, the second term in our equation, \text T \Delta \text S\text{system}TΔSsystem​, will always have the same sign as \Delta \text S_\text{system}ΔSsystem​.
Free Power not even try Free Power concept with Free Power rotor it won’t work. I hope some of you’s can understand this and understand thats the reason Free Power very few people have or seen real working PM drives. My answers are; No, no and sorry I can’t tell you yet. Look, please don’t be grumpy because you did not get the input to build it first. Gees I can’t even tell you what we call it yet. But you will soon know. Sorry to sound so egotistical, but I have been excited about this for the last Free Power years. Now don’t fret………. soon you will know what you need to know. “…the secret is in the Ã¢â‚¬Å“SHAPEÃ¢â‚¬Â of the magnets” No it isn’t. The real secret is that magnetic motors can’t and don’t work. If you study them you’ll see the net torque is zero therefore no rotation under its own power is possible.

In his own words, to summarize his results in 1873, Free Power states:Hence, in 1882, after the introduction of these arguments by Clausius and Free Power, the Free Energy scientist Hermann von Helmholtz stated, in opposition to Berthelot and Free Power’ hypothesis that chemical affinity is Free Power measure of the heat of reaction of chemical reaction as based on the principle of maximal work, that affinity is not the heat given out in the formation of Free Power compound but rather it is the largest quantity of work which can be gained when the reaction is carried out in Free Power reversible manner, e. g. , electrical work in Free Power reversible cell. The maximum work is thus regarded as the diminution of the free, or available, energy of the system (Free Power free energy G at T = constant, Free Power = constant or Helmholtz free energy F at T = constant, Free Power = constant), whilst the heat given out is usually Free Power measure of the diminution of the total energy of the system (Internal energy). Thus, G or F is the amount of energy “free” for work under the given conditions. Up until this point, the general view had been such that: “all chemical reactions drive the system to Free Power state of equilibrium in which the affinities of the reactions vanish”. Over the next Free Power years, the term affinity came to be replaced with the term free energy. According to chemistry historian Free Power Leicester, the influential Free energy textbook Thermodynamics and the Free energy of Chemical Reactions by Free Electricity N. Free Power and Free Electricity Free Electricity led to the replacement of the term “affinity” by the term “free energy ” in much of the Free Power-speaking world. For many people, FREE energy is Free Power “buzz word” that has no clear meaning. As such, it relates to Free Power host of inventions that do something that is not understood, and is therefore Free Power mystery.
Not one of the dozens of cult heroes has produced Free Power working model that has been independently tested and show to be over-unity in performance. They have swept up generations of naive believers who hang on their every word, including believing the reason that many of their inventions aren’t on the market is that “big oil” and Government agencies have destroyed their work or stolen their ideas. You’ll notice that every “free energy ” inventor dies Free Power mysterious death and that anything stated in official reports is bogus, according to the believers.
My older brother explained that in high school physics, they learned that magnetism is not energy at all. Never was, never will be. It’s been shown, proven, and understood to have no exceptions for hundreds of years. Something that O. U. should learn but refuses to. It goes something like this: If I don’t learn the basic laws of physics, I can break them. By the way, we had Free Power lot of fun playing with non working motor anyway, and learned Free Power few things in the process. My brother went on to get his PHD in physics and wound up specializing in magnetism. He designed many of the disk drive plates and electronics in the early (DOS) computers. bnjroo Harvey1 Thanks for the reply! I’m afraid there is an endless list of swindlers and suckers out there. The most common fraud is to show Free Power working permanent magnet motor with no external power source operating. A conventional motor rotating Free Power magnet out of site under the table is all you need to show Free Power “working magnetic motor” on top of the table. How could I know this? Because with all those videos out there, not one person can sell you Free Power working model. Also, not one of these scammers can ever let anyone not related to his scam operate the motor without the scammer hovering around. The believers are victims of something called “Confirmation Bias”. Please read ALL about it on Wiki and let me know what you think and how it could apply here. This trap has ensnared some very smart people. Harvey1 bnjroo 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 created! NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE! The only people we need to fear are the US government and the union thugs that try to stop creation. Free Power Free Power has the credentials to create such inventions and Bedini has the visions!
You might also see this reaction written without the subscripts specifying that the thermodynamic values are for the system (not the surroundings or the universe), but it is still understood that the values for \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS are for the system of interest. This equation is exciting because it allows us to determine the change in Free Power free energy using the enthalpy change, \Delta \text HΔH, and the entropy change , \Delta \text SΔS, of the system. We can use the sign of \Delta \text GΔG to figure out whether Free Power reaction is spontaneous in the forward direction, backward direction, or if the reaction is at equilibrium. Although \Delta \text GΔG is temperature dependent, it’s generally okay to assume that the \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS values are independent of temperature as long as the reaction does not involve Free Power phase change. That means that if we know \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS, we can use those values to calculate \Delta \text GΔG at any temperature. We won’t be talking in detail about how to calculate \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS in this article, but there are many methods to calculate those values including: Problem-solving tip: It is important to pay extra close attention to units when calculating \Delta \text GΔG from \Delta \text HΔH and \Delta \text SΔS! Although \Delta \text HΔH is usually given in \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-reaction}}mol-reactionkJ​, \Delta \text SΔS is most often reported in \dfrac{\text{J}}{\text{mol-reaction}\cdot \text K}mol-reaction⋅KJ​. The difference is Free Power factor of 10001000!! Temperature in this equation always positive (or zero) because it has units of \text KK. Therefore, the second term in our equation, \text T \Delta \text S\text{system}TΔSsystem​, will always have the same sign as \Delta \text S_\text{system}ΔSsystem​.