We need to stop listening to articles that say what we can’t have. Life is to powerful and abundant and running without our help. We have the resources and creative thinking to match life with our thoughts. Free Power lot of articles and videos across the Internet sicken me and mislead people. The inventors need to stand out more in the corners of earth. The intelligent thinking is here and freely given power is here. We are just connecting the dots. One trick to making Free Power magnetic motor work is combining the magnetic force you get when polarities of equal sides are in close proximity to each other, with the pull of simple gravity. Heavy magnets rotating around Free Power coil of metal with properly placed magnets above them to provide push, gravity then provides the pull and the excess energy needed to make it function. The design would be close to that of the Free Electricity Free Electricity motor but the mechanics must be much lighter in weight so that the weight of the magnets actually has use. A lot of people could do well to ignore all the rules of physics sometimes. Rules are there to be broken and all the rules have done is stunt technology advances. Education keeps people dumbed down in an era where energy is big money and anything seen as free is Free Power threat. Open your eyes to the real possibilities. Free Electricity was Free Power genius in his day and nearly Free Electricity years later we are going backwards. One thing is for sure, magnets are fantastic objects. It’s not free energy as eventually even the best will demagnetise but it’s close enough for me.
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.
It makes you look like Free Power fool, Free Power scammer, or both. You keep saying that I’m foolish waiting for someone to send me the aforementioned motor. Again, you missed the point completely. I never (or should I say N E Free Power E R) expected anyone to send me anything. It was just to make the point that it never existed. I explained that to you several times but you just keep repeating how foolish I am to expect someone to send me Free Power motor. There is no explanation for your behavior except that, it seems to me, you just cannot comprehend what I am saying because you are mentally challenged. This device can indeed charge Free Power battery. If one measures the total energy going in, and the energy stored, it takes way more energy in then you get out. That’s true for ALL battery chargers. Some idiot once measured the voltage in one battery as higher than the other battery and claimed that proved over unity. Hint: voltage does not measure power. Try measuring amp hours at Free Power specific voltage in, and amp hours at the same voltage out. No scammer will ever do that because that’s the real way to test for over unity. Since over unity has not existed yet on our world – it’s too painful for the over unity crowd to face. Kimseymd1: You no longer are responding.
Free Power In my opinion, if somebody would build Free Power power generating device, and would manufacture , and sell it in stores, then everybody would be buying it, and installing it in their houses, and cars. But what would happen then to millions of people around the World, who make their living from the now existing energy industry? I think if something like that would happen, the World would be in chaos. I have one more question. We are all biulding motors that all run with the repel end of the magnets only. I have read alot on magnets and thier fields and one thing i read alot about is that if used this way all the time the magnets lose thier power quickly, if they both attract and repel then they stay in balance and last much longer. My question is in repel mode how long will they last? If its not very long then the cost of the magnets makes the motor not worth building unless we can come up with Free Power way to use both poles Which as far as i can see might be impossible.
To understand why this is the case, it’s useful to bring up the concept of chemical equilibrium. As Free Power refresher on chemical equilibrium, let’s imagine that we start Free Power reversible reaction with pure reactants (no product present at all). At first, the forward reaction will proceed rapidly, as there are lots of reactants that can be converted into products. The reverse reaction, in contrast, will not take place at all, as there are no products to turn back into reactants. As product accumulates, however, the reverse reaction will begin to happen more and more often. This process will continue until the reaction system reaches Free Power balance point, called chemical equilibrium, at which the forward and reverse reactions take place at the same rate. At this point, both reactions continue to occur, but the overall concentrations of products and reactants no longer change. Each reaction has its own unique, characteristic ratio of products to reactants at equilibrium. When Free Power reaction system is at equilibrium, it is in its lowest-energy state possible (has the least possible free energy).
You need Free Power solid main bearing and you need to fix the “drive” magnet/s in place to allow you to take measurements. With (or without shielding) you find the torque required to get two magnets in Free Power position to repel (or attract) is EXACTLY the same as the torque when they’re in Free Power position to actually repel (or attract). I’m not asking you to believe me but if you don’t take the measurements you’ll never understand the whole reason why I have my stance. Mumetal is Free Power zinc alloy that is effective in the sheilding of magnetic and electro magnetic fields. Only just heard about it myself couple of days ago. According to the company that makes it and other emf sheilding barriers there is Free Power better product out there called magnet sheild specifically for stationary magnetic fields. Should have the info on that in Free Power few hours im hoping when they get back to me. Hey Free Power, believe me i am not giving up. I have just hit Free Power point where i can not seem to improve and perfect my motor. It runs but not the way i want it to and i think Free Power big part of it is my shielding thats why i have been asking about shielding. I have never heard of mumetal. What is it? I have looked into the electro mag over unity stuff to but my feelings on that, at least for me is that it would be cheeting on the total magnetic motor. Your basicaly going back to the electric motor. As of right now i am looking into some info on magnets and if my thinking is correct we might be making these motors wrong. You can look at the question i just asked Free Electricity on magnets and see if you can come up with any answers, iam looking into it my self. 

If Free Power reaction is not at equilibrium, it will move spontaneously towards equilibrium, because this allows it to reach Free Power lower-energy , more stable state. This may mean Free Power net movement in the forward direction, converting reactants to products, or in the reverse direction, turning products back into reactants. As the reaction moves towards equilibrium (as the concentrations of products and reactants get closer to the equilibrium ratio), the free energy of the system gets lower and lower. A reaction that is at equilibrium can no longer do any work, because the free energy of the system is as low as possible^Free Electricity. Any change that moves the system away from equilibrium (for instance, adding or removing reactants or products so that the equilibrium ratio is no longer fulfilled) increases the system’s free energy and requires work. Example of how Free Power cell can keep reactions out of equilibrium. The cell expends energy to import the starting molecule of the pathway, A, and export the end product of the pathway, D, using ATP-powered transmembrane transport proteins. 

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.

This expression has commonly been interpreted to mean that work is extracted from the internal energy U while TS represents energy not available to perform work. However, this is incorrect. For instance, in an isothermal expansion of an ideal gas, the free energy change is ΔU = 0 and the expansion work w = -T ΔS is derived exclusively from the TS term supposedly not available to perform work.

×