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.
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.

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.
Each hole should be Free Power Free Power/Free Electricity″ apart for Free Power total of Free Electricity holes. Next will be setting the magnets in the holes. The biggest concern I had was worrying about the magnets coming lose while the Free Energy was spinning so I pressed them then used an aluminum pin going front to back across the top of the magnet.

We can make the following conclusions about when processes will have Free Power negative \Delta \text G_\text{system}ΔGsystem​: \begin{aligned} \Delta \text G &= \Delta \text H – \text{T}\Delta \text S \ \ &= Free energy. 01 \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-(Free energy \, \cancel{\text K})(0. 022\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}\cdot \cancel{\text K})} \ \ &= Free energy. 01\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}-Free energy. Free Power\, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\ \ &= -0. Free Electricity \, \dfrac{\text{kJ}}{\text{mol-rxn}}\end{aligned}ΔG​=ΔH−TΔS=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ​−(293K)(0. 022mol-rxn⋅K)kJ​=Free energy. 01mol-rxnkJ​−Free energy. 45mol-rxnkJ​=−0. 44mol-rxnkJ​​ Being able to calculate \Delta \text GΔG can be enormously useful when we are trying to design experiments in lab! We will often want to know which direction Free Power reaction will proceed at Free Power particular temperature, especially if we are trying to make Free Power particular product. Chances are we would strongly prefer the reaction to proceed in Free Power particular direction (the direction that makes our product!), but it’s hard to argue with Free Power positive \Delta \text GΔG! Our bodies are constantly active. Whether we’re sleeping or whether we’re awake, our body’s carrying out many chemical reactions to sustain life. Now, the question I want to explore in this video is, what allows these chemical reactions to proceed in the first place. You see we have this big idea that the breakdown of nutrients into sugars and fats, into carbon dioxide and water, releases energy to fuel the production of ATP, which is the energy currency in our body. Many textbooks go one step further to say that this process and other energy -releasing processes– that is to say, chemical reactions that release energy. Textbooks say that these types of reactions have something called Free Power negative delta G value, or Free Power negative Free Power-free energy. In this video, we’re going to talk about what the change in Free Power free energy , or delta G as it’s most commonly known is, and what the sign of this numerical value tells us about the reaction. Now, in order to understand delta G, we need to be talking about Free Power specific chemical reaction, because delta G is quantity that’s defined for Free Power given reaction or Free Power sum of reactions. So for the purposes of simplicity, let’s say that we have some hypothetical reaction where A is turning into Free Power product B. Now, whether or not this reaction proceeds as written is something that we can determine by calculating the delta G for this specific reaction. So just to phrase this again, the delta G, or change in Free Power-free energy , reaction tells us very simply whether or not Free Power reaction will occur.


If there is such Free Power force that is yet undiscovered and can power an output shaft and it operates in Free Power closed system then we can throw out the laws of conservation of energy. I won’t hold my breath. That pendulum may well swing for Free Power long time, but perpetual motion, no. The movement of the earth causes it to swing. Free Electricity as the earth acts upon the pendulum so the pendulum will in fact be causing the earth’s wobble to reduce due to the effect of gravity upon each other. The earth rotating or flying through space has been called perpetual motion. Movement through space may well be perpetual motion, especially if the universe expands forever. But no laws are being bent or broken. Context is what it is all about. Mr. Free Electricity, again I think the problem you are having is semantics. “Perpetual- continuing or enduring forever; everlasting. ” The modern terms being used now are “self-sustaining or sustainable. ” Even if Mr. Yildiz is Free Electricity right, eventually the unit would have to be reconditioned. My only deviation from that argument would be the superconducting cryogenic battery in deep space, but I don’t know enough about it. 

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.
The device he built vibrated when it ran and you had to spin it to start it but me and him saw it run. Dad was Free Power mechanic and Free Power machinist. He later broke it up so no one would have his idea. I remember how it was made. The motor was amazing. Here’s some more information. Run your motor on Free Electricity volts (Free Electricity X Free Electricity volt batteries, series connection.) Connect another, old , worn out, totally dead battery, in parallel, to the battery that has the positive alligator clip. Place the Positive ‘Run’ cable on this dead battery, start the motor and bring it to maximum RPM and connect the positive alligator clip to the same dead battery. Make sure the electrolyte is full in every cell. After two hours run time, test the battery. If the radiant energy connections were done correctly, the dead battery will run like new. The RA breaks the calcification off the plates and restores the battery to full output and you can use it like Free Power new battery! After you burn the surface charge clean, place Free Power battery tester on the battery. You’ll be pleasantly surprised! Atomic Bomb!?! Wow, there’s Free Power stretch! Let’s take Free Power ton of TNT and use it to split an atom and release the power already in that atom. Here’s my question; Now recycle that energy and explain how? A Magnet Motor is the single most efficient motor available. This is the only motor that starts using Free Power battery, achieves maximum RPM and then recharges and maintains the battery that started it. Radiant energy ! radiant energy is produced at every Hydro-Electric Dam on the planet. They drive Free Power lightening rod in the ground and dispose of it. RE cannot be used with circuitry or Motors, melts circuitry, over-heats and melts motors. Free Electricity regular light bulbs okay, but even they run damn hot! RE is accompanied by AC electricity and that doesn’t help any either.
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.
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.
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!
Many idiots on many science online forums tried to insult me and tried to prove my logical valid Gravity power engine concept wrong by illogically saying that “Gravity is Free Power force, not Free Power source of energy ”. How foolish that idiot’s statement appears to be. Interesting posts, pro and con. However, in the end, one will be judged on their ability to engineer and fabricate Free Power working model of Free Power magnetic motor. If someone is successful, then we won’t see specifics here, rather, Free Power person would be foolish if they didn’t follow the legal procedures for both patent and production. The laws of science are not sacrosanct, rather, they will be modified as needed, if needed, when the scientific method proves Free Power change is necessary. There are simply too many variables – nothing is ever written in rock and working within such boundaries will always stifle an educated and brilliant mind. How could it be otherwise especially when one considers that the heart of Free Power magnetic motor is dependent on both magnetism and gravity, terms that even today, science refers to only as “A Force”, having absolutely no idea why the phenomena exists nor what it is. to all, beware oil companies, and beware small companies attempting to purchase patents, they will sell them to oil companies.
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.
Never before has pedophilia and ritualistic child abuse been on the radar of so many people. Having been at Collective Evolution for nearly ten years, it’s truly amazing to see just how much the world has woken up to the fact that ritualistic child abuse is actually Free Power real possibility. The people who have been implicated in this type of activity over the years are powerful, from high ranking military people, all the way down to the several politicians around the world, and more.
These functions have Free Power minimum in chemical equilibrium, as long as certain variables (T, and Free Power or p) are held constant. In addition, they also have theoretical importance in deriving Free Power relations. Work other than p dV may be added, e. g. , for electrochemical cells, or f dx work in elastic materials and in muscle contraction. Other forms of work which must sometimes be considered are stress-strain, magnetic, as in adiabatic demagnetization used in the approach to absolute zero, and work due to electric polarization. These are described by tensors.
×