there has been some passionate discussion in regards to this topic, and I wanted to make a few comments.

Firstly, I don't see a reason that the 'over unity' crowd should be singled out. Claims of operating at close to 100% efficiencies also deserve equal scrutiny. Much of what I've seen on the internet are in fact methods of parasitic extraction, aquiring the title of 'free energy'.

As we know, unity is the state of 100% converstion, an ideal situation. We also know that there are devices that improve under unity conditions, and therefore must be over unity in themselves. But alas, operating at over or under unity has power penalties.

We take under unity as granted, and I don't see why we should deny the over unity crowd thier place, after all, they will consume as much as everybody else, just on the other side of the coin.

What it does do, is get people thinking and experimenting. And in the end, maybe they'll show us how we can improve our performance.

 

...
We also know that there are devices that improve under unity conditions, and therefore must be over unity in themselves....

You can, of course offer us an example for out scrutiny to test the validity of this unsubstantiated assertion.

 

we charge very resonable rates for power factor correction

 

we charge very resonable rates for power factor correction

In your infinite wisdom you consider this to be an over unity process? I beg to differ with you there.

 

and I suspect that there would be challange to the use of the term 'unity', but I'm sure that the context of the op should be indicative, yet it's the play on the term that explains much of whats being claimed.

In your infinite wisdom

I didn't realize this was the house of lords, sorry, wrong address .

 

Firstly, I don't see a reason that the 'over unity' crowd should be singled out

It's because that crowd is busily involved selling scams to the public. A device that can produce more energy than it takes to operate it is a fiction. When you offer to sell one, it's a scam.

I don't see why we should deny the over unity crowd thier place, after all, they will consume as much as everybody else, just on the other side of the coin

We really do not like scams being foisted onto the public. It's not consuming - in their case, it's theft. When was the last time you purchased an operating perpetual motion machine?

Overunity devices have about as much credibility as Blondin's Z rays. You might read through some of the threads linked in the stick at the top of this forum page to see further why we abominate these people.

there are devices that improve under unity conditions, and therefore must be over unity in themselves

This really need some concrete examples. It sounds as if you feature a line of 110% efficient transformers.

A device that is said to operate above unity is capable of an output greater than the input. As far as we are aware, this is not even remotely possible. BTW - there is an as yet unclaimed prize for the successful demonstration of an overunity device. There always seems to be some slippage between the video and impartial examination.

power factor correction

Isn't that done by adding capacitance? - http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/4.html

 

I don't think a concept should be suffocated on the grounds that the public are exploited by some heartless people. Brush and tar.

A man sells a woman a ticket that entitles her to a journey to the Sun and back. She is later proven to have been scammed; journeying to the Sun is about as close for humans as achieving over-unity. The woman believed it possible.

However, the concept of space exploration and the possibility of eventually journeying to the Sun is something even I personally, would love to do or be the first to achieve.

The woman who bought the ticket to the Sun, is the same as a man who buys a 200% transformer.

If the woman was an astronomer, and the man was an engineer, it is likely that neither would have been scammed.

The guy who sits in his room his entire life trying to build a space ship to take him to the Sun knows it can't be done, otherwise, he wouldn't try. Why would I invent a car when it has already been done?

This, to me, has more social and philosphical overtunes than technical.

 

This, to me, has more social and philosphical overtunes than technical

Actually, the sit around with beers and discuss it part is just fine, as long as it's not in these forums.

It's just that entering into some "serious" discussion on AAC has the obvious effect of legitimizing the topic. Frankly, if there was any part of the overunity concept that could hold up to serious discussion, we might allow it.

But, as the ideas and devices are flim-flam designed to part the credulous from their money, we put a halt to it.

We do not give any credence or approval, tacit or otherwise, to false concepts and scam artist. Why should we go out of our way? - there are many forums online where anything at all can be discussed. The only thing we are denying is any possible appearance of complicity with a scam. If this seems to be "suffocating" the concept, that is about right.

Go to the sticky note, and follow some of the threads linked to if you like.

 

beenthere, I agree completely.

I was referring mainly to the nature of scamming and exploiting the public with regards to social and philosophical overtones.

Although presently, the technical aspect of over-unity is little more than philosophy!

By referring to "'over unity' crowd" GetDeviceInfo, I think the hositility is exacerbated; the 'crowd' have cult like characteristics. Those engineers and scientists who are possibly striving with integrity to achieve unity in an application and ultimately, with all faith, over-unity are effectively being branded.

 

According to the laws of thermodynamics you can't even get to unity.

Zeroth: You must play the game.
First: You can't win.
Second: You can't break even.
Third: You can't quit the game.

 

According to the laws of thermodynamics you can't even get to unity.

Zeroth: You must play the game.
First: You can't win.
Second: You can't break even.
Third: You can't quit the game.

Booyah! Bill

 

...
Third: You can't quit the game.

Actually, we can quit the game, but I don't think that is a good topic to talk about here either.

 

Life Sucks,
Then You Die,
Then They Throw Dirt In Your Face,
Then The Worms Eat You.
Pray It Happens In That Order.

 

Thoughts to live by...