It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lets Talk Over Unity And How To Achieve It

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth


A) the moon's orbit is not perpeptual

B) the origin of the universe had nothing to do with over unity claims in our presently existing universe


Seriously, get a basic grasp of science before you accuse others of talking nonsense.


Well then maybe you could explain why the Moon's orbit of the Earth is not a perpetual motion, Or how the Universe came to being......FROM NOTHING.


Well go on then ?




posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10

Originally posted by anumohi

Originally posted by ken10
OK here's my shout,

Totally theoretical but....

If you put a magnet into a hoola hoop that had a copper wire wounding around it (though possibly not covering all of the hoop), then move the Hoop to get the magnet doing laps inside the hoop and creating electricity. Now this initial process will no doubt be inefficient, however once speeded up you will get more power out and need less movement to continue....until eventually the magnet is moving so fast inside the hoop (and creating lots of power) that it only needs a vibration to keep it going.


LOL, i was just writing sort of the same thing as you were posting


great minds think alike


Yeh I think it just needs people to think outside of the box, We have too many people who are too quick repeat the same old nonsense that ....

(a) Perpetual motion is impossible......Yet fail to see that the Moon orbiting the Earth is exactly that.

Or

(b) that over-unity is impossible.....Yet cannot explain how the Universe came to be, before the "Big-Bang" (from nothing)?

Then there has to be hope that something similar can be found that we can use.



I have many experiments behind me and even though most made the best damn brakes you'd ever needed for you're bicycle, i still never gave up because i know its possible. its just a matter of configuration, and any little success is success. as far these naysayers or internet armchair pseudo scientists/debunkers, their input is irrelevant, especially if they have zero practical application in the field and haven't personally done the research.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10

Originally posted by john_bmth


A) the moon's orbit is not perpeptual

B) the origin of the universe had nothing to do with over unity claims in our presently existing universe


Seriously, get a basic grasp of science before you accuse others of talking nonsense.


Well then maybe you could explain why the Moon's orbit of the Earth is not a perpetual motion, Or how the Universe came to being......FROM NOTHING.


Well go on then ?


A) any resistance or force will eventually bring an orbiting body to a stop. Tidal forces, collisions with matter etc. are all slowing down the moon's orbit. Not only that, but by virtue of the moon orbiting another body (Earth), the point closest to Earth is experiencing more gravitational pull which is further decreasing the moon's orbit.

B) what does the origin of the universe have to do with over unity claims? The laws of physics for this universe exist, regardless of how the iniverse came into being.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 





the point closest to Earth is experiencing more gravitational pull which is further decreasing the moon's orbit.


I think you will find the Moon is moving away from the Earth !!!....But anyway if you cannot accept an objects movement for BILLIONS of years as being perpetual then I cannot help you.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
reply to post by john_bmth
 





the point closest to Earth is experiencing more gravitational pull which is further decreasing the moon's orbit.


I think you will find the Moon is moving away from the Earth !!!....But anyway if you cannot accept an objects movement for BILLIONS of years as being perpetual then I cannot help you.


That doesn't mean that it's orbit is not slowing down. Any slowdown means the motion is not perpetual. Regardless, over unity devices are not orbiting bodies, thus planetary orbits do not in any way validate claims of over unity. The former obeys the laws of physics, the latter does not. Even if you did try and harness orbit energy, you would slow down the orbit, eventually to a stand still. This really is elementary physics.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by ken10
reply to post by john_bmth
 





the point closest to Earth is experiencing more gravitational pull which is further decreasing the moon's orbit.


I think you will find the Moon is moving away from the Earth !!!....But anyway if you cannot accept an objects movement for BILLIONS of years as being perpetual then I cannot help you.


That doesn't mean that it's orbit is not slowing down. Any slowdown means the motion is not perpetual. Regardless, over unity devices are not orbiting bodies, thus planetary orbits do not in any way validate claims of over unity. The former obeys the laws of physics, the latter does not. Even if you did try and harness orbit energy, you would slow down the orbit, eventually to a stand still. This really is elementary physics.


but on a micro level it affects nothing and this is what we are after



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by anumohi
 


Hehe nice try anumohi


But it's like I told you in another "Over Unity" thread.

You will not succeed unless you can get the real leaders of the community involved like Mark, Bill, Steven, and Johnny.

But they will never comment on this issue, no matter how many times you try to bring it up. They themselves evidently do not believe that this kind of technology is possible; so any "Over Unity" project on ATS is automatically doomed to failure.

Good luck with your thread though!



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by anumohi
 


Planetary motion is not over unity. An over unity device is not a planet in orbit, thus you cannot draw parallels between the two. That is akin to saying "birds can fly, thus so can mountains".



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by anumohi
 


Planetary motion is not over unity. An over unity device is not a planet in orbit, thus you cannot draw parallels between the two. That is akin to saying "birds can fly, thus so can mountains".


Who said it was



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
what i have found in all my experience with only rare earth magnets is that if you use the magnetic force to push the magnets away from themselves, friction will cause the magnetics to demagnetize or lose their power, but if you use a positive to negative polarity that causes the magnets to naturally draw to themselves then they stay fully charged and beak no laws of thermodynamics or physics, its in their nature. SO, from that point forwards everything i conceive and test is based on pull rather than push for obvious reasons, so whatever system you want to create using rare earth magnets you must focus on it drawing to itself in order to create harmony with near zero friction in order to be successful, with this mindset all things are possible

edit on 19-8-2011 by anumohi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


You brought up perpeptual motion in a thread about over unity. Unless you are talking about point orbits (which do not violate the laws of physics), attempting to assert perpeptual motion in any other context is incorrect. You even used the moon as an example of perpeptual motion (which it is not) and challenged me to demonstrate otherwise (which I did). So you need to clarify: what is the relevance of perpeptual point orbits in a thread about over unity?



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by ken10
 


You brought up perpeptual motion in a thread about over unity. Unless you are talking about point orbits (which do not violate the laws of physics), attempting to assert perpeptual motion in any other context is incorrect. You even used the moon as an example of perpeptual motion (which it is not) and challenged me to demonstrate otherwise (which I did). So you need to clarify: what is the relevance of perpeptual point orbits in a thread about over unity?

take your discussion back to your thread here www.abovetopsecret.com...

you are polluting the information with negative interference


this thread is about positive creation

edit on 19-8-2011 by anumohi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by ken10
 


You brought up perpeptual motion in a thread about over unity. Unless you are talking about point orbits (which do not violate the laws of physics), attempting to assert perpeptual motion in any other context is incorrect. You even used the moon as an example of perpeptual motion (which it is not) and challenged me to demonstrate otherwise (which I did). So you need to clarify: what is the relevance of perpeptual point orbits in a thread about over unity?


No, I said this ....




We have too many people who are too quick repeat the same old nonsense that ....

(a) Perpetual motion is impossible......Yet fail to see that the Moon orbiting the Earth is exactly that.
Or

(b) that over-unity is impossible.....Yet cannot explain how the Universe came to be, before the "Big-Bang" (from nothing)?


And you deny both perpetual motion and over-unity, despite my giving examples of both.... proving my point.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Dear people who are really not interested in putting some kind of a theory or idea of how to achieve over unity,

Would it be too much to ask you all to leave it alone. We are all aware of the " no chance this ever works " ideas of yours, as was pointed out in other threads. We also do not need to hear or debate how the moon is not perpetual motion (even though it is) . Lastly, if i decide to buy Bedeini's $4000 package, i will, it is my money to waste.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


You used the moon's orbit as an example of perpeptual motion, which it is not. You insinuated that the origin of the universe as an example of over unity and somehow validating present day claims of over unity in devices, which it is not. The laws of physics did not exist before the universe existed, thus there were no laws to invalidate. So long as you remain in this universe, you are bound by it's laws.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by anumohi
what i have found in all my experience with only rare earth magnets is that if you use the magnetic force to push the magnets away from themselves, friction will cause the magnetics to demagnetize or lose their power, but if you use a positive to negative polarity that causes the magnets to naturally draw to themselves then they stay fully charged and beak no laws of thermodynamics or physics, its in their nature. SO, from that point forwards everything i conceive and test is based on pull rather than push for obvious reasons, so whatever system you want to create using rare earth magnets you must focus on it drawing to itself in order to create harmony with near zero friction in order to be successful, with this mindset all things are possible


anumohi,

I really admire your enthusiasm for experimentation.

But I am wondering why you are still at the drawing board trying to reinvent the wheel, while ignoring the readily available open-source technology from the most reputable inventors in alt energy?



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 


There is nothing wrong with an intelligent discussion about any topic, but once people choos to ignore evidence and science, then the discussion is no longer intelligent but ignorant.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 





So long as you remain in this universe, you are bound by it's laws.


No, that would be MANS laws....That incidentally have fallen flat many times.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
So the idea of using magnets is the one that to me so far makes the most sense. If anyone could help, if you already have an idea, how much energy does it take to " re-magnetize a depleted magnet" ? Can these " rare " earth magnets be re-magnetized? How does one go about getting some rare earth magnets? Can regular magnets work for experimenting with?



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee

Originally posted by anumohi
what i have found in all my experience with only rare earth magnets is that if you use the magnetic force to push the magnets away from themselves, friction will cause the magnetics to demagnetize or lose their power, but if you use a positive to negative polarity that causes the magnets to naturally draw to themselves then they stay fully charged and beak no laws of thermodynamics or physics, its in their nature. SO, from that point forwards everything i conceive and test is based on pull rather than push for obvious reasons, so whatever system you want to create using rare earth magnets you must focus on it drawing to itself in order to create harmony with near zero friction in order to be successful, with this mindset all things are possible


anumohi,

I really admire your enthusiasm for experimentation.

But I am wondering why you are still at the drawing board trying to reinvent the wheel, while ignoring the readily available open-source technology from the most reputable inventors in alt energy?


because they're all my ideas and practices, these people may have missed something very important that i will find or a better way.
besides whats the fun in following when you can lead , or why drive when you can be driven



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join