Parametric Power Conversion as a general Principle for electrical generation

In my notes on Overunity Research, Lawrence has ask the question on how does the Magnet able to increase the kinetic energy of itself by first magnetize the nearby metal, then attracted toward it. Where does the kinetic energy coming from? Moreover, in the end of the process, the strength of new magnetic field of metal and magnet is greater than original, where does the extra magnetic energy coming from?

The classic electromagnetic would answer this question by considering the energy gained throughout the whole process. Since it require energy to separate the metal and magnet, therefore energy is conserved in the sense which no net energy is gained in the process. It has, however, created the need to explain how is it possible to borrow kinetic energy in the process of attraction from the later process of separation. Does nature allow we borrow energy from the future? The same question in the case of attraction between charged object and metal, the metal is also borrowing energy from the future separation. Moreover, it is not necessary that the metal is separated from the attracted object in the future. A magnet could hinged on ceiling for years without falling down, what supply the gravitational potential energy in first place?

Another set of question which often ignored by Physicist is in the case of repulsion, what supplied the kinetic energy for the repulsed object to be separate? Clearly, the logic that eliminate the need to ask the source of energy no longer applied here. Physics has to answer the question of where this kinetic energy coming from, or through what mechanism that kinetic energy is produced.

My knowledge and understanding is probably inadequate for the process of answering this mystery, I could only lied down a tentative hypothesis of my own: My speculation is that through some special alignment of Magnetic/electrical mini-poles, it is possible that the totality of attraction/repulsion has created an effect of rotation on them. Thus the kinetic energy is coming from the rotational energy of individual mini-poles. Since it is the natural states that anything rotate, therefore the rotation of them thus provided an inexhaustible supply of kinetic energy.

One of the beautiful example of utilization of this kinetic energy for the generation of electricity is known as Parametric Power Conversion, which an iron core is attracted into an electromagnetic coil. The whole setup would then experience the unusual phenomena of negative inductive. I attempt here to formula a general principle for this classes of electrical generation, or energy extraction via attraction and repulsion of Electrical/Magnetic poles. Namely, Any electrical/Magnetic pole would first elicit energy from the electrically/magnetically neutral object in the area where electrical/magnetic flux is penetrable, possibly via the aforementioned mechanism. Then we can conveniently dream up any kind of mechanism to extract the kinetic energy gained.

For instant, we can imagine a simple Magnetic energy conversion device which attraction between coils and metal is converted into electrical energy. For instance, we could have two separate system, one made of metal and coils, another made of coils and magnet. The purpose of the coil in the later system is to attract the metal in the former system when it is magnetized. At the time of their attraction, the coil in the former system and the magnet in the later system is made to approach each other by design. If we connect any loading to the coil in the former system, that load would operate as kinetic energy from the attraction is converted into electrical energy. To end this iteration, we could end the attraction between the magnetized coil from the later system and the metal in the former system by stopped supplying the coil in the former system with electricity. After the coil in the later system is demagnetized, it is quite easy to manually separate the two system. We could then repeat the whole process to generate electricity from the attraction between coil and metal. The great theoretical question that classic electromagnetic would face is, does the total of energy conserved throughout the whole process? The answer is definitely not. Could we use the electrical energy generated in the process to maintain the operation of whole system? The answer is definitely yes.

If we look at the whole process in terms of energy loss and gained, some part of electrical energy is lost as electrical resistance in the magnetization of the coil. And the inductance of the coil no doubt borrowed some electrical energy in the building up of magnetic field in the coil in the later system. Then kinetic energy is gained as the metal is attracted toward the magnetized coil, which is then converted into electrical energy through Lenz’s Law in the coil of the former system. That is where ‘extra’ energy enter into the equation. As long as this extra energy is greater than the lost in coils as electrical resistance, the system could produce more electrical energy output than its input. We thus have a simple overunity generator.

We could similarly construct other OU generator by using any attraction mechanism between electrical/magnetic poles and electrical/magnetic neutral, then use any kinetic-electrical energy conversion mechanism we could imagine. The key is that the attraction mechanism would be reversible, i.e. the coil could be separated from the metal, so we could repeat the whole process. The inexhaustible source of energy is there in the nature for thousands of years. Physics couldn’t understand it adequately doesn’t mean that we couldn’t use it at all. In the end of the day, we never took Psychology class before we become human!

Innovation on energyfromair at Apr 22, 2005

Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 11:34 PM

This is yet another Patent claim by Euler. After my attempt to
create a mechanism that could use the rotational motion of one mass to
shift the rim of another circular mass, I now created an invention not
just able to shift the rim of another circular mass then return to its
original position, but also extracting gravitational energy in the
process. So it is really the process of a rotational object shift a
swing to shift yet another rotational object. I got two conceptual
innovation from that:
1. Theoretically, this process could take place interminably, and each
rotation would increase in speed and magnitude, thus drawing more and
more gravitational power (Power= energy/time), until we reach the
physical limit of the rotating object.
2. With a little modification, we could change the direction of
rotation of the second rotating object. We could thus control where
and to which direction the pulse force is applied.
3. By placing this device in different angle, we can control the
phasing of the pulse force. Now imagine if there is a simple way to
change the angular location with respect to the center of the first
rotating object.
4. Imagine if this device is itself rotating around the first rotating
mass and connected to another rotating mass, because of yet another
pulse force. We would observe that the second rotating mass is
changing its rotating frequency in sync of the frequency of the
rotation of this device.
5. By placing the same device in many different angles with respect to
the center of the first rotating object, we can control the timing of
the pulse force in a different way from 3.
6. With yet another modification, we could also change the frequency
of the pulse force applied compare to the rotational frequency of the
first object, as well as the strength of the pulse force compare to
the torque of the first rotational object.
7. By connected many of this device in many angle with respect to the
center of the first rotating object to many other independently
rotating mass, we can control the phase of pulse force in many
different rotating mass.

To summarize, I found a way to control the phase, frequency,
strength , the power output and the direction of the pulse force
applied to any number of rotating masses connected via this device. If
we could found a way to feedback the second rotational momentum to the
first one, we should see the world’s self-accelerating physical
system. And we should expect this system reach its maximum capacity
within 5 feedback cycle. Who say we can’t use the swing to push yet
another swing to yet another swing…?
With the combination of pulse circuit and clever engineering, I
could produce something much much more powerful than electrical
control could produce. Who is to say I shouldn’t feel proud of myself?

On Perceptual Motion Machine

Wed, May 11, 2005 at 11:33 PM

Below is my personal contribution toward theory of Perceptual Motion Machine.
The characteristic of any PMM would be:
1. Conservation of energy would be maintained if the missing energy
is taken account into. The missing energy is likely coming from the
interaction of construction energy(internal energy) with the potential
difference of the one or more of the three natural force:
Magnetic/Electrical/Gravitational. We can retro calculate the amount of energy supplied and estimate about its source and extraction.

2. The missing energy is extracted, not produced in the sense that
no new energy produced via the traditional means. Most likely, energy
is transformed from potential energy in either E/M/G to kinetic energy
via innovative ways.
3. The missing energy is most likely non-exhaustible. i.e. An amount
of this energy transformed into other forms would be instantly replace
via a natural process. So it is pointless in calculating the total
amount of energy reserve since there exist no definitely upper limit
of this energy, only the efficiency which we can transform this in
other form of energy.
4. The exist a physical upper limit for the amount of energy
possible to be extracted by a particular process(and a possible
uppermost frequency for extraction). Notice that maybe different from
what is the upper construction limit which related to how the
machinery is constructed. Before reaching this upper limit, however,
this system exhibit an interesting characteristic that the energy
output depend largely on the demand of the load, there is no
characteristic output.
5. However, due to imperfectness of the real machinery, the
machinery is likely limited by the life of its weakness leak. It,
however, does NOT change the nature of this machine. It can only
consider as an non-excellent implementation of the idea. It maybe
possible replace part of the weaken component and re-run this
machinery as in the past,
6. If we try to exceed either the physical upper limit or upper
construction limit for the output, this machinery would DEFINITELY be
broken apart from its weakness link. How it broken apart depend on the
particular design of this machinery.
7. If we run such a machinery well within both of its limit, we
would expect this machinery to be running indefinitely in its
predicted fashion. And produce energy at a rate in accordance to its
theory.

Most accurate formula to calculate energy from gravity

Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:02 AM

Hi everyone in energyfromair.com,
Through some knowledge of differentiation and integration, I have
derive the following formula to calculate the gravitational energy
extracted from one single rotation of a non-cylindrical mass.
For a hollow circle with R as the outside radius and r as the inner
radius,    E=40/3*(R^3-r^3)/(R^2-r^2)
This formula will be more accurate than E=2MGR.

Ideas of Second Stage Oscillator

Sun, Jun 3, 2007 at 11:28 PM

My observation on Double-Stage Oscillation Phenomena

Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 4:58 PM

The double oscillation phenomena we discuss here refer to this website: http://www.rexresearch.com/milkovic/milkovic.htm
Through an invention someone is able to amplify ten times of the input, this thesis attempt to understand its underlying mechanism. This thesis at current stage is at best immature, please forgave me for that.
The name Double Stage Oscillation derived from the sense that there are 2 oscillations: 1 is the oscillation in the horizontal plane by the pendulum, 2 is the oscillation in the vertical direction by the counter weight in the output side. The general impression would the 1st oscillation has caused the 2nd oscillation, although actually it is an iteration of 1st and 2nd feedback into each other . So a better term should be a oscillation within a oscillation. It should be consider along with the question which I raised 2 years ago: ‘What if the strength of gravity varies in according to the phase of a pendulum?’, i.e. When it is falling from the top position, the strength of gravity is on the increase until the pendulum reach the lowest point; and when it rise again, we decrease the strength of gravity field in according to the position of the pendulum. The result of DO experiment seems to confirm my initial guess: There would be an increase of kinetic energy in the pendulum. If there is no energy cost to vary the gravity field in according to the motion of pendulum, we could be amazed at the excessive kinetic energy coming from nowhere.
While I was pondering about this phenomena, I remember that 2 years ago an inventor has proposed that gravity energy could be extracted through oscillation. And different oscillations would have different efficiency in extracting the gravity energy. It thus appears to me that DO inventor has found an efficient way to oscillate energy out of gravity field. And contrary to established Physics, the route which the an object took in gravity field is related to the total amount of energy exchange. Gravity could behave as an non-conservative field, or gravity itself is not a conservative field to begin with. It is only because the limitation of our experiments apparatus and the location of our experiment(always close to Earth) that gravity appear to be conservative.
We could say gravity is in heart an oscillation of force field, and if we closely match the ‘natural’ oscillation from gravity, and the oscillation we induced then we achieve a resonance. At resonance, the excessive energy is coming from the gravity itself. What remain as a question is: Could we use that to reveal the frequency of gravity oscillation?
I previously had suspect that it is the constant ‘conflict’ of force between gravity and electromagnetism in the microscopic cause the undetectable oscillation. I need to reconsider that observation along with this new line of thinking.
Another hypothesis, it is actually a crude guess. 1st Oscillation: g*sin angle, 2nd oscillation g*(sin angle)^2. Since it is known that the strength of gravity and electromagnetic field is inversely proportional to the distance squared from Center of Gravity. Therefore if the variation of oscillation in the direction parallel to field line took the form of X^2(the meaning of X within X), it is thus a closer match to the natural variation of gravity. It follow from this hypothesis that Triple/Quadruple Oscillation wouldn’t obtain a better I/O ration than 10.(It is also interesting that is a 10, which is close to theoretical value of g.) My alternative hypothesis is that we could obtain a better output ratio: Double=10, Triple=100, Quadruple=1000… etc.
(And I does has a method to test this hypothesis by building n-th Stage Oscillator)
Something continue to haunt me: Why gravity from 3-D objects has the dimensionality of only 2? Gravity only exist in 2-D? or Gravity is a wave that only propagate in 2 dimension? All known force field operate at 2-D, why do we live in a 3-D world?

08/05/10 update: The official explanation: nebojsa_simin_paper_free_energy_of_the_oscillating_pendulum-lever_system

Experiment on Pendulum motion

Hypothesis:
In a pendulum, If we replace Thread with spring, and we let the spring oscillate with a mass it carries.
Then we swing the pendulum.

If the frequency of oscillation of the spring is a ‘good match’ with the swinging motion of pendulum.
We would thus obtain resonance. Which is another demonstration of Double Stage oscillation, and LT’s invention is based on that.

A strange experiment on falling magnet

Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 6:27 PM

illl070820

A thought experiment using Parallel Path Technology.

Double Oscillation in Electromagnetic Field?

mdosdiscussion

Discussion on Magical Transformer

Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 2:14 PM