Electrical engineer debunks free energy circuit

[Tesseract]

I've always wanted to see an electrical engineer debunk a 'free energy' device based on some kind of special electrical wizardry. I was browsing the EEVblog youtube channel (which has a lot of fascinating material, and the guy is clearly an expert) and I found this video.

The free energy circuit is debunked first in theory on the whiteboard, and then in practice after he builds the circuit. I'm sure he could debunk a whole lot of others too if given the time (and patience). It might be a bit hard to follow if you don't have a rudimentary understanding of electronics, but most people who have dabbled in this area at one time or another should get the gist of it.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=hoqF3gjLIyI

[Carmody]

Free energy does exist, just not in this particular circuit, I'd imagine.

What I don't stand for ----is the idea that it is all bunk.

Which it is not.

That one really will find themselves under serious scrutiny on all levels, if they speak about achieving over unity... and if they go forward with it they will be approached. And surrounded.

So... if one does have such work in hand, keep it 'tranquilo', or it will be like putting one's head into view for being hit by sniper fire. Become a sneaky conniving bastard around the idea and reality of giving it away, as no other scenario will work. So get prepped and get ready to bolt.


Understand that a thousand people before you have fallen down that hole of ignorance and have had their lives ruined or actually been killed.

Once, I spoke to a major venture capitalist about funding some work I came up with. They basically shunted me to another person, as the given technical area was not their department.

That other person's job was sussing out investments for the United States security apparatus.

Think about that for a minute.

[betoobig]

i´ll love to hear Wade in this one., But i guess he is not going to lose his time with this.

LOVE
JUan

[araucaria]

Posted by betoobig (here)
i´ll love to hear Wade in this one., But i guess he is not going to lose his time with this.

LOVE
JUan

Wade has a huge thread of his own here, he doesn’t need to “wade” in here – anyone debunking free energy is simply Wade-incompatible.

His friend, and the forum’s friend, the late Brian O’Leary (why late? We shall never know for sure) visited many researchers around the world and saw first-hand proof of concept many times over.

This makes sense. Brian also used to say, “we don’t want Dick Cheney running this show!” In other words, you don’t want a single technology that someone can slap a patent on and then milk the planet again. For free energy to be free, as it has to be, requires that it should break out all over the place more or less at once in different forms, so as to circumvent these old control tactics once and for all. A hundred years ago, the problem was that Tesla’s technology couldn’t be metered. It still can’t be metered, but we also have to be able to say, neither can it be centrally controlled. This means, as Carmody suggests, that it needs to escape the economic stranglehold altogether, namely by operating totally outside of the current economic system.

[meat suit]

there is plenty of free energy out there.. in fact its all energy anyway....
IMO.. with the current restrictions imposed on this reality, there is restricted access to that energy...
I have gone down the road of playing with technology that I dont fully understand and couldnt get to work before doing the obvious thing and pointing solar panels at the sun and planting biomass willow.
that willow produces an average of 2000% annual gain... thats !900% overunty.....
overunity is all around you.... just find an existing utility to give it to you....
plant/water/sun 'non parasitic' ie. beneficial to all involved life forms based energy conversion is just great stuff....(crap gramma..sorry)

[Morbid]

'free energy' is the wrong term to use and what is used frequently to discredit progression in given field. very very efficient energy generation is possible with very minimal use at the moment. higher we go further into knowlege the better our efficiencies will become. not entirely 'free'.

[Ewan]

It's easy to debunk flawed circuits. That doesn't lead to all FE circuits are flawed though.

This guy certainly doesn't think so anyway, been a while since I watched it but from memory he states the (second?) Law of Thermodynamics is wrong - and deliberatley so.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=eNU3MLqyzPk

[Carmody]

The 'theories of thermodynamics'* are based on Newtonian aspects tied to statistical function of the result of quantum considerations. But, crucially, never looked at as the true quantum activity that they are.

When they attempted to move thermodynamics into having quantum functions incorporated, they did it the wrong way around, they force fit quantum functions into thermodynamic theory and ignored the bits that did not fit. They did a best approximation error trim fitting. The way it works, is that statistical averaging is used to come to the final 'mass aggregate' of quantum functions and actions, and thereby have a quantified mass or mass aggregate, an element in solidus lattice locked form, etc. And in that lattice locked form, the behaviour of the quantum bits is in a statistically averaged resonance coupling mode. Ie, block of steel, nickel, etc.

The deal is that we can apply other forms of energetic resonance to the mass or break the mass down to individual quantum components and apply differing forms of resonance addition and subtraction. And that will give us dimensional and dimensional energetic flow considerations that are outside of the Newtonian and outside of even the relativistic functions.

That a ounce bar of gold, for example..... is a resonance coupled statistical function, as compared to and via another resonance coupled statistic complex system. That the measurement and the thing being measured are reflections of reality and reality is also a reflection. That all of it is sensory impression, and is locked in that bubble of being outside of all potential to be a fact. That the only fact we know is that there are no facts, and is thus representative of reality...a paradox. The entire package is in paradox.


*(theory not law, never use the word law in physics, or you are setting yourself up for the psychology of attack and prosecution for breaking rules. No dogma and human drama in physics, please.)

When Tom Bearden says 'deliberately so', what he is saying is "secret society many hundreds of years long enacted plan and control system that is ongoing, right now".

He's not even remotely kidding and when looked into, this is what one finds.

It is tied to the rate of capacity for speed in cognition.

That is how they slip it by and under your radar.

There is a reasonable argument for controlling such technology, and there is also an unreasonable argument.

The unreasonable side is one where animals and killers are allowed to run rampant in that area of control and denial..tied to personal use and personal advantage. In that scenario humanity gets twisted into a total mess, which if you look around your right now, this is what you see.

And that is the part that has to go, that has to be cleaned out, if you will.

[Earthlink]

Un-fog your glasses first. That guy in the first video above here is a classic example of one who makes astro-turf.

I can't tell you how many times over the decades that these astro-turfers have derailed virtually everything good in Humanity, and kudo's to this woman for standing up.

And wikipedia? Yeah, like she said, it's garbage.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU

[Carmody]

Thinking of the video above ^ ^ , I make up a few 'words of the day', that might catch on.

Shilltard

Astrotard

Turftard

Simple words, simple memorable original words... with strong complex meaning, that requires upacking and is suggestive of a known state of complex reality.

This is why such simple looking things, like a new meme word... can be so important.

It takes a complex thought process, and reduces it to a singular memorable descriptive that can be placed anywhere, and people will simply 'know' when they see the word in use.

'Turftard' may be particularly handy in moving this thing forward.

The guy in the OP video or someone on a website comment area speaking in name of a corporation's neutrality and goodness, or 'obey police and you won't get killed',and so on.

Look at the shilltard/turftard in motion, right here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...e-gray/391119/

check out the gardener idiot in the comments section. That would be a shilltard or astrotard or turftard.

Astrotard is not so effective as it can be misunderstood.

Shilltard and turftard are particularly useful and singular in potential extrapolation of meaning.

It is important to shut off such a person without involvement, without discourse, and with a short statement that is descriptive. this is how we get to higher learning level learning and higher level expression..., we introduce complex ideas in simplistic titles and words. We reduce the thing to it's essence so it can be quickly handled in everyday life. If we don't....we'll never get past it.

We do this with everything, throughout all of history, so it's time to apply this sort of reductionist high level packing into this issue of dealing with astroturfing.

Like the computerized version of AstroTurfing. That would be a turftardbot.

'What did you do yesterday?' 'Oh, I spent my time arguing on line with a few people. It took a few hours but I finally realized I was dealing with a shilltard.'

[ulli]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Thinking of the video above ^ ^ , I make up a few 'words of the day', that might catch on.

Shilltard

Astrotard

Turftard

Simple words, simple memorable original words... with strong complex meaning, that requires upacking and is suggestive of a known state of complex reality.

This is why such simple looking things, like a new meme word... can be so important.

It takes a complex thought process, and reduces it to a singular memorable descriptive that can be placed anywhere, and people will simply 'know' when they see the word in use.

'Turftard' may be particularly handy in moving this thing forward.

The guy in the OP video or someone on a website comment area speaking in name of a corporation's neutrality and goodness, or 'obey police and you won't get killed',and so on.

Look at the shilltard/turftard in motion, right here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...e-gray/391119/

check out the gardener idiot in the comments section. That would be a shilltard or astrotard or turftard.

Astrotard is not so effective as it can be misunderstood.

Shilltard and turftard are particularly useful and singular in potential extrapolation of meaning.

It is important to shut off such a person without involvement, without discourse, and with a short statement that is descriptive. this is how we get to higher learning level learning and higher level expression..., we introduce complex ideas in simplistic titles and words. We reduce the thing to it's essence so it can be quickly handled in everyday life. If we don't....we'll never get past it.

We do this with everything, throughout all of history, so it's time to apply this sort of reductionist high level packing into this issue of dealing with astroturfing.

Like the computerized version of AstroTurfing. That would be a turftardbot.

'What did you do yesterday?' 'Oh, I spent my time arguing on line with a few people. It took a few hours but I finally realized I was dealing with a shilltard.'

Here is a visual to accompany the turf tard.

[Carmody]

'turfbotting' is probably the better term to describe what governments and corporations do to try and control opinion and situations.

They astroturf via bot programs, possibly programs run by humans, etc.

Thus...'turbotting', turfbotted'

as in, "The gubberment has turfbotted the dang issue!"

[Ewan]

There's a problem with words like that though, they are quickly adopted by the turfbotters to shut down legitimate speakers. Those lacking discernment are caught in the usual position of fitting in with the consensus. The fear of ridicule is horribly pervasive, the chorus of jeers apparently all too easy to join in with.

The sheep, (a very poor choice of words as it is so obviously offensive), is now commonly used by sheep to control other sheep that had the audacity to stop grazing for a moment and stare at the horizon.

We were all sheep once I guess. How many, when first begining to ask questions, are paralysed by that chorus of condemnation. Sheeple, turfbot, whatever.

[Carmody]

Posted by Anakie (here)
It's easy to debunk flawed circuits. That doesn't lead to all FE circuits are flawed though.

This guy certainly doesn't think so anyway, been a while since I watched it but from memory he states the (second?) Law of Thermodynamics is wrong - and deliberately so.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=eNU3MLqyzPk

Yo, just so you folks know, that Tom Bearden (guy in video) is for real. He's not even remotely kidding about the "laws of thermodynamics" being deliberately set up that way.

In Albert Einstein's own words. The 1996 Wings Books edition of Albert Einstein's 'Out Of My Later Years. Chapter 4, Physics and reality, part 4, 'the theory of relativity' First paragraph....:

"...The hypothesis of the non-existence of perpetual motion as a basis for thermodynamics affords such an example of a fundamental hypothesis suggested by experience....."

Maxwell's original math had INFINITY..and a SINGULARITY..in it. (one begets the other)

Since the theoreticians could not deal with the mathematical complexity of the infinity and the singularity, as they were just scribbling on paper, and using mind experiments..., they basically chopped off both ends of the math and force fit, error fit the theories into the new mathematical proposals, like Lorentz's works and Einstein's works.

That's why relativity has a speed limit, it removed the ability for the math to go dimensional and faster than light. The chopping off of either end of Maxwell's works, which were used in Lorentz's works, which were fundamental to Einstein's works.... and this...was what gave us the speed of light being impossible to surpass.

The reality is totally different.

The correct math says no such speed limit, no such energy limit.

For example, most of us have heard, or know, from this hearing of things... that E=mc^2, says that as you approach the speed of light and get to the speed of light..that it would take all the energy of the universe to reach the speed of light.

well, if you use bastardized theories as the basis for your theories..ones where the infinity and the singularity are 'removed'....and then you attempt to describe them, without their presence.... then it only serves to reason that a 'infinity of energy' would be a statement of a 'final requirement'.

And that it could not deal with dimensions, or spooky action at a distance, which is the singularity in each particle core.


(my understanding here) Except that the singularity is a dimensional fulcrum, created by two 2d dimensions in complex vectoral spin cumulative opposed stressing. Thus, they are in balance as a singularity fulcrum.

Our dimension, our 3d time-space universe..is tuned harmonic leakage.

From our viewpoint, our feathery and wafer thin ghostly angular harmonic viewpoint... it is all particles, quantified particles, with mostly empty space.

[Omni]

We are surrounded by free energy. We just have to tap into it somehow

[Carmody]

It's easy, we tickle it with resonance. Acoustic, mechanical, physical, electrical, current, light, and so on. Application of resonance in those forms, done the right way, will give 'free energy' by unwinding the lock of the dimensionally paired fulcrum of the core of the particle, or singularity.

They are resonance coupled and locked, so the same energetic form will uncouple them. It's all resonance and complex spin polarization.

[Snoweagle]

OK nobody else has and apparently nobody else is brave enough to speak out about the video in the OP - aledgedly debunking free energy.

In fairness, Avalon is not the place, however, "messengers" will carry this as fact.

The guy is an electrical engineer and his description and detail is EXCELLENT. But he doesn't understand MAGNETISM.

At around the 28min mark he describes accurately what happens to the voltage and current (CURRENT = MAGNETISM) at the load conditioning INDUCTOR. He dismisses the collapse of the voltage and current electrically but IGNORES the influence of the collapsing magnetic field. This is HIS mistake.

Yet the free energy circuit originally presented to HIS forum (a senior poster at least) was ridiculed mercilessly to which he gratuituosly slates the original poster and mocks him throughout the video. Yet, technically, the original poster was indeed right, it represents an increase in output.

Similar circuits exist in engineering already, have done for years. Transferring magnetic fields from one place to another in special "kit". Loosely put anyway.

These are many dangers in engineering. This mans behaviour is near the top of the lists of high risks that WILL impact your health. He can work FOR me but I would never submit authority to anybody with this "I know all, you know what I tell you".

This is the main problem with the free energy market, too many "wankers" being able to read a book and use a meter, do not a free energy device make.

[Carmody]

Of course, he does not understand what electricity is, what current is or what voltage is. It's like he was taught sentence structure and words, in a school of a sort, a school for sentence structure and word writing. He has no clue what the words mean, what the words were created for.

Voltage, current, and so on, were constructed as similes for things we don't really understand. We can enquire as to their meaning, but, as we get to only two layers of questions down, into the intricacies of what electricity is.... we reach a brick wall, where science, theory and all of physic simply says....'we don't know'.

It is literally impossible to refute 'over-unity' and impossible to state that over-unity is impossible. There is literally no scientific, no physics capacity to do so. by the very rules and entire knowledge base of physics, the answer is that it is impossible to refute it.

As a matter of fact, a little known point in the history of science concerns the theories of thermodynamics. They are taught as the laws of thermodynamics.

The second part of that aspect of law (dogma and enforcement of law) about the theories of thermodynamics, is that 'Lord Kelvin', specifically constructed them and issued them...get ready for it..in order to deny the existence of over unity devices. in order to destroy any chance of perpetual motion machines, as they were known at the time.

Seriously. Look into it.

That is the fundamental constructed falsehood that lies down at the bottom of thermodynamics.

If you look at his history, you see a very long line of potentials for being involved in secret societies. One connection after another.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willia...t_Baron_Kelvin

However, to be fair, it may not be thomson's 'fault' at all, it may be later men elevating him to a unassailable status (godhood, dogma, ritual, etc), with regard to interpretation and usage of things they really don't have the depth of capacity to truly understand. This is far too common in science. A point where the incapable adopt the look, and the walk, and even wear the sunglasses and wear the cologne of the earlier person, and live as a caricature of. The capacity and tendency hiding in the depth of humans, when they individually can't cognate a thing, they wear a mask of it. An instinctual form of adoption takes over, the animal herd part wears the conformity.



We see this every day in the rest of the world... and we would have to be a fool to think that this very animal aspect does not happen in science as well.

Especially when we factor in darker motivations of control being inserted into the situation, and this now going public aspect of the physiology of psychology, one where we find that conscious thought in the head really is an afterthought of the unconscious mind and the hind brain really is in control.

http://singularityhub.com/2015/08/02...s-think-again/

Science and technology, in the public science sense, has spent billions and billions trying to get over unity to work.

Science does NOT refute over unity. They simply call it something else.

Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor

Science refutes simplicity of access, and moves toward centralized controlled slave versions of power and control of over-unity.

Note that very carefully. They move toward centralized control of your 'energy freedom'. The dark money and dark power machine tries to insert itself into your freedom, even in this. Most especially in this.

[Earthlink]

Energy is everywhere and all the time and can be easily used in limitless amounts. That is true.

All I know of all of the other issues here is that there are not any people anywhere involved in it any more in any way.

A system that has continued for several centuries doing the same thing has lost all of its' original participants and has become unto itself void of human interface.

It is what it is.