On 01/15/2010 06:05 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: William Beaty <[email protected]> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Fri, January 15, 2010 3:25:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF:
>> Sean may be right
>>
>> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>>
>>> We got energy out in B-1 which we didn't get out in A-1, yet we
>>> put the same amount of electrical energy into the system in steps
>>> B1-B3 as we did in steps A1-A3. Where'd that energy come from?
>>> This is the Steorn Mystery.
>>
>> Now we're on the same track.
>>
>> As I said before, this sounds just like the uproar about the
>> "Keelynet Firefly". There was no FE-source in that device. It
>> just acted to uncouple the input drive pulse from the output pulsed
>> load. As a result, when you added a load, THE INPUT ENERGY DIDN'T
>> INCREASE! It's FE, it's FE! Not. Instead, with no load
>> connected, the input energy would go into waste heat. But with a
>> load connected, the input energy drives the load instead of being
>> wasted. But unfortunately, output energy was still being supplied
>> by the power supply, so it could *never* be higher than input.
>> There was no mysterious energy present. And if you tried to "close
>> the loop" and make it self-acting, you'd always fail.
>>
>> With the origional MRA device and with Firefly, after all the
>> yelling died down, our conclusions ended up being something like
>> this: "Don't waste time with possibly self-deceiving measurements.
>> Since your net output power is apparently so large, GO AND CLOSE
>> THE LOOP. You haven't bothered to try closing the loop? Then
>> you're just fooling yourself. Please shut up and stop bothering
>> everyone."
>
> So for the orbo to be overunity it would have to produce less "waste"
> heat under NO loading, i.e. with the revolving magnets removed?
Almost. But say, rather, that it would have to produce MORE waste heat
when it's under load.
With no load,
(waste heat[no load]) = energy input.
When it's under load, waste head DROPS, and we have
(waste heat[under load] + mechanical energy) = energy input
and
waste heat [under load] < waste heat[no load]
and it's not OU. If the waste heat did NOT drop when it was under load,
on the other hand, then we'd have
waste heat[load] == waste heat[no load]
(waste heat[load] + mechanical energy) > waste heat[no load]
and so
(waste heat[load] + mechanical energy) > energy input
and it would be over unity.
>
> Harry
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark
> your favourite sites. Download it now http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
>
