System for Enhancing Energy

Could you please show us where the extra kW comes from, I don't want to issue an over unity alert in vain....

Obviously I cannot disclose everything I have done, however I would like to connect with a serious third party who can help bring my prototype to good use. I wouldn't be introducing something that doesn't exist to a forum such as this.

For the last 2 years, the prototype proved that the system is working.
You contradict yourself since at start you say it works since 2 years and now you say it does not exist !
Are you serious or not ?
I manifested my appreciation and interest but your reaction makes me doubtful about what you claim.I shall not participate anymore at this thread since the person is unreliable.

I'm not contradicting myself, if you take your time, you will see that the prototype is working , the only thing I do is put the switch on and 10 lamps 200 W plus 3 150 W lite on.

Albert,

You cannot produce more energy from a machine than you put into it.

Even if both machines (motor and generator) were perfect, had no mechanical losses, no electrical inefficiencies and the conductors were lossless you still cannot almost double the amount of energy you produce from the contraption.

You will never convince anybody on this forum that you have even come close to this, since it is physically impossible.

Good luck.

Let me repeat , I don't propel the generator (need 5 HP motor) with a 2 HP motor , what I do , I propel my system with 2 HP motor and the system propels the generator, go back to the A-C-B example.

I wish I could tell everybody the details, but in due time.

quote"To reach the RPM necessary for a generator to create electricity is RPM plus Torque to maintain the RPM's." I do not understand this sentence.

"For the last 5 years I'm working in a system to reduce the input of power with the same output of the generator , based in maintaining the RPM and the Torque. A) input 1.490 KW (2 HP motor) B) output 2.450 KW (Generator 2.5 KW)"

With this statement you have proved the laws of Thermodynamics to be false. Until today the law said that the input power must be greater that the output power.
I guess we will have to change it.

My generator "Voltmaster" needs 3600 RPM , until you don't pull energy from the "g" it will run with any motor , as long as will keep the 3600 RPM

Albert Krotowski,

Greetings, I represent LynDoor Industries, Opperunity Development Division, and I'd like to enter into an exclusive marketing and distribution agreement for your product.

Please respond here, and we can make arraignments to further converse away from possible technology thieves.

Keenly interested how you get 2.5 kW out with 1.4kW in. That's a neat trick, but don't divulge your secret here.

in touch with me soonest.

Arraignments??!!!!!

Ain't no penalty if you ever manage to break that law!

It's a secret over-unity inventors code word.

Please do not misunderstand the following question :

Have you been in any technical college which ever the technical direction ?

I notice that only those who did not follow technical courses have the free mind to attack basic principles the other stay and keep with traditional ideas without any attempt to break them.

In general traditional technique goes from the idea that energy cannot be created from nothing so that when in a system energy enters due to the fact that all systems have losses (for instance in mechanical systems friction) the output will always be smaller than the input.

You claim to have obtained a confirmed result (by prototype) which proves this principle as wrong.

It is a great breakthrough and I congratulate you. If you have already applied for a patent I would be very interested to know more about the revolutionary prototype.

You will be the first of I do not know how many thousand people who tried without true results to reach what you achieved. Some of them claimed to have obtained this miracle but it came later that there were tricks and no real honest results.

Great!

Ok I'll bite, tell us more.

Have you had someone independently test your system for example?

What makes it different from the other devices currently being offered on the free-energy and pseudoscience websites that claim the same thing (to various degrees)?

How do you plan on taking your prototype to the next stage as a saleable product?

With 40 years of experience already, have you considered just getting a loan, hiring someone to help with the product marketing, producing some working prototypes and take them out into the industry to drum up interest in your device?

Most people (and certainly potential buyers) won't take your device seriously unless you get it independently tested by a certified laboratory or group of scientists. There have been far to many scams involving fake device demonstartions for this line of proof to be considered enough for a sale or to be taken seriously (see numerous previous threads on CR4 on such devices).

But if you do spend the time and money getting it independently proven, well the sky's the limit! This must be your next step for financial success, otherwise you will not be able to differentiate yourself from the other pseudoscience inventers posting Youtube videos and claiming the same thing, and neither will we.

Oh we're way past that by now, why we can generate twice that!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qa3MmdqdQ0

http://pesn.com/2013/11/10/9602392_ValyEnergiStar-posts-another-QMoGen-demo-video/

We be crazier than you.com

you make no sense, we make even less....the worms the worms somebody has to do something about the worms!

.

I read your comments but did not male any till you wrote this stupid sentence.

Intelligence is not compensated with knowledge or experience it is a gift one gets . If one has enough intelligence he will learn from experience and increase his knowledge.

Knowledge can every body have intelligence but a few.

You wrote it to justify your apparent result : I have no degree but experience and knowledge so that it compensates. Yes, in your profession but not against physics.

Those laws of nature you want to make people believe that you broke are stronger than what you think.

I do not believe that your prototype works, as I have had several contacts with "inventors" as you in my professional activity as consultant and EVERY time it was -if on paper- a misunderstanding between energy, losses and power and if a "prototype" was presented it had a hidden energy source or if did not work it was the poor manufacturing the reason.

M- S - G with available power at G higher than the introduced power at M is either a hoax or it does not work. Full stop.

The reason you believe you can break the laws of nature is that you do not know them.

Your example with the apple falling is again a proof that you do not understand them.

The observation of the apple lead to the theory which was, after formulation, confirmed by many many MEASUREMENTS.

If you do not look at the apple you cannot imagine what makes it falls!

You did not get the point!

May be too much experience and knowledge?

you're fighting some heavy physics.........show me

this is already taken

It's not the we don't think your prototype doesn't exist, it's just that you need to provide enough information to enable us to determine if it works as you say.

This forum has many engineers that have many years of experience evaluating proposals such as yours, and we always find that there's some secret widget or chemical that makes the "process" work but can't be revealed to the world.

So be prepared for a healthy dose of sceptism should you desire to continue posting here; give it a try, you'll get some good feedback that you can use before you present to the next forum you go to.

http://www.icr.org/law-conservation/ you can not challenge or fight this principal in this universe. you must be adding existing energy in order to get your results(if accurate)

No overunity person believes that they are subject to those pesky laws. To them the fact that they can drive their car at 80mph in a 40mph zone is proof that laws can be broken.

For starters, right off the bat you are wrong. Power is not related to RPM + torque; it would be RPM x torque. Elementary mistakes like that destroy your credibility, even before we don't see the nonexistent description of this device. Don't even bother to go back to the drawing board.

I do not want to see the machine in any location of your choosing. All you really need to do is take your device into an empty field of my choosing, open up any closed/sealed compartments so that nothing is hidden from view, show me how to start it up a with a small generator, allow me to stop the generator, disconnect it and hook up some high wattage halogen lamps to the output. If those lights are still on two hours later, then by golly you have the first demonstrable perpetual motion machine, and fame and fortune are sure to follow. Not one device ever pitched to me could pass that test, and I suspect that yours can't either.

Watch this video of a light bulb that appears to glow by itself when power is removed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljKX9Om7Z4s

.

.

.

.

.

.

then when you finish, click on the link on the video to see how they did it...