Ed wrote;
> Lately many people have used o/u and free energy as interchangeable.
> Is this indeed true, or are their definitions different?
You know, IMHO it really seems to be simply a semantics argument.
Unity is a 1 in 1 out relationship, written as a 1:1 ratio.
This means it COULD and SHOULD power itself but nothing else, no motors,
no lights, no heaters, so what good is UNITY alone?
Over Unity is anything greater than this 1:1 ratio. I've seen various
statments claiming that to be commercially viable, a working overunity
device must put out at LEAST 3 times what it takes to run it. Which as I
read it would be
1:4 (4 out - 1 to run it = 3 times for loads which is FREE).
So, really, anything that is greater than unity is essentially free.
Beyond of course the investment in the equipment needed to produce the
phenomena as well as the intial excitation energy.
I've seen many articles belaboring the point...to my mind, such semantic
arguments simply defocus from the main point of building one. After all,
if it isn't overunity, what good is it?
Natural power, from sunlight, hydroelectric, windpower, etc...are all
essentially free (beyond hardware and maintnenance) and these are great
things that WORK NOW and are available off the shelf, however most are
fairly expensive or complicated to get installed. They also don't put
out a helluva lot of power, though would be ideal for keeping a hybrid
battery/inverter system working....
The problem of course is peak load times....when many appliances are
being run at one time, can the system maintain it...
That is another reason I like the idea of single device power supplies,
so that you could take an appliance anywhere and it would have its own
internal power supply, independent of wires or outside power...
-- Jerry W. Decker / jdecker@keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187