It's blatantly obvious that you are not interested in finding out anything that doesn't fit your "schtick".
You obviously don't understand, or are interested in the fact -- that "History" did not stop when Physics made their 1850s statement.
"Electric Energy" - as being a physical entity that is produced from "a physical source" -- does not exist- and has no "physical source".
You obviously can't accept that -- so your nothing more than the perfect example of the jackass that, even though led to the water trough - is both dumb enough and stubborn enough to not drink the water.
Electricity is an energy carrier, otherwise it can be changed to electromagnetic energy, via photons or electrostatic energy aka coulomb energy. And it can be created ONLY by conversion of some other form of energy, ultimately all of which came into being at the Big Bang.
If your MOD POD is over unity in energy production it HAS to extract that energy from some other energy source.
This is a thoughtful comment - so I'll respond in kind.
First: I was taught about "Energy" / the Conservation of Energy Theory and "Conventional 'Current-Flow' Theory - as an early 1960s graduate of both the US Navy Class "A" "ET"/ Electronics School and Class "A" Radar SChool.
It was a year and a half - 8 hours a day / 5 days a week / 4 weeks a month - of nothing but ELectronics, ing Electricity and Radar -- because in the Navy - lives depend on "you getting it right" -- and besides what I was taught "worked"
But what I had been "taught" - didn't make sense - when, after being honorably / medically discharged in the later 1960s -- and after recouping:
--- the resonant tank circuits I began "playing around with" in the early 1970 - as "resonance" - part of the ET School's curriculum - had totally fascinated me:
--- because my tank circuits were consistently developing output power to input power levels that readily available ELectronics textbooks - and my former education -- could not explain.
Also -- in the Navy -- you "learn what you are taught" - if you want to continue in the field you were "assigned to" - and I sure as hell didn't want to be a deck-hand (with no offense to deck-hands).
So, in 1975; I decided to "do the research by researching Tesla's US Patents - and uncovered the fat that "in my understanding of what my tank circuits were developing:
--- he had discovered / invented and US Patented the information (some unclaimed) for the world to "electronically develop" all of the clean electricity it would ever need.:
My further research uncovered the "inconvenient truth" - that what I had been taught was not correct:
--- because it was actually based on ancient Greek philosophy and "observations" -- and could not withstand being compared with the real world electric power results, not only from my resonating tank circuits - but from every radio receiver "resonating tank circuit manufactured since Tesla used it in his 1900 US Patent for the radio.
The following is what "is in" two "fact-backed -up Electric Engineering textbooks:
--- "...Electricity One-Seven / edited by Harry Mileaf / copyrighted in 1966 - written from the "atomic viewpoint, i.e., what an atom is / what it's parts are specifically that it is the "voltage-influenced valence electron, physically moving from "negative-to-positive" in an electric circuit, and:
--- "...Basic Electronics - Fourth Edition.." written by Bernard Grog -- both validating the "resonating tank circuit as "always reducing the electric power level connected to it:
--- to a level below that being developed in the tank circuit itself.
But before I start -- having a "belief" in something is very powerful.
Just take a look at the Nationalism of the Nazis in Germany - and elsewhere - and the gymnastic hoops that people put themselves through to maintain "their belief"- when "faced with facts" -- with disastrous results sometimes.
A "belief" is always "left in the dust" - if reality means anything.
This is what the "real world / historical facts are - which you can "check-out" - as I had to do in order to understand what my circuitry was doing -- and the information is all there.
The "Conservation of Energy Theory" - is based on the Ancient Greek pre-Socrates "philosophy" that "everything in the Universe had a 'force' in it - which they named 'energie' " - based in the information they had at the time.
The "Conservation of Energy Theory" was "officially stated" in 1789, along with the Classic Physics stated position on what "power supplies could not do" in the 1850s - when Classic Physics Academia stated that::
--- "...no power supply can 'produce more output power than input power...".
Both of these "positions" were based on the information available at the time - and in the case of "power supply capability" at that time; it was correct:
--- because everything was physically powered - either by "steam powered apparatus or "real" horsepower".
Classic Physics Academia had no way of knowing:
1.) that in 1882, Tesla would discover / then develop and US Patent the multi-phase AC power system used around the World today- or:
2.) in 1894, Tesla would invent his "Electric Generator / US 511,916 / Jan 2nd. 1894 - which included the "tank-circuit" - and "resonance" - or:
3.) in 1900, Tesla would invent his "System For Transmission For Electric Energy" / US 645,576 / Mar. 20th. 1900 - which included the "resonating tank circuit as the "receiver circuit" found in every AM or FM radio manufactured since 1900.
These are facts -- not a belief -- and unlike most people today -- I had to face the fact that what "I had been taught in ET School" - did not cover what my "resonating tank circuits" were consistently developing" as far as "real" electricity - powering "real" loads.
My first successful solid state "resonating tank circuit" / constantly developed it's output power while powering a resistive test load:
--- at 103% - on May 1st. 1982.
My second successful mechanical- electric "resonating tank circuit" / a wall-powered "first" AC motor, directly driving an AC power generator; which developed it's AC output power to power
a "second" AC motor used as the "set load" / constantly developed that output power:
--- at 293% - on Sept. 10th. 1984 -- and I will gladly send you the test results for those tests because - if the licensed ELectrical Engineer had followed the specific connection directions given him- as noted on page 2 of the signed affidavit - (a legal document):
--- the "output power level" to "connected input power level" ratio would have been sell over 400% -as it had been the previous 6 months before I gave the system to Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc to test.
These are facts -- not beliefs.
Electrical Engineering actually, to this day, uses the defining terminology that a "resonating tank circuit" always simultaneously develops two opposing operating conditions - it:
1.) always develops "the minimum impedance to current flow" - within the tank circuit - while
2.) always develops " the maximum impedance to current flow" - pertaining to the input power level connected to it.
This is what electrically takes place in any resonating tank circuit - and it also matches the terminology just above - iIt:
3.) always internally develops it's:
--- "...absolute maximum power level..." while
4.) always "electrically reducing" the input power level "connected to it" - to it's:
--- "...absolute minimum power level...".
The "internally developed absolute maximum developed power level" to "connected absolute minimum power level" ratio -- is;
5.) always "...more than '1' " with "1" signifying "unity".
It's the "verbiage" that we've gotten hung-up on defending - because ever since 1894 - when Tesla invented the tank circuit and discovered "resonance" - it separated "resonant tank circuit electric power supplies from rest of the "physical power supply world - and Classic Physicist just can't stand that -- because it brings to question the fabricated situation " that they dictate 'what is and what isn't' -- simple hubris.
The situation with Electrical Engineering is not the same.
The 1897 discover of the magnetically negative electron - totally eviscerated their "positive-charge; moving from 'positive-to-negative' "Greek philosophy based "beliefs" -- which they conscientiously decided to keep teaching "only" - while totally admitting that:
--- it is the "voltage-influenced valence electron, moving from 'negative-to-positive' in an electric circuit - that is "electricity - as governed by the Laws of Magnetics - which causes the heat / light/ and magnetic fields developed in motors and power generators:
--- known as "amperage" which we pay pay for.
The ancient Greek philosophy based "energy" that is incorrectly spoken of as "something" that can be either "added to" or "taken from" a circuit - is just a misplaced belief -- not a fact:
--- and the negative ramifications of "believing something - over the "facts" concerning a "term" called "over-unity power production - is a major part of why "we didn't look" for an alternative to continuously burning fossil-based fuels to produce electricity and power vehicles - getting us into this Global Warming / Climate Change disaster we've created for ourselves.:
--- when for 124 years - every radio receiver's "over-unity operation" is the the proof of the validity:
--- that the absolute maximum developed output power level - is never increased or exceeded.
A "fact" always invalidate a "belief" -- and one has to be nominated to receive a Nobel Prize.
I hope this helps you understand what I have been saying about "resonance" when applied to the tank circuit.
--- because it is my "belief" - that the reason behind it been rejected - and what I work to change (because of what the resonant tank circuit demonstrably makes available) - is the invalidated "belief" that "over-unity electric power production is impossible" - when we've been using it for over a century.
Mark Carney, Globalist Bankster, elitist Malthusian, Misanthropic Minion #1. I wonder if that idiot knows even the rudiments of energy science & economics or is he just bound & determined to achieve his owners DeGrowth, DeIndustrialization, Doomer Techno-Feudal socio-economic system, powered by warm sunshine and gentle breezes.
You have most of this right - all except the part that (clean) green energy isn't going to be cheaper.
Try $0.10 "per hour..."- $72 per 30 day month per power unit / through long term lease - with no increases / as long as is needed - with increased number of installed power supplies at up to:
eTo Steven -- it means exactly what the English words mean.
In the comment that was presented - the "statement" was made that "green energy would always be expensive - and the writer knows that there is a "resonant solid-state / electric power supply - that is has been developed and US Patented - that can continuously "electronically develop" the output power levels listed in my comment.
Being a nuke lover - which is your right: - before you comment about "over-unity" power production - you better have an actual electronics basis against it -- because there is none -- as we' ve been using the same electric circuit, used exactly the same way - for over 124 years - ever since Nikola Tesla invented and US Patented the radio receiver - see US 645,576 / "System For Transmission For Electric Energy" / Jan. 2nd. 1900 which included the "resonating tank circuit".
You still haven't told us the source of all this magical energy your resonant circuit produces. There's this thing called Energy Conservation. That's always been a tough nut to crack. And if you've done it why are you wasting your time here, write the Nobel Committee and get them to start wrapping up your Nobel Prize.
Good explanation of some economics of energy, I always learn from you.
Boy are you a day late and a dollar short.
Instead of trying to cover "what you think you know" -- get a copy of the two text books I'ff listed -- and "learn".
The new batch of textbooks aren't worth the paper their written on - because they just shovel the same crop that you think you know.
You have to understand older electronics to understand that you're just making a bigger fool of yourself than before.
xampt SmithFS -- you are one dumb Neanderthal.
It's blatantly obvious that you are not interested in finding out anything that doesn't fit your "schtick".
You obviously don't understand, or are interested in the fact -- that "History" did not stop when Physics made their 1850s statement.
"Electric Energy" - as being a physical entity that is produced from "a physical source" -- does not exist- and has no "physical source".
You obviously can't accept that -- so your nothing more than the perfect example of the jackass that, even though led to the water trough - is both dumb enough and stubborn enough to not drink the water.
You are just not worth educating.
Electricity is an energy carrier, otherwise it can be changed to electromagnetic energy, via photons or electrostatic energy aka coulomb energy. And it can be created ONLY by conversion of some other form of energy, ultimately all of which came into being at the Big Bang.
If your MOD POD is over unity in energy production it HAS to extract that energy from some other energy source.
To SmithFS.
This is a thoughtful comment - so I'll respond in kind.
First: I was taught about "Energy" / the Conservation of Energy Theory and "Conventional 'Current-Flow' Theory - as an early 1960s graduate of both the US Navy Class "A" "ET"/ Electronics School and Class "A" Radar SChool.
It was a year and a half - 8 hours a day / 5 days a week / 4 weeks a month - of nothing but ELectronics, ing Electricity and Radar -- because in the Navy - lives depend on "you getting it right" -- and besides what I was taught "worked"
But what I had been "taught" - didn't make sense - when, after being honorably / medically discharged in the later 1960s -- and after recouping:
--- the resonant tank circuits I began "playing around with" in the early 1970 - as "resonance" - part of the ET School's curriculum - had totally fascinated me:
--- because my tank circuits were consistently developing output power to input power levels that readily available ELectronics textbooks - and my former education -- could not explain.
Also -- in the Navy -- you "learn what you are taught" - if you want to continue in the field you were "assigned to" - and I sure as hell didn't want to be a deck-hand (with no offense to deck-hands).
So, in 1975; I decided to "do the research by researching Tesla's US Patents - and uncovered the fat that "in my understanding of what my tank circuits were developing:
--- he had discovered / invented and US Patented the information (some unclaimed) for the world to "electronically develop" all of the clean electricity it would ever need.:
My further research uncovered the "inconvenient truth" - that what I had been taught was not correct:
--- because it was actually based on ancient Greek philosophy and "observations" -- and could not withstand being compared with the real world electric power results, not only from my resonating tank circuits - but from every radio receiver "resonating tank circuit manufactured since Tesla used it in his 1900 US Patent for the radio.
The following is what "is in" two "fact-backed -up Electric Engineering textbooks:
--- "...Electricity One-Seven / edited by Harry Mileaf / copyrighted in 1966 - written from the "atomic viewpoint, i.e., what an atom is / what it's parts are specifically that it is the "voltage-influenced valence electron, physically moving from "negative-to-positive" in an electric circuit, and:
--- "...Basic Electronics - Fourth Edition.." written by Bernard Grog -- both validating the "resonating tank circuit as "always reducing the electric power level connected to it:
--- to a level below that being developed in the tank circuit itself.
But before I start -- having a "belief" in something is very powerful.
Just take a look at the Nationalism of the Nazis in Germany - and elsewhere - and the gymnastic hoops that people put themselves through to maintain "their belief"- when "faced with facts" -- with disastrous results sometimes.
A "belief" is always "left in the dust" - if reality means anything.
This is what the "real world / historical facts are - which you can "check-out" - as I had to do in order to understand what my circuitry was doing -- and the information is all there.
The "Conservation of Energy Theory" - is based on the Ancient Greek pre-Socrates "philosophy" that "everything in the Universe had a 'force' in it - which they named 'energie' " - based in the information they had at the time.
The "Conservation of Energy Theory" was "officially stated" in 1789, along with the Classic Physics stated position on what "power supplies could not do" in the 1850s - when Classic Physics Academia stated that::
--- "...no power supply can 'produce more output power than input power...".
Both of these "positions" were based on the information available at the time - and in the case of "power supply capability" at that time; it was correct:
--- because everything was physically powered - either by "steam powered apparatus or "real" horsepower".
Classic Physics Academia had no way of knowing:
1.) that in 1882, Tesla would discover / then develop and US Patent the multi-phase AC power system used around the World today- or:
2.) in 1894, Tesla would invent his "Electric Generator / US 511,916 / Jan 2nd. 1894 - which included the "tank-circuit" - and "resonance" - or:
3.) in 1900, Tesla would invent his "System For Transmission For Electric Energy" / US 645,576 / Mar. 20th. 1900 - which included the "resonating tank circuit as the "receiver circuit" found in every AM or FM radio manufactured since 1900.
These are facts -- not a belief -- and unlike most people today -- I had to face the fact that what "I had been taught in ET School" - did not cover what my "resonating tank circuits" were consistently developing" as far as "real" electricity - powering "real" loads.
My first successful solid state "resonating tank circuit" / constantly developed it's output power while powering a resistive test load:
--- at 103% - on May 1st. 1982.
My second successful mechanical- electric "resonating tank circuit" / a wall-powered "first" AC motor, directly driving an AC power generator; which developed it's AC output power to power
a "second" AC motor used as the "set load" / constantly developed that output power:
--- at 293% - on Sept. 10th. 1984 -- and I will gladly send you the test results for those tests because - if the licensed ELectrical Engineer had followed the specific connection directions given him- as noted on page 2 of the signed affidavit - (a legal document):
--- the "output power level" to "connected input power level" ratio would have been sell over 400% -as it had been the previous 6 months before I gave the system to Northwest Laboratories of Seattle WA Inc to test.
These are facts -- not beliefs.
Electrical Engineering actually, to this day, uses the defining terminology that a "resonating tank circuit" always simultaneously develops two opposing operating conditions - it:
1.) always develops "the minimum impedance to current flow" - within the tank circuit - while
2.) always develops " the maximum impedance to current flow" - pertaining to the input power level connected to it.
This is what electrically takes place in any resonating tank circuit - and it also matches the terminology just above - iIt:
3.) always internally develops it's:
--- "...absolute maximum power level..." while
4.) always "electrically reducing" the input power level "connected to it" - to it's:
--- "...absolute minimum power level...".
The "internally developed absolute maximum developed power level" to "connected absolute minimum power level" ratio -- is;
5.) always "...more than '1' " with "1" signifying "unity".
It's the "verbiage" that we've gotten hung-up on defending - because ever since 1894 - when Tesla invented the tank circuit and discovered "resonance" - it separated "resonant tank circuit electric power supplies from rest of the "physical power supply world - and Classic Physicist just can't stand that -- because it brings to question the fabricated situation " that they dictate 'what is and what isn't' -- simple hubris.
The situation with Electrical Engineering is not the same.
The 1897 discover of the magnetically negative electron - totally eviscerated their "positive-charge; moving from 'positive-to-negative' "Greek philosophy based "beliefs" -- which they conscientiously decided to keep teaching "only" - while totally admitting that:
--- it is the "voltage-influenced valence electron, moving from 'negative-to-positive' in an electric circuit - that is "electricity - as governed by the Laws of Magnetics - which causes the heat / light/ and magnetic fields developed in motors and power generators:
--- known as "amperage" which we pay pay for.
The ancient Greek philosophy based "energy" that is incorrectly spoken of as "something" that can be either "added to" or "taken from" a circuit - is just a misplaced belief -- not a fact:
--- and the negative ramifications of "believing something - over the "facts" concerning a "term" called "over-unity power production - is a major part of why "we didn't look" for an alternative to continuously burning fossil-based fuels to produce electricity and power vehicles - getting us into this Global Warming / Climate Change disaster we've created for ourselves.:
--- when for 124 years - every radio receiver's "over-unity operation" is the the proof of the validity:
--- that the absolute maximum developed output power level - is never increased or exceeded.
A "fact" always invalidate a "belief" -- and one has to be nominated to receive a Nobel Prize.
I hope this helps you understand what I have been saying about "resonance" when applied to the tank circuit.
--- because it is my "belief" - that the reason behind it been rejected - and what I work to change (because of what the resonant tank circuit demonstrably makes available) - is the invalidated "belief" that "over-unity electric power production is impossible" - when we've been using it for over a century.
You still haven't told us the physical source of the energy your MOD POD creates. Just a runaround, obfuscation.
Mark Carney, Globalist Bankster, elitist Malthusian, Misanthropic Minion #1. I wonder if that idiot knows even the rudiments of energy science & economics or is he just bound & determined to achieve his owners DeGrowth, DeIndustrialization, Doomer Techno-Feudal socio-economic system, powered by warm sunshine and gentle breezes.
You have most of this right - all except the part that (clean) green energy isn't going to be cheaper.
Try $0.10 "per hour..."- $72 per 30 day month per power unit / through long term lease - with no increases / as long as is needed - with increased number of installed power supplies at up to:
--- 480 VDC or VAC / 480 Amps per unit available.
What does that even mean?
eTo Steven -- it means exactly what the English words mean.
In the comment that was presented - the "statement" was made that "green energy would always be expensive - and the writer knows that there is a "resonant solid-state / electric power supply - that is has been developed and US Patented - that can continuously "electronically develop" the output power levels listed in my comment.
Being a nuke lover - which is your right: - before you comment about "over-unity" power production - you better have an actual electronics basis against it -- because there is none -- as we' ve been using the same electric circuit, used exactly the same way - for over 124 years - ever since Nikola Tesla invented and US Patented the radio receiver - see US 645,576 / "System For Transmission For Electric Energy" / Jan. 2nd. 1900 which included the "resonating tank circuit".
You still haven't told us the source of all this magical energy your resonant circuit produces. There's this thing called Energy Conservation. That's always been a tough nut to crack. And if you've done it why are you wasting your time here, write the Nobel Committee and get them to start wrapping up your Nobel Prize.