Here is a paper written by Jovan Marjanovic of Serbia.
The first thing to strike me in this paper was the diagram showing two magnets with opposite poles facing each other and a conductive strip in between the two magnets, this increases the electrical flow in the conductive strip.
Amazing isn’t it? Amazing, because it makes perfect sense.
The space and time existing between the two magnets is what does the trick.
Keep in mind that the relationships existing in this diagram represent relative effects, which is a very important point.
The field, the magnetic field existing between the two magnets has a negative effect on the underlying energy available, which is why two opposite poles attract. The coming together is affected by a decrease in the underlying energy affecting the space and time remaining relative to both magnets.
This energy decrease increases resistance to a further increase in energy, but has the opposite effect on the conductive strip.
The underlying dynamics correspond to internal and external dynamics being inversely proportional in relation to any given mass of material, therefore there are opposites much like a mirror image maintaining the balance of physical structure.
This external decrease in energy and subsequent increase in resistance affects an increase in energy affecting the conductive strip and a proportional decrease in resistance.
Hopefully this explains the various examples of over unity, but it should also be kept in mind that there is a limit to this induced over unity and that over unity itself does not represent an unlimited supply of free energy.
Yes, the underlying energy of universe, argon energy, aether energy, etc. is responsible for these examples of over unity, but the methods employed do not directly access an unlimited supply of free energy.
This does not mean the energy of universe cannot be accessed and an unlimited supply of free energy be made available for our human industry, but what it does mean is we must broaden our view of universe and our understanding of the underlying dynamics affecting the form and function of physical structure.
Only when we fully understand the underlying dynamics of universe will we find a method by which to tap into an unlimited supply of free energy.
Project Unity suggests the right direction and the method best suited to the task.
A magnetic frame of focus creates a relative relationship between one system and another, a differential in energy and resistance, which results in an electrical charge being created as a dynamic effect.
In this case there is also a gravitational effect, where the controlled focus of energy can be employed to modulate both the electrical charge and gravity.
The importance of this paper is significant as it allows an explanation to be possible concerning over unity and free energy potentials.
A further advance in research and development should therefore be possible, so what are we waiting for?
5 comments ↓
I would like to make a comment about his argument that Newton’s Third Law is in violation with electrodynamics, in his ‘paper’ Marjanovic gives an example of two point charges travelling with perpendicular velocities which don’t give equal and opposite forces acting on one another in a closed system violating Newton’s Third Law. This violation is a well known example of an apparent violation of Newton’s Third Law and appears in many undergraduate texts such as ‘Introduction to Electrodynamics’ by David Griffiths.
The point I would like to make is that Newton’s Third Law is derived from the conservation of momentum so if it is violated a lot of what modern physics is based on is in a lot of trouble however although there is nothing wrong with his reasoning or use of Biot-Savart Law the problem lies with the fact that the point charges are not interacting directly but interacting with the electromagnetic fields which also carries energy and momentum, with proper treatment taking the momentum of the fields into account along with the momentum of the charges the violation vanishes and all is good again.
David you said
“The first thing to strike me in this paper was the diagram showing two magnets with opposite poles facing each other and a conductive strip in between the two magnets, this increases the electrical flow in the conductive strip.”
Now i assume you mean picture 1 in the ‘paper’?
This image is used to represent the Lorentz force on a conducting wire that a current is passing along and has nothing to do with the current increasing in the wire when in a magnetic field (which is induction and only happens when the magnetic flux is changing with respect to time, Faraday’s Law).
Inc.
I appreciate your input.
I am afraid I am not an expert or anything close to an expert when it comes to electrical theory.
Nonetheless it baffles me how so many things are viewed in the manner which you describe.
You are saying the magnetic field has no effect on the conductive material?
In a dynamic state the flow of current would either be increased or decreased by the two magnets.
If we take the magnets away and discard them completely this would have no effect on the conductive material, no change would occur?
Maybe I just don’t understand enough about electrical circuits, it would appear I don’t.
But I do know something more about the dynamics of physical structure and you cannot change a situation without changing the underlying dynamics.
An underlying force of energy affects all form and function and any change in the underlying force of energy immediately changes the dynamics affecting both the form and function of physical structure.
And as an electrical charge is a resistant effect of an underlying force of energy any change in the force of energy will either increase or decrease the electrical charge.
Therefore over unity should be possible.
And yes I would agree that our modern physics is in deep trouble, as it stands it is quite inadequate.
“Nonetheless it baffles me how so many things are viewed in the manner which you describe.”
What part baffles you?
“You are saying the magnetic field has no effect on the conductive material?”
No that is not what I was saying, what I was pointing at is your misrepresentation/understanding of what that image was being used to explain and from which made an incorrect assumption that formed the backbone of your blog post.
The image represents the Lorentz force, in this case the force acting on the wire due to it being in a magnetic field while having a current passed through it and this is principle that electric motors work on converting current into motion.
“If we take the magnets away and discard them completely this would have no effect on the conductive material, no change would occur?”
This would induce a current because there would be a change in magnetic flux through the wire as you take the magnets away and is the principle that electric generators work on converting motion into current. But if the wire is in a static magnetic field then you will get no change in current which is what you claimed would happen.
I am not asking for you to accept this just on my word alone and thats the beauty of science you can test it and in this case it would be very easy with little equipment, to test you idea just place a wire in a static magnetic field and measure any current with an ammeter, if you are correct then you should get a current when everything is stationary and if you are wrong there will be no current when everything is stationary unless either the magnets or wire is in motion (or if you can change the magnetic field as in the case of electromagnets)
“Therefore over unity should be possible”
only if you can demonstrate a violation of the conservation laws, which from you confused arguments i cannot see and even if you can think of a thought experiment that does you wont have a case until it has been demonstrated and tested presenting extraordinary evidence so until then i shall remain highly sceptical of the possibility of overunity, forgive me.
The conservation laws do not take an underlying force of energy into account.
In this respect we have hydrogen with a very high ratio of energy per unit of mass. And in respect to single atomic units hydrogen has the highest ratio of energy of any existing element.
This throws a curve ball into the mix and suggests that it should be possible to increase the energy of any system simply by modulating the underlying energy.
This alone would give us an increase in energy far beyond what is generally viewed as realistic today.
I think the Lorentz force was just another name for electrical pressure on the space surrending it.Pro.Brown was well aware of that, since he discovered the effect.From what i,ve read, a strip or disk of copper ,glued to a magnet, ( either pole ), and spun around will generate a electrical current. In other words, they don,t have to pass over one another seperately.Also, the shape of the copper makes a difference in the amount of current produced.I DO agree though,that the magnetic feild must be pulsed in some fashion, to creat current.There was one design for a generater that used four magnets and a low voltage singal generater. A metal core with two large electro magnets and two smaller, ( exciter ) magnets.It appeared that a small ( time varied ) signal voltage, created a much larger voltage in the larger coils.Hmm, but none of which explains why a magnet with a copper strip glued onto it will generate current when spun arround,,,,, unless it was reacting with the earth,s magnetic feild?