Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
Followers 5

# Mathematically proven Overunity mechanism

## 594 posts in this topic

##### Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

This is a Roberval, not Roverball balance (see image below)  it is just impossible to turn this thing 180° around

In your sketch you turn in a way that point C becomes point F => NO WAY!!!

Now  suppose A and D and B and E are two tubes.now cut these two tubes in middle and it will rotate.

##### Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

It won't. I'd love to but you keep moving the goalposts and now your videos do not represent the device you are claiming will work. On top of this your diagrams are not sufficiently labelled to represent your design either or allow for a clear picture of its working.

Furthermore, you make theoretic assumptions (e.g. inelastic collision) that are not realised in practice and you ignore energy losses (heat, sound, aerodynamic effects, friction, etc) that will eventually bring you device to a stop by gradually dissipating the initial potential energy possessdd by the ball from its first drop.

Overunity implies the production of energy from nothing. All mechanical systems use more energy than they can produce.

If a pendulum is getting more height than the releasing point and again get the same or more height then why are thinking about energy losses.if these losses works then the ball will never get back it's initial position even at starting.

But if ball is getting more height than why are you considering these points.

##### Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

go and build it then!

I don't say overunity is not possible, I only say you are just simplifying your calculations way too much

You just ignore all friction and heat etc, just by telling "there is nog use of it in your device"

but we never see any mathematical or demonstration proof of that

Off course.there is no use because if these factors works then the ball will get back it's initial position at first attempt.

##### Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, vikram_gupta11 said:

Now  suppose A and D and B and E are two tubes.now cut these two tubes in middle and it will rotate.

it never will

##### Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

even your own video shows this is not true!

the ball might do this (we can not see it, so we just believe your word on it)
but the total arm of the device is clearly not!
just look at your own video!

Without total arm how will the ball do it?

##### Share on other sites
Just now, Jampudding said:

it never will

What???????see the mass of counterweight and ball and imagine the position of device.

##### Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, vikram_gupta11 said:

What???????see the mass of counterweight and ball and imagine the position of device.

please draw it with the support beams and see for yourself it can not be done

Edited by Jampudding

##### Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, vikram_gupta11 said:

Without total arm how will the ball do it?

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! see your own video, total arm is NOT going higher than initial position !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we are no blind idiots

Edited by Jampudding

##### Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! see your own video, total arm is NOT going higher than initial position !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

we are no blind idiots

Yes,it is getting.see it is getting 180 to 180 degree

##### Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

please draw it with the support beams and see for yourself it can not be done

See Mr Ozymandias answer .post 570

##### Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vikram_gupta11 said:

Yes,it is getting.see it is getting 180 to 180 degree

but your initial position is not 180° !!!!!!!!

##### Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vikram_gupta11 said:

See Mr Ozymandias answer .post 570

He is telling you that your drawing is not correct...

##### Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

May I suggest you might want to build this one first?

... or perhaps this one?

.... notice any familiar behavior?   Do you still want to buy into this and encourage him?  Even though he'll likely use you as a reference even when it goes bad?  Even knowing that once your implementation fails to deliver 'overunity' (and we all know it will), Vikram will simply claim you didn't build it well enough, and then move onto one of those others or a new, equally deluded design?  And of course he will change the goalposts, make new claims, and ironically berate all those who DO fully understand the idiocy of his plans..

Look, I'd love to see the device built so we can all say we told him so, but you just have to read the thread to see that Vikram ignores any reasonable and logical assessment of his claims.  He has fully deluded himself into believing he is right no matter what is presented to him, and no matter if his own efforts to build any of this garbage don't work as he wanted it to.  He didn't reason himself into this delusional obsession, and no amount of reason or demonstration or energy calculations will get him out of it either.  It seems clear that he thrives on being given attention, even if it mostly bad/critical.  So you need to go in with eyes open, and even when you prove that the device won't work and doesn't deliver over-unity, don't be disappointed if Vikram simply admonishes you for not getting it, or not building it well enough, or being part of the conspiracy to stop him...  I'll bet he will not drop this hogwash - he can't as it is now his life...

Now I'll be delighted to apologise to Vikram if I'm proven wrong, so feel free to build one anyway and proceed at your own risk of a complete waste of time...

but.. that fulsome apology will ONLY come from me *after* Vikram:

- concedes that he is completely wrong about his claims of free energy/overunity  AND

- apologises to all those of us who, in the past, have (initially politely but not any more) pointed out the error of his ways, only to be berated and belittled...

Ignorance is one thing.  Ignorance and arrogance is inexcusable..

Here's the deal. Everyone is taking this way too seriously. No matter the results, it will be interesting to see it in action, right? I have the tools and experience to fabricate any part of this machine. It will be a legitimate test of the design. Don't you want to see that? Trust me, I have years of design and construction under my belt- I've built everything from trebuchets to industrial wastewater systems that treated more than 25,000 gph. I suggest everyone chill out and enjoy the process. Think of it as an episode of Mythbusters or something. This'll be fun!

2 people like this

##### Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DirtyDocMartens said:

Here's the deal. Everyone is taking this way too seriously. No matter the results, it will be interesting to see it in action, right? I have the tools and experience to fabricate any part of this machine. It will be a legitimate test of the design. Don't you want to see that? Trust me, I have years of design and construction under my belt- I've built everything from trebuchets to industrial wastewater systems that treated more than 25,000 gph. I suggest everyone chill out and enjoy the process. Think of it as an episode of Mythbusters or something. This'll be fun!

It will be fun indeed,
In that way Mr Vikram Gupta can give you hints and tips on the design as you are building it

thanks for the support!

Edited by Jampudding

##### Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jampudding said:

It will be fun indeed,
In that way Mr Vikram Gupta can give you hints and tips on the design as you are building it

thanks for the support!

I'd like to see the device working but, like most people, know it won't.

When it doesn't work Mr Gupta will say it was built wrong or will move the goalposts. I'd love to see probably done engineering designs and actual mathematical results of the experiment.

1 person likes this

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jampudding said:

It will be fun indeed,
In that way Mr Vikram Gupta can give you hints and tips on the design as you are building it

thanks for the support!

Now we’re on the same page! I’ll document the entire process, and follow Mr. Gupta’s instructions to the letter. My first thought, though, is to have the machine started by water flow.With my background I can determine a fairly accurate input of energy that way. How can Mr. Gupta reach me? Can I post my email address on this sight somewhere? And remember, this is a fun experiment, please show respect to everyone involved. Thank you!

1 person likes this

##### Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DirtyDocMartens said:

How can Mr. Gupta reach me?

I have made an animation for him, and asked some questions via PM

But never got a reply, he even did not read my messages, maybe he will now?

Edited by Jampudding

##### Share on other sites
On 3/19/2018 at 1:19 PM, DirtyDocMartens said:

Now we’re on the same page! I’ll document the entire process, and follow Mr. Gupta’s instructions to the letter. My first thought, though, is to have the machine started by water flow.With my background I can determine a fairly accurate input of energy that way. How can Mr. Gupta reach me? Can I post my email address on this sight somewhere? And remember, this is a fun experiment, please show respect to everyone involved. Thank you!

Any response from the inventor as of yet?

## Create an account

Register a new account

Followers 5