Is it FREE ENERGY or what?

Do like this:

Put a source of DC or AC current with an electronical millisecond switch and a capacitor of the same power like the source with another switch and finally the load.

When the first switch is on, the other must be off and viceversa, all the time.

If you will make this circuit to run by keeping only one thing in your mind, that is of NEVER PUT THE SOURCE IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE LOAD, probably you shall have some FREE ENERGY.

I mean the time till your source will be off its power will be much more greater with this circuit attached than puting in direct contact the source with the load.

It's better to see the whole document here:

formatting link

First, I urge you to try it and write your comments after, please.

Reply to
swisscash
Loading thread data ...

[... deleted yet another idea that doesn't work ...]

If you think you have designed a system where E + MC^2 does not remain constant, you are always wrong. Solar energy is the closest we have to free energy. It is a very important source of energy. Consider what it would cost to provide all of that outdoor lighting if the sun didn't.

Reply to
MooseFET

This guy has been peddling this idea for over a decade, yet he's not managed to make anything commercial out of it. The only money he makes is from plans and donations.

But the field is wide open . . .

Reply to
default

Is that cost to be evaluated after the earth cools to 4K?

Reply to
Robert Baer

No, you have to make the heaters too. I was just taking the easier part to compute.

Reply to
MooseFET

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.