And again, I ask, why don't you make one of those yourself? Why are there dozens, if not hundreds, of these inventions, and not a single guy shares the technical details or instructions for how to build it, and no two people ever seem to build the same type of device?
And before you say "money," we have crowdfjnding and loans. Raise or borrow some money, build one at home, use it to power your neighbors' houses and charge them for electricity, then use that money to pay back investors or bank. Very easy, but no one in the entire world is doing it. Why?
Again - there is lack of funding of these people. First.
Yes there is! Random people on the internet raised $55,000 for some guy to make a potato salad on Kickstarter. I'm sure they would donate way for than that for something as awesome as a solution to the world's energy problem. Yet no one seems to ever be able to raise any money. It's as if they know that they can't prove their invention works to potential investors.
Second - read my previous posts. The romanian guy's invention would cost you 1000$ to build yourself, but he needs a finished demo, to be able to patent it.
Why doesn't he borrow $1,000, build it himself, use it to power his house, and use the money he saves on not paying for electricity to pay for the patent? Even better, hook his neighbor us, and charge him half of what the power company charges. He'll earn enough to pay off the $1,000 loan and pay for a patent in no time.
And why are all these free energy invention guys such greedy assholes? Every single one of them claims they won't share the technology, because they want to patent it first. Did Satoshi patent bitcoin? Did Linus Trovalds patent Linux? Give the give of free energy to the world, and you will be praised and taken care of for ever. Hell, you'll even win a Nobel Prize, and that's a lot of money. It's as if the patent thing is just an excuse all of these guys use for not explaining how their system works, so they don't have to be held accountable or be xaught lying.
Arguing that there is no free energy is stupid. Einstein (a very smart man) said that no energy is lost in the Universe, it only shifts from one form to another.
Yes. The full quote is "Energy can not be created or destroyed." Energy can only shift from one place to another, or be converted into and out of matter. When you run a motor, or use a conventional energy device, you are shifting energy from coal/wind/gravity/sun/nuclear fission into energy that moves your motor or heats something. When you create a "free energy" device, you are not shifting energy, you are creating energy out of nothing.
If we humans knew how to close that cycle any mean for energy generation would be 100% effective.
It doesn't matter how much knowledge we aquire, generation would never be 100% effective. There is always friction to overcome, even if it's from light glowing on the device, or magnetic fields from surroundings and the planet interfering with motion.
However, we are limited as human beings. We think we know everything, and in reality we know squat
Scientists and physicists who actually know about this stuff (and anyone else who is educated enough) know they don't know everything. That's why their actual job is figuring out things they don't know. People who don't know jack shit make claims like "We think we know everything, " and then add, "in reality we don't know anything" to make themselves seem intellectually superior.
If there was no Oil we would be living in the dark ages right now - no electricity, no hot water, no running cars. Don't you think that's pathetic?
Not sure where your going with this, but most electricity in US is generated from coal. Must of it in Europe and Japan is from nuclear. If there was no oil, chances are we'd be driving electric cars, but I doubt we'd be in the dark ages.
I watched an interview with one Kiril Chukanov. He said that he invented a ball lightning electric generator that outputs 10 times more than used electricity, and when turned into the cycle releases to the electric network 3.5 times more electricity than used - so 100kW is turned into 350kW. He also said that the bigger the ball lightning - the larger the output. He said it can be done upto 1,000,000 x and a clear output of 350,000 times more than used - if you input 100kW you would be able to support a whole country, but It will be huge and will cost as much as a Nuclear Power Plant. But it's 100% green and free of fuel payments.
I watched that interview. Note that everything is based on what he says, nothing is explained, and (this is the most important part)
he has to plug it in to get it working, and then turns it off. Why not turn it on, plug it into itself, and just let it run indefinitely?
Asmi pointed put a while ago in this thread, why do all overunity machines have to be started up, and then shut down, instead of being allowed to run under their own power for ever?
Making a prototype would take much time and money. 1000$ would be if you already know what to do.
And the guy from Utah already has funding. He is building a prototype in Canada for an Oil company. He received millions, but needs billions to create a market applicable machine. Physics is not simple you know. It's delicate. Also dangerous he works with pressures of up to 100G. That's why you can't do it in your home. You need a lab and team of scientists to do that successfully.
Stop arguing just for the sake of arguing. He said that it needs power to start. But a part of the produced power would go for powering the unit. That's the tricky part. How to conserve the produced power while unit is off. Of course he will not reveal his full idea on youtube. Someone would steal it. Oldest trick in human character.
Do you really think that the Universe runs on Oil and electricity, and that there is no free energy running it? Who does then? The Uber Space People?
Its obvious that the Universe does not need an engine to run for billions of years. It's just that our tiny brains are incapable of dealing with it.