It’s not that simple. It last a long time but you don’t have enough power to push a bicycle at 1 mile an hour. You don’t have a chance of pushing something weighing 2000 pounds at 60 mph. Diamond batteries aren’t practical for much of anything yet…while I expect this to improve we are a very long way from power a cellphone with it let alone a car

No. But to understand why you might appreciate the explaination in part three better. Even though I talked about this idea in this video, I got this same suggestion hundreds of times below in the comments meaning I didn't do a good job of explaining the problem. I also use a different demonstration to prove this is the case. Link to playlist in the description.

Conspiracies can be really enticing but you only have to look at how the government and businesses actually behave to know this conspiracy doesn't match real life. Check time 40:08 for more discussion. Solar panels are basically free energy devices. Yet, they can be bought at Walmart! If you put them on your house the government pays you for doing it. If you get an EV the government pays for some of it. Nothing in real life supports this claim. It’s just that people naturally enjoy the conspiracy and don’t think about whether what they repeat matches the real situation. When you hear this it seems to touch something in your soul that makes you want to repeat it even though I am certain you can't point to one thing in real life that fits this claim about free energy devices. This idea would be worth hundreds of billions of dollars in tax revenue, trillions of dollars to the company that makes the device if true. You and everyone on the planet would be lined up to buy one, and they would be just like solar panels except 100 times more valuable. When you consider Walmart and every major solar company can make a profit from a "free energy" device, and the government literally pays you to use them so you reduce power demands on on public infrastructure (the power grid is expensive), I think its seems pretty weird to think they might kill someone for solving this problem.

@@JeremyFieldingSr think about how much money you make off solar. I'm in Australia. Most solar systems cost between $3000 to $8000 to install. The feed in tarrifs would are between 3-9 cents per kWh. If your system is operating efficiently you may get 1-2 kWh output per day. The average 3 person household uses between 20 to 30 kWh per day. So a saving on electricity bills of 3.3 to 5%. That equates to mabe $50 a year or between 1 and 2 % of the initial outlay. Feed in tarrifs are controlled by government. Solar regulation is set by government. Every year solar feed in tariffs go down because the government doesn't want to lose money. In a lot of states in the next 5 years there will be no tariffs. If our government Were truly supporting lowering energy costs and sustainable energy it would be cheaper to install full off grid solar systems in all homes. But that will never happen. Why? Because they would lose too much money. You aren't wrong about what you said regarding a perpetual free energy device I'm not debating that. But if it were possible to make one I'm pretty confident the creator would mysteriously dissapear along with their technology.

@@timbushnell8964 I don't understand your argument or where you get these numbers from. I have calculated real numbers for my house to go to solar with a system that can supply my daily power needs as measured from my power bill. We have 6 people in the house sir. With a full battery wall setup by far the most expensive option from a high end solar dealer it takes 9 year or not paying my power bill to recover my cost of installing the system and it works for 25 years under warrantee. That is over 15 years of free energy. That is thousands saved per year not $50. None of that "free energy" is taxed in the US. Depending on the state you can even sell any excess energy to the power company. I think you are confused about this works, or you just insist on the most pessimistic view of what is really happening. There is nothing shady about this deal. It just implies a meaning completely opposite of what you suggest.

@@JeremyFieldingSr I'm glad it works to benefit citizens in your country. Here it costs between 30 and 50k to go completely off grid. With a lifetime of 25 years Max plus a couple of inverter replacements in that time and diminishing panel Output. Average electricity bills are about 2k a year. So to go fully off grid in Australia you're looking at about the same cost as just staying on the grid with no solar. My argument is that our government uses it as an opportunity to make more money when they could be using it to supply free energy and reduce environmental impacts from electricity related mining and power production. But they don't. I only used solar as an example because you mentioned it. Evs yes ther was a kickback to buy the exceptionally overpriced vehicles. I'm not sure if there still is. But now they have set up ev charging stations to pay for recharging your vehicle. I got the numbers from an Australian solar statistics page. Tell me again it's not about money.

@@timbushnell8964 Interesting... it sounds like you have a supply and demand problem. If there isn't much competition between companies selling and installing panels the prices won't come down much. It also seems unlikely that many companies are manufacturing this stuff in your country. To say the government should make it cheap is misleading though. Governments aren't regular businesses. They have to pay for stuff with tax dollars. So you still "pay" for it. The cost is just spread across everyone. When you say "they" should make it cheaper its more like "they should increase my taxes so I can have it cheaper. Its just more complicated than you make it sound. I don't think anyone is keeping this from you is the point. It's about the policies your country vote into place by selecting officials.

Amplifying is adding energy. Just use that energy source. Otherwise you have wasted far more than you gained from the process

@@JeremyFieldingSr Thank you. What are your thoughts on liquid nitrogen engines or somehow using liquid nitrogen in combination with quantum locking? You just gained a subscriber btw!

You should watch part three. I explained exactly this in that video with demonstrations using a bicycle and I generally explained the problem better. Your idea would not work. Adding an alternator doesn’t help at all. Alternators transform the energy you put in… they don’t create energy. I.e you can’t stop petaling. The alternative would be like a giant brake on the wheel. The faster you try to turn it the more difficult it is to turn. It gets harder not easier for reasons I prove and explain better in part three. Link in the description.

@@JeremyFieldingSr Interesting. Thank you.

Hmmm.. I get the feeling you didn't watch the video? LOL you might be surprised at where this is going. That is unless you mean you believe in free energy in which case I can't change your mind if you believe this stuff works.

explanation for me having three phase : i have a industrial water pump in my garage as i am not connected to my town's water supply, instead i pump my own water from the ground from my own source, which means no water bills, yay. but that also means i need three phase to run that big motor, so you get the point...

I looked at the title, thumbnail and intro to the video... I just don't understand where I wasn't clear about what this is. In part two I talk about designing the gears themselves which will come out probably this weekend. That is probably as close as we get to talking about making a gear box. These videos are about using gear boxes. The purpose of the series is explained in the first 45 seconds or so of the video.

Check the description for link to part three. I think that demonstration and explaination will be more helpful to you. In that one I do a better job of explaining the "push back" problem that I think you are missing which leads to this question. When you get that part you will no longer have this question. Just a additional size note. The size of the motor doesn't matter nor does the number of alternators. Lets say you had a 1000KW motor (ridiculously large) and had 40 alternators. The power would be divided among the alternators each getting 1/40th. Then each alternator would produce even less than that meaning you just wasted a bunch of power. There is no such thing as multiplying energy. In fact more alternators makes it worse not better because each one is wasting energy. Check the description for link to part three. I think that demonstration and explaination will be more helpful to you.

You are asking the wrong question. Electrical energy is not magic. it is a measurable thing we can track as it flows from one place to the other. It can only be transformed not multiplied. Every transformation wastes some of it. Here is an absurd example that is literally exactly the same as you suggest via your question. A person eats a hamburger as a starting source of energy. Then to operate continuously they start eating their own poop and no other energy source. There is likely a tiny amount of energy in the poop that didn't get digested. Lets say there are 5% of the calories left in that poop. Each time it goes through the system only 5% of the 5% is left. This very quickly stops working for obvious reasons and you die just like your system powering itself would quit. I understand why you don't see that as the same, but both are energy sources, both consume energy to get useful work done, and neither system can multiple or add energy that wasn't already there. It is literally the same problem. There is no device that can multiple energy. It just gets transformed from one form to another. Check out part three for better examples and more proof this is the case.

@@JeremyFieldingSr that's not a good example. The alternator will always give you almost the same voltage, and current, I understand that wear can be a down hill thing with the performance of the Alternator in the long run (of course nothing lasts forever?) also your batteries receiving the load might drop in time

The problem is you don’t quite understand what the numbers actually mean. But you think you do making this conversation hard. You really need to actually try it yourself. I don’t know where you got this idea… but I can tell you haven’t seen this in person or measured the output of an alternator. Short answer. The output of the alternator varies in direct proportion to the input. I prove that at the end of this video. And it acts like a brake getting harder to turn as current output increases. Also shown in this video. Near the end of this video you see a real alternator being tested and you can see how much energy is needed just to spin the alternator before you plug something in. You don’t have to believe me though. You really should just try it. It’s the best way to learn. If you’re right this idea is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. If you’re wrong it’s a great lesson in physics. Please stop repeating this misinformation until you see it yourself. It’s clearly worth your time to test your theory. Though if you watched the whole video it might not be necessary.

You would be considerably faster on a bicycle with no gears. Wheels are hundreds of times more efficient than running. This comparison doesn't make sense.

Of course there is. It’s called the inventors hall of fame. Look it up when you have a moment. Thanks for watching

I can't tell from your comment if you actually watched the video or not. But if you didn't perhaps you have missed an opportunity to see how much we agree LOL

Magnets don't have energy or power. But they can be used to transfer power. There is a huge difference between those two things. The Earth's magnetic field is NOT a source of energy nor is gravity as is most commonly suggested from people in the same vain of thought. They are things that can be used to store energy not create energy. Lifting a box stores potential energy in the form of gravity. When you let the box go the energy is used up. You have to use more energy to lift the box again. Same idea with magnets. They can be used to temporarily store energy not create it.

@@JeremyFieldingSr I think it "may" be, we just dont know how to harness it yet.. ~extracting power from Gravity or the Earths motion in space..

We agree! Now I just need you to help me tell the rest of the people down in the comments below. It took me 40+ minutes to explain it why we know this is true and some still don't believe me LOL.

I get the feeling you didn't actually watch the video. If you had watched for even 30 seconds you would know this video is about exposing the scam LOL. Give me a chance man. :)

I don't understand? What did I say that could possibly indicate I believe or don't believe in God? This is such a weird claim to make. Nothing I said in this video contradicts God. I think you have been listening to bad information.