The Overunity (archetype) is the apparent exploitation of one or more natural resources with little or no concern for whether these resources are limited or unlimited. Thus, much of an overunity archetype's success is owed to under-accountability despite its dependency on open systems' resourcing. But this is usually not a concern if the consumption of resource is sizably reused or recycled, either by the device or by nature, in an adequate amount of time prior to its next use by the device or by anyone else.An ideal overunity archetype is one which operates in harmony with its environment — from which is derived its main source of archetypal energy — so that its resource does not become destroyed, nor lessened, by the operation of this archetype.
Contents
- 1Archetypal Overunity vs Efficiency
- 2Examples for Comparison
- 3Example for Contrast
- 4What An Overunity Archetype Is
- 5What An Overunity Archetype Is Not
- 6Technical Definition
- 7Analysis of a Prank
- 8Overunity Archetypes
- 9The Archetypes of Overunity and Perpetual Motion
- 10Conclusion
- 11See Also
- 12References
- 13External Links
William Lyne Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 7:58 AM
ReplyDeleteTo: Vinyasi
This article is disingenuous, because it skirts the real issue, which is "where does the extra energy come from"?. It is obvious that it comes from and UNRECOGNIZED source, a source which the extablishment want to conceal because the establishment is controlled by the big corporations and government operating hand in hand. Tesla referred to unrecognized energy as "highly efficient", which to him meant that a process appropriated a lot of energy from an unrecognized source. It was his kind of "mind game" where avoided being accused of claiming "perpetual motion" or "overunity", when it was neither. There is no such thing as perpetual motion in the sense that motion is created without a source. There is no such thing as overunity in the sense that a process produces more results than the unrecognized source causes. This article is playing with minds in a dishonest way.
ReplyDeleteFrom: John Paine Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 9:54 AM
To: Vinyasi
It's bloody brilliant~!
From: Cappelletti, John Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:58 PM
ReplyDeleteTo: Vinyasi
This is a great start, I think the part at the beginning was a little too deep for most people and will make them not want to read the rest of the article. Including me, I didnt really follow it and I dont think the mystical self confirming wordage is helpful. To me the introduction is more of an interesting poem about God than an introduction to over unity but I do see how this fits in and how it is actually a good point to be making. I think that introduction section should not be the introduction but in a different section later on.
I really like the prank example, you need to expand and explain that in more detail. Talk about how human emotional energy is a form of free potential energy that can be triggered through physical situations that require much less energy to trigger than what is actually released in the end. Shaping someones mental state with a few words or simple actions to inspire them to do something that requires much more energy than required to initiate. Like saying some words to an egotistical guy who gets extremely angry and starts throwing heavy objects around, the energy required to say the words to him is much less than the energy you brought into existence by changing his mental state. If your goal was to move the heavy objects this would be an overunity mechanism. This goes right into the Illuminati or the 'people in control' using the free perpetual energy of the human race. We do need to eat though. Maybe there is no free energy. You're talking about overunity and perpetual motion. I dont know how free energy and perpetual motion fit together. Hope this helps.
Keep it up,
John
From: Bob Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:32 PM
ReplyDeleteTo: Vinyasi
well hummm... as an ordinary person I think I would get lost by sentence three. You may have to educate the listener up through several levels of knowledge before your article would be able to take hold in their psyche. Like knowing trig before calculus. I like very much that you spent a lot of time designing and working up this article. It does have some fascinating posits for considerations. Your might want to list what disciplens would have to be known experientialy before your context would become psychologically available for the reader. The very thing that most of humanity is lacking is the (Sat-chic-anandic) experiential point of view with which to assess objects in a physical reality. Please continue to round out and differentiate with numerous small examples, each point of your discussion so that the culmalitive effect will coalesce as a gestalt in the reader's mind. Then you will be able to take them some place in your level of cogency. Also remember that your personal point of view within a difficult subject area, is also esoteric to those in the same field. Like giving a mechanic an erudite explanation about timing versus ignition in your car -- but he hasn't been trained in reading oscilloscope wave forms. He is within the field of car mechanics, but your level of approach is still a holon higher than his developed capacity to assimulate your context.
Sincerely,
Bob