==== Times have Changed ====
The science of electrodynamics hasn't changed. Its focus has changed.
A hundred years ago, it was possible to pick up a book[''[https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=bNI1AQAAMAAJ&pg=GBS.PA244&hl=en Some Recent Developments of Regenerative Circuits],'' by Edwin H. Armstrong, Proceedings of The Institute of Radio Engineers, vol. 10, 1922] which emphasized the differences between positive and negative resistances within an oscillating circuit involving both “forced oscillations” impressing themselves upon a circuit by entering into it as its input source of EMF and then resulting in the formation of “free oscillations” acting as the output of that type of circuit.
But times have altered the focus of electrical engineering to the extent that [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]] is not discussed anymore. It's not that it was never discussed. It's just that no one is old enough, or still alive, who remembers it being discussed let alone taught to budding students of electrical engineering.
Good ideas never die. But they do need to be revived from time to time. Especially if these good ideas are timeless classics.
===== Growth of Triangular Waves =====
Growth of triangular waves ride piggy-back upon the input of sine waves whose non-variant amplitude are ever-present within the voltage tracing of the large coil, VC1, within the figures which are contained within [[c:Category:Growth of electrical non-saturation|]]. ''{HINT: Play all of them as a slideshow within their Category. The green arrow, to the far-right, is its “play button.”}'' The sine wave input, which underlies these triangular waves, retains the same frequency and amplitude over time. The sine-shaped, carrier wave represents the “forced oscillations” of voltage input entering into this type of circuit from its sine wave generator. This input source of voltage provides the circuit (to which it is attached) only one terminal (half a network portal) for current to escape, namely: its terminal of entry. Hence, its coils and capacitors are ''forced to generate'' free oscillations of non-saturable, triangular waves of an ever-escalating amplitude (of both voltage and current) in order to free itself of its confinement from within its half-portal network. This is the only way in which voltage buildup may escape confinement: is by reversing its polarity of direction relative to voltage and buildup to the point of explosively exiting the circuit by destroying its host-circuit.
Convention dictates that we provide current with a throughput to encourage its natural inclination to flow. But my unconventional approach is intended to thwart that outcome and deny a throughput of current since that would result in a relative synchronicity of positive unity, power factor, and a boring output less than its input satisfying conventional expectations of under-unity. We want a negative unity, power factor or else the generation of free energy will not happen. So, we have to risk destroying the circuit (in pursuit of free energy) if we should fail at regulating its explosive growth of overunity. But that's the price I am willing to risk if I want free energy to manifest.
So, we could safely deduce that the forced oscillations have already saturated this type of circuit configuration while the free oscillations will ''never'' saturate this circuit.
It's as if this circuit is exhibiting the characteristic behavior of a multiplex network which can accommodate multiple streams of data transfer due to the unique characteristics of each data stream: the forced oscillations remain saturated while the free oscillations do not.
Hence, the amplitudes of voltage and current of the forced oscillations remain constant exhibiting their Conservation of Energy while the amplitudes of voltage and current of the free oscillations continue to grow beyond the RMS amplitudes of the forced oscillations. This would violate the Conservation of Energy if these free oscillations were to be considered as the resulting output of their causative input for that would seem to be the case at first glance.
But first impressions can be deceiving.
If I vary the input voltage of the sine wave generator, not much change occurs at the output. Although some direct relationship exists between the two, it's not an equivalency since the input varies by a fraction (and not linear) to the variation of the output. It's more like an exponential differential (at the very least) barring explosive rates of growth transforming their exponential relationship into an infinite rate of growth.
If it be true that Conservation of Energy is a Universal property of all forms of energy and inviolate, then I am left to conclude that reactance is a self-feeding process which contributes to the overall amplitudes of energy.
In other words, ...
Capacitive inputs (the preexisting conditions of various capacitances within a reactive circuit) become the outputs of capacitive reactance which, in turn, become the inputs of capacitance for the subsequent cycle, or half-cycle, of oscillations, and likewise for inductive inputs.
These capacitances and inductances grow over time and, thus, give the ''appearance'' of the violation of energy conservation without actually violating anything due to our erroneous presumptions are affecting what we conclude is happening.
But, when one capacitor can affect the capacitive field of another capacitor, and when one inductor can affect the inductive field of another inductor, and when two capacitors can affect the field of two other inductors, and vice versa, then free oscillations are free to expand their amplitude over time without anything to stop them (much less Conservation of Energy).
An electrostatic field surrounding a capacitor is the result of capacitive activity. And a magnetic field surrounding an inductor is the result of inductive activity. So, energy does play a role in the growth of overunity, but energy does not bear sole responsibility for that would violate the Conservation of Energy.
This is analogous to how some criminal minds think.
When one mafia boss wants to launder his profits, he channels them through another mafia boss, who channels them through a third, and a fourth, etc, to hide what each is doing and claim innocence. Spammers do the same thing. They relay their spam all across the globe, bouncing their emails against multiple servers until it becomes a blooming mess of complicated accountability.
Well, free energy is no exception! And free energy enthusiasts could be considered as outlaws based on how society judges the accountability of its members, but without digging any deeper (such as what the IRS always does or a private investigator).
Energy enters a reactive component within a circuit. This reactive component absorbs this energy and converts it into energy by first passing it through its dynamic field of reactance acting as an intermediate middle step of conversion (aka, laundering the cash). So, in reality, energy does not exit upon entering a circuit. That's only true for nodes which lie in between two components according to Kirchhoff's Laws. It does not hold true for the components, themselves. That's the catch.
Thus, Energy Conservation has nothing to do with the components of a circuit. And much less does Energy Conservation hold true for reactive components of a circuit. Energy Conservation only holds true for the conceptual void (which we call: nodes) which lie ''in between'' the components of a circuit, which is like saying that Energy Conservation is limited, ie. restricted, to nothingness.
Conservation of Energy controls fluff.
Do you always pledge allegiance to fluff?
There's nothing wrong with the Conservation Law. It's the socially provocative, peer pressure to pledge allegiance to nothingness which disturbs me.
I remained silent, back in the days when we were supposed to vocalize our allegiance to the flag of our country.
What did you do? Blind obedience?