GENERAL OVER-UNITY EQUATION NATHAN LARKIN COPPEDGE 2020/04/21 EDITION FROM “GENERAL OVER-UNITY EQUATION”, LOCATED ON QUORA.COM BASED ON EXTENSIVE WORK IN TOE’S AND PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINES. BY NATHAN LARKIN COPPEDGE REPRODUCIBLE IF MY NAME STAYS WITH THE WORK FOR EDUCATIONAL AND OTHER PURPOSES THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT INTENTIONALLY MADE AVAILABLE ON USB TO BE DISTRIBUTED IN A PUBLIC AREA PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO KEEP ALL ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS ON RECORD FOR ANY APPLICATION. PROPRIETARY OWNERSHIP IS NOT GRANTED. THESE MATERIALS MUST REMAIN FREE UNDER MY NAME DERIVATIVE WORKS MAY BE PROPRIETARY IF APPLICABLE LAW PERMITS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS NATHAN COPPEDGE IN NO WAY GRANTS OTHERS TO USE HIS CONTENT AS AN EXCLUSIVE BRAND FURTHER MARKETING IS PERMITTED BUT CONDITIONS MUST GRANT SUFFICIENT DIGNITY TO THE AUTHOR THE AUTHOR IS NOT HOMOSEXUAL, IDIOTIC, OR POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. KEEP THAT IN MIND. GENERAL OVER-UNITY EQUATION 2020/04/21 Edition Nathan Coppedge March 31, 2020. (Actual equation (s) is /are further below in bold) Previously, a qualifying equation for Over-Unity of Knowledge is Given By: (D ^ results) - (verbs - 1) >= 1 —Extent of Over-Unity in Knowledge In Proof of TOE, results = Set 0. In a perfect-yet-practical perpetual motion machine, Over-Unity has a value of 1.5. Solve for: (D ^ results) - (verbs - 1) >= 1.5 The goal is to find compatibility between the Over-Unity formula for TOEs and the main TOE, in particular between the perpetual motion and knowledge forms of the over-unity equation. … REPRODUCED FROM BELOW: Amount of leverage (assuming no lvg range): (D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) Note: This was only calculated for some ordinal values in the 3rd dimension. Results or Mass Range = ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) PMM over-unity given by Mass range / Lvg + 1. PMM Over-Unity = ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) / Lvg + 1 Longer form: {((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) } / {(D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) } + 1 Reducing: {((eff say Lvg + Diff) ) } / {(D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) } + 1 = 1.5 Simplified for slightly specific general case: {Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1) (Lvg +1))} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity Remember this is only without including range of leverage. ( Efficiency / ((D - 1) (Efficiency)) } + 1 = General Over-Unity, where efficiency is stated as Results = (Efficiency* + Difference), and efficiency sums to <1 if topic os acted on, and efficiency sums to >1 if topics is acting. Translated for greater generality: General Over-Unity = { ( Efficiency / ((D - 1) (Efficiency)) } + Difference, where efficiency is stated as Results = (Efficiency* + Difference), and efficiency sums to a fraction if topic is acted on, and efficiency sums to a whole number of >1 if topic is acting. And difference is usually assumed to be one, but is assumed to be minus one for knowledge applications. [Interestingly, this theorem seems to place all values between -1 and +1.5, and is compatible with the recent ‘Antitheory of Everything’ which predicts the antithesis of anything, and is stated as: Sum Total < Difference - Efficiency]. Note that the efficiency is represented by the results of the actual TOE, stated as Results = (Efficiency* + Difference) and the details about efficiency. When in doubt trust the given values in Coppedge's recommended sources. [The equation is meant as a final modifier on dimensions, perhaps the only meta-equation so far to be more important or at least more general than the TOE and dimensions of knowledge. Other contenders are the general language formula, the formula for the souls of literature, and the formula for personal significance called the Premier Psychological Dialectic]. General Extended Equation for Complicated Cases: {{Efficiency / ((D - 1 + range) (Efficiency))} / (range e.g. range of mechanical motion + 1 for minimum value times (number of resisting antiforces + 1 (X relevant dimensions of antiforces)))} + Difference = Over-Unity Note in the general case Efficiency may stand for the whole TOE equation, represented by additional elements Efficiency* + Difference. Once the value is translated it represents some specific efficiency plus some difference value such as typically one. An example of the GEECC applied to perpetual motion: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / (range of ball upon lever + 1 times (number of resisting antiforces such as buoyancy + 1(X relevant dimensions of resisting motion e.g. a sphere is 1, a balloon is 2, a vehicle is 3, this is only if there are resisting antiforces)))} + 1 = Over-Unity Simplified expression of PMM Over-Unity: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / {(range + 1) X (1 X (antiforces + 1 (relevant dimensions of resisting antiforces))}} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity … Testing with invisibility: Conventionally, (33 ^ 1 > 4 - 1) So, difference = -1. Efficiency = Results = 1. Dimension = 33. 1/ (33 - 1 = 32) (1) - 1 = negative 31/32 over-unity. Testing with Theory of Everything: Conventionally, 9 (11 ^ 1 > 3 - 1). So, difference = -1. Efficiency = Results = 1. Dimension = 11 1/ (11 - 1 = 10)(1) - 1 = negative (9/10) over-unity. Testing with wizard logic: Wizard logic traditionally 4 (7 ^ 1 > 4 - 1). So, difference = -1. Efficiency = Results = 1 Dimension = 7. 1 / (D - 1 = 6)(1) - 1 = negative 5/6 over-unity. Testing with Convening of the Gods: Conventionally 18 (5 ^ 2 > 8 - 1) So, difference = -1 Efficiency = Results = 2 Dimensions = 5 2 / (5 -1)(2) - 1 = 1/4 - 1 = negative 3/4 over-unity. Testing with Logic of Time: Conventionally 57 (4 ^ 3 > 8 - 1) So, difference = -1 Efficiency = Results = 3 Dimensions = 4 3 / (4 -1)(3) - 1 = negative 1/3 over-unity. Testing with categorical deduction: Conventionally 1 (2^2 > 4 - 1) Difference is seen to be -1. Efficiency = Results = 2. Dimensions = 2. (2 / (1 X 2) ) - 1 = 0 over-unity Testing with Formula for Souls: Conventionally 11 (2 ^ 4 > 6 - 1) So, difference = -1 Efficiency = Results = 4 Dimensions = 2 4 / (2 - 1) (4) - 1 = 0 over-unity. Helium Balloon 1 Perpetual Motion: Note: Antiforces factor in in 2 dimensions, because it is a balloon pulling an object below in a planar shape. Lvg = 1 Extended equation for complicated cases: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / {(range + 1) X (1 X (antiforces + 1 (relevant dimensions of resisting antiforces))}} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity Difference = 1 Efficiency = 2 {{2 / ((2 + 0)(2))} / 1 X 3} + 1 = 116.67% over-unity. Perpetual Motion Bobblety Toy: Note: Zero antiforces and 1 leverage range leaves a divisor of 2 in the range section. Otherwise the equation is normal, except that the values give less than 150% over-unity, but the result is still a perpetual motion machine (in some cases). Lvg = 2 to 3 Extended equation for complicated cases: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / (range + 1)} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity Difference = 1 Efficiency = 3.5 {{3.5 / ((1.5 + 1)(3.5))} / 2} + 1 = 120% over-unity. Swivel Lever Device: Note: This is a standard perpetual motion machine with a very high rating. A simplified equation can be used because there is no leverage range and no antiforces. The device may require some study to build correctly Lvg = 2. {Lvg + 1 / ((3 - 1) (Lvg + 1))} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity Difference = 1 Efficiency = 3 3 / ((2)(3)) + 1 = 1.5 over-unity. Extended equation for complicated cases: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / (range + 1)(X1 if there are no antiforces)} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity { 3 / ((2 + range of 0)(3)) / ((range of 0 +1)(X1 because there are no antiforces))} + 1 = 1.5 over-unity Vertical Lever Device: Lvg = 3. {Lvg + 1 / ((3 - 1) (Lvg +1))} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity. Difference = 1 Efficiency = 4 { 4 / ((2)(4)) } + 1 = 1.5 over-unity Extended equation for complicated cases: {{Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1 + range) (Lvg + 1))} / (range + 1)(X1 if there are no antiforces)} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity { 4 / ((2 + range of 0)(4)) / ((range of 0 +1)(X1 because there are no antiforces))} + 1 = 1.5 over-unity EARLIER WORK, MUCH OF THIS EARLIER STUFF IS OBSOLETE BUT SAVED FOR RECORDS: Solve for: (D ^ results) - (verbs - 1) >= 1.5 (1.5 ^ 1 = 1.5) - (1 - 1 = 0) >= 1.5 (2 ^ 1 = 2) - (1.5 - 1 = 0.5) >= 1.5 (3 ^ 1 = 3) - (2.5 - 1 = 1.5) >= 1.5 (4 ^ 1 = 4) - (3.5 - 1 = 2.5) >= 1.5 (1.5 ^ 2 = 2.25) - (1.75 - 1 = 0.75) >= 1.5 D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) (D ^ results) - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) So, (D ^ results) - (Verbs - 1) = 1.5 in the second case. 1.5 is the overunity rating. 1 would be a rating of adequate knowledge. A possible conclusion is: (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1, <= 1.5 So, in perpetual motion, if results is usually treated as the larger mass, we get: (D ^ larger mass) - (verbs - 1) >=1, <= 1.5. 3-d presumably, so, if larger mass must be greater than 1… a unit of 3 would give: 27 - (2, 2.5) = Verbs. With 3X larger mass, Verbs = (Min 24.5, Max 25) a unit of 2 would give: 9 - (2, 2.5) = Min 6.5, Max 7 Verbs a unit of 1.5 would give: 5.1962 approx. - (2, 2.5) = Min 3.1962, Max 2.6962 Verbs a unit of 2.5 would give: 15.5885 approx. - (2, 2.5) = Min 13.0885, Max 13.5885 Verbs a unit of 4 would give: 81 - (2, 2.5) = Min 78.5, Max 79 Verbs … More seriously perhaps, in 3-d, over-unity is given by: (Max - Min as above)… … (Max Mass - 1) = Min Lvg (Min Lvg + 1) = Max Mass Min Mass / 2 + 1 Simplified ignoring range… Lvg / 2 + 1 = min mass Lvg + 1 = max mass (Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1) = Mass range Compare to: (D ^ larger mass) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5. (D ^ (Lvg + 1)) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 Assuming leverage is constant, we can plug in some values. Swivel device leverage is 2, over-unity is confirmed to be 1.5. D ^ 3 - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 27 - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 28 - verbs = 1.5 28 - verbs - 1.5 = 0 verbs + 1.5 = 28 28 - 1.5 = 26.5 verbs Vertical Lever is 3, over-unity is confirmed to be 1.5 D ^ 4 - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 81 - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 82 - verbs = 1.5 82 - verbs - 1.5 = 0 verbs + 1.5 = 82 82 - 1.5 = 80.5 verbs … Now we have: (((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg Ratio) + 1 = 1.5 Lvg ratio can be approximated by the Max Lvg. ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Max Lvg) + 1 = 1.5 Compare to: (D ^ (Lvg + 1)) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 1.5 + (verbs - 1) = D ^ (Lvg + 1) In the other equation: 0.5 = ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Max Lvg) So, also: ((D ^ (Lvg + 1)) - (verbs - 1)) - 1 = 0.5 ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg) +1 = (D ^ (Lvg + 1) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 D ^ (D - 1)(X - 1)? ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg) +1 + (verbs - 1) - 1.5 - (verbs - 1) - (D^ (Lvg + 1)) = 0 ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg) - 0.5 - (D^ (Lvg + 1)) = 0 ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg) - (D^ (Lvg + 1)) = 0.5 We already know ((Lvg + 1) - ((Lvg / 2) + 1)) / Lvg) = 0.5 0.5 - (D ^ (Lvg + 1)) = 0.5 0.5 + (D ^ (Lvg + 1)) = 0.5 D ^ Lvg + 1 = 0 Possibly missing a constant. Maybe better to say D ^ Lvg + 1 = Verbs (reduced verbs?) Compare to: (D ^ results) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 (D ^ results) - verbs = 2.5 (D ^ (Min, Max)) - verbs = 2.5 With swivel device Min, Max = (2) (D ^ 2) - verbs = 2.5 D = 3 9 - verbs = 2.5 D ^ results - 1 - verbs = 1.5 (D ^ (Min, Max Mass) - verbs - 1 = 1.5 for swivel device, (9, 27) - verbs - 1 = 1.5 Verbs = (9, 27) - 2.5 Verbs = D ^ (Min, Max mass) - 2.5 For swivel verbs = 6.5, 24.5 Test Verbs = D (results, 2X results) + 0.5 for Vertical Lever D ^ (Min, Max mass) - 2.5 (15.5885, 81) - 2.5 13.0885, 79.5 This is similar to what was given earlier for the min in: (D ^ larger mass) - (verbs - 1) = 1.5 So, possibly: Set 0 = (D ^ larger mass) - (verbs - 1) - 1.5 Verbs = (D ^ min, max mass) - 2.5 Plug it into earlier: [(D ^ larger mass) - (verbs - 1) >=1, <= 1.5.] (D ^ larger mass) - ((D ^ min, max mass) - 2.5 - 1) >=1, <= 1.5 Special point: (D ^ larger mass) - ((D ^ min, max mass) - 1.5 ) >=1, <= 1.5 For perpetual motion, (D ^ larger mass) - ((D ^ min, max mass) - 1.5 ) = 1.5 (D ^ larger mass) - (D ^ min, max mass) = D Max Mass = Min Lvg + 1 Min Mass = Max Lvg / 2 + 1 Set 0 = Efficiency * + Difference, where efficiency sums to <1 if object is acted on and efficiency sums to >1 if object is acting. If ‘exceptional’ Primary range = Difference say 1 + (Leverage, Leverage / 2). That is accurate for primary range giving min and max! (Leverage, Leverage / 2) must then express the efficiency! So we have, results = Difference say 1 + Efficiency say Leverage, Leverage / 2 Compare to, (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) = 1.5 D ^ (Difference say 1 + efficiency say Lvg, Lvg / 2)) - (Verbs - 1) = 1.5 Example: Swivel lever: 3 ^ (2,3) - (Verbs - 1) = 1.5 9, 27 - (Verbs - 1) = 1.5 (9, 27) + 1.5 - (Verbs - 1) = 0 (9, 27) + 1.5 - Verbs = 1 9, 27 + 0.5 - Verbs = 0 9, 27, +0.5 = Verbs Verbs = 9.5, 27.5 Amount of leverage assuming no range: (D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) Translating, 0-d = Negative. 1-d = Efficiency. 2-d = Dimensional. 3-d = Mechanical. (4-d = categorical?) … Amount of leverage assuming no range: (D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) Results or Mass Range = ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) PMM over-unity given by Mass range / Lvg + 1. PMM Over-Unity = ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) / Lvg + 1 Longer form: {((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) } / {(D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) - ((Lvg /2) + Diff)) } + 1 Reducing: {((eff say Lvg + Diff) ) } / {(D - 1) ((eff say Lvg + Diff) } + 1 = 1.5 Simplified for slightly specific general case: {Lvg + 1 / ((D - 1) (Lvg +1))} + 1 = PMM Over-Unity Remember this is only without including range of leverage. ( Efficiency / ((D - 1) (Efficiency)) } + 1 = General Over-Unity, where efficiency is stated as Results = (Efficiency* + Difference), and efficiency sums to <1 if topic os acted on, and efficiency sums to >1 if topics is acting. Translated for greater generality: ( Efficiency / ((D - 1) (Efficiency)) } + Difference = General Over-Unity, where efficiency is stated as Results = (Efficiency* + Difference), and efficiency sums to <1 if topic os acted on, and efficiency sums to >1 if topics is acting. … … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. … OLDER MATERIAL: (D ^ Results) - ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = 0 Solving for the second one: Minus ((D ^ Results) - 1.5) = D ^ results. (D ^ Results) - 1.5 = - (D ^ Results). 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 … Either: (1) (D ^ Results) - (Verbs - 1) >= 1 Or, (2) 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 Plus, also: D ^ results - 1.5 = (Verbs - 1) where >= is translated as 1.5 … So, in the first case, (D ^ Results) = (Verbs - 1) + 1 Translated as: (D ^ Results) = Verbs. … For the second case, 2 (D ^ Results) = 1.5 So 2 Verbs = 1.5 Verbs, then Verbs = 0 for perpetual motion machines. This connects with the Set 0 = Efficiency* + Difference equation, where although the difference is 1, the complex difference might be expressed as D - 2. In that case, Verbs might be a constant -2. But in perpetual motion, Verbs - 1 might be expressed as D - 2, which is 1, so verbs would equal 2, so Verbs might be a constant + / - 2. NOTE LOOK TO THE EARLY SECTIONS MUCH OF THIS IS SIMPLY WORK I WENT THROUGH BEFORE REACHING THE CONCLUSION MENTIONED MUCH EARLIER. Coppedge, Nathan. Southern Connecticut State University 2020-03-31, p.