- 5x More Current Out Than In - Validation Of Proof Of Concept -

[soundiceuk]

Excuse me,
but we have been told of only ONE energising oscillator being used, but the text here states two !?

Yes a beat is generated between different source frequencies.
This is claimed to happen with V2.5 and V2.6 with only a single oscillator ?

- PRIVATE ENGINEER -

There was only one energized oscillator, the other ( tank circuit) I referred to as a slave.

The schematic shows a "box" which represents an oscillator circuit, then it shows a tank represented as a coil and variable capacitor.

The OSC can be any oscillator capable of bringing the "tank" into resonance.

The beat is claimed to come from an 'Earth' based resonance, but does it ?
Or does the beat arise between longitudinal antenna resonance and the tuned inductor resonance ?

I'll get back to you on these ones.

Also did the original V2.5 change ?
I read of a tiny Texas IC being used, but not now. I also think the coil winding turns changed slightly.

I have the TPS61254 IC now on the evaluation board (not cheap) and I see I will need to remove the output capacitors.

Yes the schematic did change but the previous version was also correct.

I think it highlights that it is a good idea to label any further schematics with a further version number like v2.51, v2.52 etc, to prevent confusion.

Waiting for 2 each of moving coil amp and volt meters.
Have wire for the coil now too.
Antenna ? Will do what I can.
I intend to breadboard first and get running, but I'm thinking of trying a 20m coil of 3/8" copper tubing spaced over wooden supports.

Cheers ....... Graham.

Look forward to your results. Interesting antenna idea. What is it, brake pipe?

[GSM]

@ realmikel - I await a response from - ENGINEERING -

@ GSM - I await a response from - ENGINEERING -

@ ChrisW - I will write you a detailed response.

@ All

Here is something to chew over for a while until I return.

LOL - Paul.
You are like a call centre operative who is obliged to contact a technical team and telephone back !
At least you do, and thanks for replying in gentlemanly manner, even though my comments can be most trying.

And you know Mike is not the only one who thinks this response comes
across more like as if from a salesperson -

@ realmikel & GSM

Facts that we believe you should know

1. Radio communication utilizes electromagnetic oscillations (electromagnetic radiation or which can be alternatively called electromagnetic radiant energy); in what we know as the radio spectrum.

2. ION power conversion utilizes electrostatic oscillations (electrostatic radiation or which can be alternatively called electrostatic radiant energy); what should be termed the planetary energy spectrum.

3. With these facts in mind it should be easy to envision how we can extract useful electrical power from the planetary ions.

4. Nikola Tesla and T. H. Moray both were correct in assuming that we cannot obtain electrical power from a purely "static" charge.

5. However, we can obtain electrical current from a moving, oscillating, or a vibrating ionized particle. If a highly charged particle sits on the surface of a neutrally charged solid surface it is a static charge. If however; a highly charged particle that is free to move on the surface of a liquid or in a gaseous atmosphere it is not static, it is a moving charge. It is a fact that a charge in motion can and does induce a moving charge of current in an electrical conductor that it approaches, or if it is moving away from it.

Nikola Tesla said:

"If ever we can ascertain at what period the earth's charge, when disturbed, oscillates with respect to an oppositely electrified system or known circuit, we shall know a fact possibly of the greatest importance to the welfare of the human race. "

"If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is, for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of Nature."

"When the great truth, accidentally revealed and experimentally confirmed, is fully recognized, that this planet, with all its appalling immensity, is to electric currents virtually no more than a small metal ball and that by virtue of this fact many possibilities, each baffling imagination and of incalculable consequence, are rendered absolutely sure of accomplishment;"

Bruce A. Perreault
July 23rd, 2012

Hi Bruce,
These are the facts I know -

(1) Radio communication is via the propagation of photonic (electromagnetic) radiation (as stated by Tesla himself) and the radio spectrum is but a tiny fraction of the electromagnetic spectrum.
Photons are radiant energy and are radiated by electron energy level collapse after excitation, and the photon stream propagates freely through space and air etc. in straight lines until it interacts with or gives up its energy to the electrons of other (transducing) matter.

(2) Ionic charges are always related to matter, whether positive or negative. The matter (often gas molecules) cannot move at luminal velocity like photons, but ionic charge can propagate through molecular exchange at lightning speed and with potential for high current, thereby generating an electromotive current flow through conductive material, and/or electromagnetic (photon stream) radiation.

(3) With these facts in my mind I am convinced of the validity of your findings,
(sorry not your facts), and this is why I am already buying in necessary parts to attempt replication.
I have seen so many circuits here said to be overunity, often with claims of hot and cold electricity being involved, but I have never seen any explanation of cold electricity which matches Physics fundamentals.

However your work has been sound from a fundamental viewpoint, hence this being the first project I am willing to attempt replication of.

This energetic beat you have demodulated comes about because the bare metal antenna is supported in an ionised air environment, and thus when resonantly electrically energised in a non-electromagnetically radiating manner, is capable of collecting ion charges and developing a current flow with respect to earth ground.

Without both the antenna being bare, and there being a good ground connection, there could not be a return resonant ion/electron conversion along the length of the antenna inducing oscillatory current flow through the tuning coil.

My puzzle (before I can check it out for myself) is as to why the tuner is set to a lower frequency than is the exciting BFO, and I wonder if this could be due to the air ion exchange at the antenna wire being slower than electromagnetic relations, or being related to dynamic conduction effects in the ground around the earthing rod with respect to the antenna.

Bruce, are there two frequencies, or is the tuner merely shifting phase ?
And if there are two frequencies, then are they both apparent on the antenna ?
Maybe you have already scoped at the coil anyway, though if you have it has not been shown.

One way to check would be by using a radio receiver (amatuer radio with SSB or synchronous reception capabilities), and maybe using a SW radio would prove to be a way of finding an optimum frequency tuner setting without needing to buy expensive test gear.

Has output been greater at night than day, or vice-versa; or better some days than others; or better at some location than another ?

Cheers .......... Graham.

[ChrisW]

more thoughts...

SoundIceUK,

@ ChrisW
1. Thank you for your altruism.
Thank you for teaching me two new words.

Heh-heh... my pleasure!

It made me realize that I am much more like myself when I was younger. I lost my way and now I'm back on the right road.

I presume you mean prior to the time you were fed a pack of lies about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, "government is good," you have to PAY to live on the planet on which you were born, two political parties, your vote counts, you have to pay "your" taxes, ad pukem (which is waaaay beyond ad nauseam!)

4. The 7.5 to 8.0 MHz range might also be of interest. See Deyo's work.
Personally I haven't studied Deyo's work. Sorry Chris but is that supposed to be hz or Mhz?

That would be 7.5 MHz to 8.0 MHz -- sorry for the confusion...

5. The larger the wire diameter of the antenna, the greater the voltage impressed upon it. Source: ARRL Antenna Book.
Larger antenna surface area means it is easier to harvest IONS.

Okay, I'm no physicist, but let's see if we can figure this out. In order to have IONS (free electrons), something must be present, for our purposes, a high voltage field, to cause a disturbance of sufficient magnitude to cause the freeing of electrons. What that means in the context of this device is that there must be a high voltage present on the antenna itself, or nearby (e.g., a lightning strike). While this device may easily build up a large current in the tank circuit (3 amps at 4.5 volts, according to Perrault's document), it is achieved through resonance, NOT IONS.

The most difficult aspect is the fact that the energy IS out there, but it's scattered all over the RF spectrum. In order to harvest what's out there in a big way implies a broadband system capable of sucking it in, passing the energy through multiple, tuned, band-pass filters, and then combining their outputs to produce DC via full-wave bridge rectifiers and large caps. Oh, and of course, feeding back the energy to the antenna (positive feedback) is essential.

This is not to say that ions don't or won't play a part, but they first have to be there before you can grab them -- and that implies having a high voltage in the antenna's near field.

Corrections to my thought process are welcome, of course...

More to come....

Chris

[GSM]

Look forward to your results. Interesting antenna idea. What is it, brake pipe?

Could be Paul,
or soft copper gas/fuel pipe, can sometimes be bought in 20m coils.

Cheers .......... Graham.

[GSM]

Okay, I'm no physicist, but let's see if we can figure this out. In order to have IONS (free electrons), something must be present, for our purposes, a high voltage field, to cause a disturbance of sufficient magnitude to cause the freeing of electrons. What that means in the context of this device is that there must be a high voltage present on the antenna itself, or nearby (e.g., a lightning strike). While this device may easily build up a large current in the tank circuit (3 amps at 4.5 volts, according to Perrault's document), it is achieved through resonance, NOT IONS.

The most difficult aspect is the fact that the energy IS out there, but it's scattered all over the RF spectrum. In order to harvest what's out there in a big way implies a broadband system capable of sucking it in, passing the energy through multiple, tuned, band-pass filters, and then combining their outputs to produce DC via full-wave bridge rectifiers and large caps. Oh, and of course, feeding back the energy to the antenna (positive feedback) is essential.

This is not to say that ions don't or won't play a part, but they first have to be there before you can grab them -- and that implies having a high voltage in the antenna's near field.

Corrections to my thought process are welcome, of course...

More to come....

Chris

Hi Chris,

Ions are molecules having charge; they may be negative or positive - with extra electron or missing an electron.

The air is already charged/ionised with respect to the ground, we need to collect its energy but it is static, thus we need to move it (the charge) through the air molecules on to the antenna. It does not have a spectrum, unless we energise (alternate or pulse) it and give it one.

The far end of the antenna resonates at high impedance and at high voltage swing with respect to the equipment end, thus it develops a potential capable of cyclically attracting ionic flow through the air molecules, which becomes alternating current flow via the antenna.

This is something which radio engineers normally try to avoid happening lest it should damage their equipment !

Bruce appears to be suggesting that the charge has a 7.8Hz Earth resonance frequency, and this is why there is a tuning offset, but I don't know about this.
The thing about ionised air is that it can affect radio propagation, and I have never noted anything happening around 7.8Hz.

Cheers .......... Graham.

[Ernst]

I was asked if this system resembles the Wardenclyffe project as I decoded it.
I am still trying to figure out how this one would work. But I have some ideas.
I do not see a clear similarity with Wardenclyffe, though.

You have a HF oscillator (can easily be build using a 74HC132 smith-trigger in a relaxation circuit) this feeds a resonant LC circuit which is slightly out of tune. The resulting signal has a beat frequency equal to the frequency difference. This beat frequency is transmitted as a heterodyne, thus increasing your antenna size to the size needed to receive this frequency.
So you are actually receiving VLF signals and these provide the extra power in the system.

I do not see how ions are involved here.

Actually this principle (heterodyne: transmit to receive) is nature's own. This is how atoms can capture lightwaves much larger than their own size.
I would say that a longer and thicker (reducing resistance) antenna would reduce the power needed from the oscillator.

It reminds me of a 'free' energy idea that I had earlier, which will probably not be exactly legal:
Take a large (!) coil, feed it with a HV 60Hz signal to create a 'virtual antenna' for this frequency. Wind a secondary around this coil to extract the received power.
Where does this power come from? From the huge 'antennas' they call the power distribution system. The beauty of this system: if you are in the US you are always in the near-field of this antenna and so you can get a close coupling. This means that the power lines will start radiating more energy as you extract it, thus you can get as much as you like.
Second: the 60Hz associated wavelength (5000 Km) fits around the globe (8 times) and so it creates a standing wave, which makes it impossible to locate your antenna.
Unfortunately (in this case) I do not live in the US so I can not get the close coupling.

[GSM]

Look forward to your results. Interesting antenna idea. What is it, brake pipe?

The other wire I had in mind to try as an antenna is something like this, often available in hardware stores etc -
1.5mm Galvanised Steel Wire (200m) : Electric Fencing Spares | Solway Feeders

I have found iron/steel wire good for antenna use in the past, it is cheap, and strong too, but most of all the fencewire is - galvanised - and thus long term good for electron-ion exchange as is.

This morning I was pleased to read the last line on this posting -
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post203398

A wise man indeed.

Also regarding Nat's post I already had in mind constructing a Ferrite Sleeve inductor for the V2.5 coil, and I am wanting to try a copper tape winding over it, but presently I simply do not know know where I can obtain copper tape. As a substitute I had thought of removing the outer braid from quality coaxial cable and flattening that.
Even 20 months ago I constructed these ferrite sleeve coils with 'energy' conversion in mind (thinking more of ion-valves or electrostatic conversion), and what a coincidence it is that Bruce's 3.5MHz is right in the middle of the tuning range for that most efficient inductor constructed upon the parcel tape card centre tube,
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...-inductor.html
and the ferrite rods are available from here in the UK -
http://www.rapidonline.com/Electrica...Aerial-88-3098
Likely about 100pF of tuning variable will be all that is necessary, though possibly with two or three separate windings and/or winding taps to maximise efficiency.

Cheers ........ Graham.

[soundiceuk]

LOL - Paul.
You are like a call centre operative who is obliged to contact a technical team and telephone back !
At least you do, and thanks for replying in gentlemanly manner, even though my comments can be most trying.

Yes I wear many hats, this is one of them Thanks for noticing. I try my best

And you know Mike is not the only one who thinks this response comes
across more like as if from a salesperson -

I just wanted to clarify that It wasn't a response from Bruce to anyone, infact it was to the engineering team.

I shouldn't have addressed it to you both, although it prompted responses and deeper questions, so therefore a step forward in my opinion.


I have many questions to answer.

Here is a few for now answered by one of our private engineers.

The beat is claimed to come from an 'Earth' based resonance, but does it ?

Yes....The injected beat frequencies is to synchronize with the VLF oscillating electrostatic field.

Or does the beat arise between longitudinal antenna resonance and the tuned inductor resonance ?

I believe you are confusing the two.

The OSC. determines the VLF interference pattern. This might help... OSC + (3.5mhz oscillating ions) = VLF resonant oscillating ions of the planet

[GSM]

The beat is claimed to come from an 'Earth' based resonance, but does it ?

Yes....The injected beat frequencies is to synchronize with the VLF oscillating electrostatic field.

Or does the beat arise between longitudinal antenna resonance and the tuned inductor resonance ?

I believe you are confusing the two.

The OSC. determines the VLF interference pattern. This might help... OSC + (3.5mhz oscillating ions) = VLF resonant oscillating ions of the planet

Thanks Paul.

I am asking many questions - not confused - so I thank you for your clarifications.

Questions are the best way to sort things out, because the explanations thought necessary by those who know, cannot be complete in advance through inability to imagine all of the questions which might subsequently be asked.

Given that 'Engineering' have advanced the concept we should accept, this being the measurable beat results observed are due to the Schumann resonance of atmospheric ion charge with respect to earth due to measurement of a 7.8Hz beat in an antenna-coil-ground rod circuit, maybe you can guess my next question.

Is this proven by evidence of 7.8Hz ionic alternations close to the pulsed antenna, or is this still hypothesis ?

The Schumann wave is stated to be electromagnetic with an equivalent voltage field amplitude typically less than 1mV/m.
Clearly the beat demodulated by V2.5 represents a much greater amplitude of excitation, so is the Schumann resonance really an ionic wave generating minimal electromagnetic component, and never discussed as such because it has minimal impact upon present day electric/electromagnetic technologies ?
(If so, then what a cover-up, though most of us know about many formal cover-ups already.)

Thanking you in advance.

Cheers .......... Graham.

[gyula]

Hi Graham and Paul,

I noticed the use of bare wire for the long wire antenna. Is it a must? I mean a normal enameled copper wire (the American technical word maybe magnet wire) would not work as good as the bare wire?

Thanks,
Gyula

[Ernst]

Still not 100% sure on this one, but the ongoing experiments will tell.

I am thinking... If you wanted to transmit a 7.5Hz signal, that would take a lot of power. So what I believe is happening here, you use the 3.5 MHz signal which is MUCH easier to transmit, to get 'airborne'. And you use (rectified) AM to sneak in your 7.5 Hz signal.

If this is how it works you should optimise your antenna for 3.5 MHz, meaning you need a 21.4 m long antenna, preferably vertical. Another way, even better, would be Eric Dollards way, to wind a coil with 21.4 m wire and provide a very good ground connection.
Watch these videos.

[GSM]

I think many of us here are still puzzling as opposed to being convinced.

The 'engineer(s?)' responding, and the original file uploaded both relate to tuning a slightly lower frequency in order to peak up on a generated beat frequency.

If this beat were Schumann Resonance related, then it would not matter whether the tuning were higher or lower than the inducing fundamental !!!!!


So (as I queried before) do we have operating here a velocity of ionic charge transfer related phenomenon with respect to normal electromagnetic relations, like lightning speed as opposed to light speed, and with the ion field we are disturbing naturally polarised by the Earth's magnetic field ?
Hence the resultant ion/atmosphere to wire/electron conduction lower in frequency only (being like a bass string being plucked) and having NOTHING to do with the Schumann resonance, lightning or solar/cosmic relations ?


What evidence do Bruce and the ion team (who are responsible for the accuracy of texts they publish) have to prove that the mechanism involved is what they claim it to be ?


I have already pointed out that 3.5MHz is in the noise dip when it comes to lightning generated noise in med/high global latitudes, also that ionisation is due mainly to Solar UV. With not all of my questions being answered and evidence not being substantiated 'Engineering' have not yet shown that they already know what they are attempting to educate others about.

Conjectural hypotheses based upon empirical evidence cannot become theory until proven, no matter how likely the observational fit.

My parts have now arrived, but I do not have any antenna. I have much else to contend with, but I will report my findings here and will look into aspects which 'engineering' have not yet addressed. Also I apologise in advance if my manner appears arrogant, but I no longer accept anything at face value without first checking for myself.

Cheers ........... Graham.

[GSM]

Hi Graham and Paul,

I noticed the use of bare wire for the long wire antenna. Is it a must? I mean a normal enameled copper wire (the American technical word maybe magnet wire) would not work as good as the bare wire?

Thanks,
Gyula

Hi Gyula,

For atmospheric-ion to wire-electron based conduction - yes.

Quite different to radio antenna requirements hey !

Cheers ......... Graham.

[soundiceuk]

#3 This sales talk implies if it is not easily understood then the problem is with the reader not the explanation. I understand that you can quote many knowledgable individuals, I am asking how what you quote brings you to the conclusion that you have improved the device directly word for word. Don't worry about being too complicated I actually understand some theory. For example hetrodyning, frequency a with frequency b will produce on the other side of the mixer a , b, a+b, a-b. Now if your getting extra energy which frequency is providing it and how much energy is provided above the 60% loss of the energy used by the mixer?

#5 Wonderful explanation about electrical theory. Absolutely fills up the page and sounds important. Does not explain the first thing about your device or circuit or its improvement over any other circuit so it is understood again as salesmanship of unrelated "facts" copied from other peoples work.

The disadvantage of quoting say "Tesla" is that he invented polyphase motors at the end of the 19th century and today almost every polyphase motor looks exactly the same as the one Tesla built himself. That means a lot of people for 100 years have followed or quoted Tesla yet few have the ability to improve on his work. I am still waiting for your explanation on how your circuits are an improvement over Tesla's used in his radio equipment at the 1900 worlds fair many years before marconi's patents

I do apologise for interpreting one of your questions wrongly

Here is a reply from one of the engineers.

It might not be the complete answers you seek, but hopefully open yours and others minds into asking more questions to move us forward with our constant learning.


1. Is the frequency providing extra energy? If not, what is?

It's the oscillating ions that provide us the extra energy.


2. How does what you quote brings you to the conclusion that you have improved the device directly?

There are MANY way to improve this device that we are still trying to understand at this time. We are constantly in development and learning as we go. But rest assured there is SIGNIFICANT gains that are being discussed and implemented right now that are real! Please understand that we do not want to create confusion with misinformation, we only want to provide you guys with the correct starting points to see how important this research is. Once you do the beginning steps...and read the supporting information in the 2nd Edition, you will begin to see how you can create serious gains!


3. How much energy is provided above the 60% loss of the energy used by the mixer?

This almost becomes irrelevant when you learn what you are taping into. We are learning to gain energy from electrostatics...and not electromagnets. This may seem like a broad statement but...this is very true. In our case...it's the noise that generated in the environment that we are tuning into. Study every noise that is generated in space....there are so many to choose. This is very similar to radio technology but NOT electromagnetic.


4. Please explain about the device or circuit or its improvement over any other circuit Tesla used in his radio equipment at the 1900 worlds fair many years before marconi's patents.

Tesla tuned into the these electrostatic fields as well...he spent a great deal of time learning how to time his impulses to match these necessary frequencies. These were strict requirements for magnifying energy. Many people think that a TC coil is emitting ...but in reality Tesla was all about RECEIVING energy through his TC coils. Very few people understand his use of the TC coil. But when you study nature...you can tap into these kinetic states.

[soundiceuk]

I'm slowly moving through the questions here. I will go over the thread again and make a note of what has been unanswered.

I will also try to expand on some of the previous responses.

The larger the coil the lower its resonant frequency, how large of a coil would it take to get the frequency to 7.8 hertz or a harmonic thereof.

Is this what Newman was trying to do with his huge coils.

1.The larger the coil the lower its resonant frequency, how large of a coil would it take to get the frequency to 7.8 hertz or a harmonic thereof?

You are missing the point. When you heterodyne with the atmospheric ions...you create a "group velocity" that travels at 7.8hz that just happens to tune into the VLF earth oscillating ions. You do not need a LONG antenna to do this as most would think. This is only one of the methods of gain that T. H. Moray utilized.


2. Is this what Newman was trying to do with his huge coils?

I have studied his work in passing but can tell you that you do not need to get side tracked by studying his work. This is not necessary. The only proof you will need is to build and see for yourself.