Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[gsmsslsb]

Hi Les,

Thanks for posting that stuff as I also refuse to subject myself to fb. I read over much of the long doc. link and the diagrams. Obvious question is what's stopping Mr. Hay or one of his fans from building the device and demonstrating free energy production? Also, maybe citfta figure this out. He seems to rely heavily on the equation F = m * v^2. Or Force equals Mass times Velocity squared. Which is incorrect.

Regards,

bi

You say that F=mv^2 is false. Could you explain that. What do you think F= in terms of movement and velocity. and why do you think the current equation is false.
Not trying to criticise just to clarify

[bistander]

Force

You say that F=mv^2 is false. Could you explain that. What do you think F= in terms of movement and velocity. and why do you think the current equation is false.
Not trying to criticise just to clarify

F = M * a. Force is equal to mass times acceleration. Can we agree on that? It is known as Newton's second law of motion. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. Acceleration has units of m/s^2, or meters per seconds squared. A Force of one Newton equals one kilogram times a meter divided by one second squared. N = kg*m*s^-2.

Your equation of F = M * v^2 units reduce to kg*(m/s)^2 or kg*m^2/s^2 or kg*m^2*s^-2.

Obviously units are different between your equation and Newton's. I say Sir Newton is correct and you are wrong.

Your turn. Prove your equation correct.

Note: I have used upper case M for mass and lower case m for unit of meter to avoid confusion between the two.

Regards,

bi

[Les Banki]

I can see a flawed equation and a stupid scheme which I know will not work. Why would I spend effort and resources trying it?
Regards,

bi

bistander,

Thank you for confirming my suspicion and as a bonus, revealing your rather childish mentality displayed in your response for all to see!

Since this is all about Kevin Hay and his work, I let him respond in form of his FB post today.

Cheers,
Les Banki

Kevin Hay added 2 new photos.
3 hrs ·

Most humans are so full of toxic metals, parasites and chemicals that they cannot hear the music that I am listening to and singing at the top of my lungs.
Alcohol is a neurotoxin.
Tobacco is laced with over 70 toxic materials, including ammonia, formaldehyde and aluminium.
Your toothpaste contains hydrofluorosilicic acid.
Your deodorant and antiperspirants are laced with aluminium oxide.
Your food is full of chemicals and pesticides, if they are not genetically modified, which more than likely, they are.
Add to this the toxic fumes that you are breathing from fuel, chemtrails and industry.
Now...
Imagine what you are not being told.
Imagine what has been hidden and what is occurring now as I type this.
Add to this the disinformation campaign that was designed to lower intelligence here and create a trap for those that survive this industrial takeover.
Now...
WHO are you, and what the hell are you going to do about this?
Nothing.
You are going to do nothing, and let others do the heavy lifting again, aren't you?
Now you know why those of us with these answers, these solutions are walking away from the blind and ignorant masses and searching for specific people that can help in this task and rebuild this planet using the technology that we have succeeded in testing and applying here.
Most of this has been shared already.
So...
Now it is really up to you.
yes.
Just you.
Most of you have already made your decision long ago, and have done nothing to avert what some of us have seen coming for decades.
Now, those of us that have sewn our crops will begin to reap the harvest, the harvest that has been created by refusing to follow the status quo...
Which may soon be starving.
This is why I have moved away from the insufferable miscommunication systems used here on Facebook and return to my work in agriculture.
You see...
Plants do not ask questions or become confused when shown applications and materials that they can use to accelerate their cellular functions.
No, they do not argue.
They just eat this **** up!
And so should you.
www.vancouverislandormus.net/shop/

[bistander]

Childish?

bistander,

Thank you for confirming my suspicion and as a bonus, revealing your rather childish mentality displayed in your response for all to see!

Since this is all about Kevin Hay and his work, I let him respond in form of his FB post today.

...

No Les, it was about what you posted and the subject which you appear to support and promote. I answered your question and ask several of you. But you choose not to answer and instead post fb garbage. Can you not think for yourself? Does your deep spiritual insight tell you follow and believe Kevin Hay rather than Isaac Newton? Good move.

bi

[Les Banki]

Does your deep spiritual insight tell you follow and believe Kevin Hay rather than Isaac Newton? Good move.

bi

bistander,

Yes, ABSOLUTELY.
And this will end our brief "exchange", bistander!
Have a nice day!

Cheers,
Les Banki

[citfta]

Hi guys,

I think I understand the points both of you are trying to make. Les, as bistander has said we both have been here for a pretty good while. I respect his ability when it comes to the math. He and I both try to point out the mistakes that are sometimes made by people trying to show what they have. There is no deliberate effort to be a naysayer just for the purpose of being negative. We both have commented many times on mistakes we see in order to help people better understand what is going on with their projects.

Now, having said that, I am intrigued by this idea. I have seen videos before that show the tremendous forces created by an out of balance wheel. I believe it is possible that this device might be able to do more than would normally be expected. My experience has been that some inventors just have an intuitive ability to design and build without being able to accurately describe what is going on with their project. I believe bistander is correct about the math. However that only means the inventor didn't know how to properly explain what is going on. I don't believe simple math can explain this device because of the swinging arm. The high level calculus that would be needed to accurately describe the forces are way beyond my ability as I have totally forgotten what little I used to know about calculus.

I am going to keep an open mind about this project until I see a build that can show the input and output power that is able to be measured accurately.

Respectfully to both of you,
Carroll

[Les Banki]

Hi Carroll,

There was no need for you to try to explain.....
I thought it was obvious to ALL readers on this thread that I am just a “messenger” here!

In order to avoid further misunderstandings, this is where I stand.....

I am now 80 years old and I have worked with electricity/electronics since I was 13.
Yes, a professional design engineer.
No, I am NOT new to free energy work and you may remember that I have already completed (and published ) my Water Fuelled Generator Project (WFGP) about 4 years ago.
(It has been downloaded several hundred times from my 'dropbox')

So, I never had any problems with mathematics.

The simple reason I did not comment on 'bistander' claiming the formula being “incorrect” is the fact that Kevin has already explained the reason for that. (see his email further down)

Having worked on my own gravity unit design for the last 3 years or so, I am not exactly new to mechanical engineering either!
(Or the use of GRAVITY, INERTIA, CENTRIFUGAL forces and so on!)
However, this thread (or should I say MY posts here) are NOT about my design.

Kevin Hay is a genius but a loner, basically lost on Facebook but it was about the only 'outlet' he knew of.
He has been publishing his discoveries on FB for years, falling mostly on “deaf ears”.
No kidding!

He needs support and assistance to spread his discoveries.
NO, he did NOT ask me to do this!

There is something else you need to know about Kevin, if you want to understand him!

IF you had direct access to FB, you would have discovered this very quickly.

ORMUS.

In one of my emails to Kevin I mentioned that I was very familiar with it, having studied it EXTENSIVELY back in 1995, it was called ORME then.
(Orbitally Rearranged Monoatomic Elements)
Then he opened right up and sent me the following email:

Hey Les,

David Hudson knows little of these materials, as he does not ingest them or use these to enhance cognitive attraction for the information that spins around us.
It is unfortunate that he spent over 7 million dollars and failed to find an energetic solution.

Ormus materials show us how to induce planetary movement.
They show us how to transfer inertial compression dynamics from one space to another.

Ormus increases vacuum induction reactions, through phase resonant compression.

Ormus explains solar reactions, how light is induced and it shows us electro-gravitational potential, not through meta-dynamics but through the torsion induced inversion of an electrostatic function, namely gravitation.

I discovered these materials through an out of body experience.

The information that I found surrounding these materials was not accurate.

David Hudson buried these reactions under religious dogma and failed to understand the potential, or how to tap this and use it.
A profound mistake, especially for a farmer.

I decided to apply this to horticulture. This increased yields and provided a revenue stream.
I am using this revenue stream to test and design mechanical devices and apply these to electromagnetic induction mechanics.
This allows us to use our solutions for production. Maintain them. Expand them.

There is free energy. This is called movement.

What needs to be discussed is the electricity that we use, not the "energy" that remains undefined, as all matter is energy.

The relative function is E=MV squared. This is electricity and the equal and opposite back emf reaction, which is a reaction to the displacement of gravity.

Hydrodynamic reactions explain this. Falling water shows us how to electrify this.

David Hudson could have spent this money in engineering, as this would have allowed him to move forward and change the world.
David did not have the language or the understanding, so it is left to others, like myself, to share this effectively, and do this in a manner that allows others to understand, test and use these reactions, and sustain them.

Ormus allowed me to expose the fabric of space, and provide methods of testing my thesis.

Space is composed of diatomically opposed hydrogen in stasis, an electromotively induced inversion of atomic wave functions, these spinor scalar torsion functions.
Moving through space inverts this field, collapsing the inverted material by magnetically attracting the hydrogen through phase conjugation.
This is what induces the light reaction.
Hydrogen fusion is how light is formed, how matter is formed, how electricity is induced.

There will be a lot coming out over the next 15 years.
If you do not take ormus, I would suggest starting, as this can reverse aging and heal issues that have begun to spread inside of you.
These elements will remove viral antibodies, bacterium, GMO matter, aluminium and other toxic material from your body.
This will allow your body's organs to heal and detoxify.

Cheers,
Kevin

OK.
Know that Kevin Hay owns and operates 'Vancouver Island Ormus', making his own ORMUS by using electromagnetic separation methods.
Needless to say, he is not only ingesting it himself since the 29th of February 2012 but also feed it to his PLANTS and his dogs!
You can see all the pictures on his FB page!

Well, perhaps I should add that I am also 'taking' ORMUS. (with great effects!)
Are you surprised?

(NO, I did NOT buy it from Kevin since the freight charges to Australia are EXORBITANT!!)

Cheers,
Les Banki

[bistander]

Force

...

In order to avoid further misunderstandings, this is where I stand.....
...

So, I never had any problems with mathematics.

The simple reason I did not comment on 'bistander' claiming the formula being “incorrect” is the fact that Kevin has already explained the reason for that. (see his email further down)
...

{below is from his email as mentioned above}

...
There is free energy. This is called movement.

What needs to be discussed is the electricity that we use, not the "energy" that remains undefined, as all matter is energy.

The relative function is E=MV squared. This is electricity and the equal and opposite back emf reaction, which is a reaction to the displacement of gravity.
...

Hi Les,

Your attempt to avoid further misunderstanding falls short with regards to the question of that incorrect equation from him, namely Force = Mass times Velocity squared. I see where he uses an Energy equation. But see no mention of Force. Perhaps you could explain in your own words as I did to express the reason I claimed it was wrong at the request of Mr. gsmsslsb.

Thanks in advance,

bi

[gsmsslsb]

F = M * a. Force is equal to mass times acceleration. Can we agree on that? It is known as Newton's second law of motion. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. Acceleration has units of m/s^2, or meters per seconds squared. A Force of one Newton equals one kilogram times a meter divided by one second squared. N = kg*m*s^-2.

Your equation of F = M * v^2 units reduce to kg*(m/s)^2 or kg*m^2/s^2 or kg*m^2*s^-2.

Obviously units are different between your equation and Newton's. I say Sir Newton is correct and you are wrong.

Your turn. Prove your equation correct.

Note: I have used upper case M for mass and lower case m for unit of meter to avoid confusion between the two.

Regards,

bi

I think you are correct F=M*A The equation I was thinking of is E=1/2M*V^2.
Energy (kinetic)=1/2Mass * Velocity Squared. Energy in Joules is equal to 1/2 of Mass in kilograms times velocity in meters per second squared.

The E=MV^2 is a hybrid somehow of E=MC^2 and E=1/2MV^2.

[bistander]

Still Force?

I think you are correct F=M*A The equation I was thinking of is E=1/2M*V^2.
Energy (kinetic)=1/2Mass * Velocity Squared. Energy in Joules is equal to 1/2 of Mass in kilograms times velocity in meters per second squared.

The E=MV^2 is a hybrid somehow of E=MC^2 and E=1/2MV^2.

There is no "hybrid" energy equation. And besides he was using Force in his wrong equation, not Energy.

bi

[Les Banki]

Guys,

Since I am NOT an “armchair scientist” but a DOER, I will NOT take part in your NEVER ENDING arguments about formulas and the like.

To me, the issue is very clear.
Those who argue have ZERO understanding of this subject.
Period.
End of story.

From now on, all I will do is look out for your announcements about YOUR WORKING free energy machines!

Cheers,
Les Banki

[bistander]

No thinking allowed

Guys,

Since I am NOT an “armchair scientist” but a DOER, I will NOT take part in your NEVER ENDING arguments about formulas and the like.

To me, the issue is very clear.
Those who argue have ZERO understanding of this subject.
Period.
End of story.

From now on, all I will do is look out for your announcements about YOUR WORKING free energy machines!

Cheers,
Les Banki

So Les appears to say no thinking, no questions and no discussion. You have to just build it, even though you'll end up with a pile of useless junk. Seems odd he comes to a discussion board and refuses to engage in a civil discussion which I have attempted nicely. Since Les is a DOER, you'd think he'd have that teeter-totter generator about ready to start delivering free energy. So how about it Les? Show us what you have.

Regards,

bi

[BroMikey]

Guys,

Since I am NOT an “armchair scientist” but a DOER, I will NOT take part in your NEVER ENDING arguments about formulas and the like.

To me, the issue is very clear.
Those who argue have ZERO understanding of this subject.
Period.
End of story.

From now on, all I will do is look out for your announcements about YOUR WORKING free energy machines!

Cheers,
Les Banki

Hi Les
Been enjoying the hell outta you taken the upper hand.
Thanks for the Hays stuff. I get content offline.

When you speak I try to listen with more faith because i known you
are a man who has been thru the handbooks more than me. In fact the
average fellow probably has not been thru every page of the EE handbooks,
let's face it that would take years and decades.

I am looking forward to any and all further entries that you might deem of
value so drop more in the fishbowl, I love learning.

God Bless you Les

PS Sounds like you got one working? Well not in this thread no way.
Wasting your breath. Is anyone asking? That's because they already
know. You are being corrected for an example that has not yet been
offered. Does anyone care? I do, but you understand.

I had to jump in and give you one.

[Ufopolitics]

F = M * a. Force is equal to mass times acceleration. Can we agree on that? It is known as Newton's second law of motion. Acceleration is the rate of change of velocity. Acceleration has units of m/s^2, or meters per seconds squared. A Force of one Newton equals one kilogram times a meter divided by one second squared. N = kg*m*s^-2.

Your equation of F = M * v^2 units reduce to kg*(m/s)^2 or kg*m^2/s^2 or kg*m^2*s^-2.

Obviously units are different between your equation and Newton's. I say Sir Newton is correct and you are wrong.

Your turn. Prove your equation correct.

Note: I have used upper case M for mass and lower case m for unit of meter to avoid confusion between the two.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

I believe that Kevin is more likely referring to Centripetal-Centrifugal Forces, rather than Newtonian Forces:

Fc=m*V^2/r

Considering all his mechanical devices are based on rotating wheels, where radius must be scaled up properly as to balance all forces.

Which in the end is the same thing if we know that acceleration (a)= V^2/r , and then substitute (V^2/r) by just (a) then we will have what you are writing, or the known and simplified F=m*a.

However, if you notice on his drawing below, it is clearly defined that Kevin Hay knows that F=m*a as it is written on center-low side of image:

"FORCE IS MASS TIMES ACCELERATION"



And so, on image below he is replacing r by 2 on the left side of image formula F=m*v^2/2:



But what happens to acceleration "a" if the rotating speed v -of the whole System- reaches a steady RPM, which MUST take place when Machine reaches a Steady Normal Operation?

Acceleration becomes exactly zero, correct so far?

And so -and only according to math formula which directly relates v and a, but never in reality- then velocity "v" "should" also become zero...

But my question to you is:

Do you really believe that velocity of a steady spinning wheel is zero?... according to acceleration being zero at constant speed.

Anyways, my post here is not to start another argument about who is right and who isn't...but trying to reach a clear and sane discussion, trying to understand Mr Kevin Hay.

And Bistander...I do have my doubts about the Newtonian 2nd Law...as his "Free Fall" Calculation Method, but that is a topic to another post I will put together for you later...

Oh, and I almost forget...to remind you -btw- that I also came from Face Book...


Kind Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

About "Sir Isaac Newton"...and Galileo Galilei...

Hello,

If someone have not seen the video below...and had some doubts about the discovery from Italian Scientist Galileo Galilei related to Free Falling Objects of different Mass and Volume...I highly recommend to watch it.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs[/VIDEO]

Now according to the repeatedly mentioned before formula from Newton:

F=m*a

Applied to the two objects on video:

The two objects falling on that video, the heavy steel canon ball and the subtle, almost weightless feathers are BOTH under the ONLY INFLUENCE of Gravity Force ACCELERATION, since chamber is at vacuum levels, so NO OTHER FORCES are acting on any of the two objects.

Now, if we say that the steel ball mass=weight=80 Lbs (Pounds)

And feathers, all together are 0.05 Pounds (and that's heavy for the actual weight of those feathers)

Now, find the Force on the Steel Ball, let's take 80 pounds to kilograms= 36.28= 36.28X9.8=355.544 N

Force on Ball is 355.5 Newtons

And so those subtle feathers Newtonian's Forces calculations are:

0.022679Kg X 9.8= 0.2222542 N

Newtonian Force acting on the feathers are:

0.22679 Newtons

Obviously, according to that formula we could throw ONE THOUSAND STEEL BALLS and still the feathers would be floating in the air...

But that is NOT REAL, both objects fall at exactly same speed, just like if they both would have IDENTICAL MASSES or Weight (same deal different names) and so, what does Sir Isaac Newton "PATCH" to "JUSTIFY MATHEMATICALLY" the Galilean proof where MASS IS NOT INCLUDED ON FREE FALLS?

3.8) Newton’s Second Law Explains Why Objects in free Fall have Equal Acceleration

How Newton’s Second Law explains why the acceleration of all falling objects is the same (on earth).

Weight is the force due to gravity on an object. The ratio of weight to mass is the same for any object. Although a larger mass has more weight and thus more force pulling it downward, it also has more mass.

Then:

a= weight divided mass= big weight/big mass= little weight/little mass

Taken from: Physical-Science Classes

In other words...on the Second Newtonian Law, the Free Fall Calculations completely EXCLUDE Weight-Mass Parameters.

How did he figured that out?...simple, no matter how much the falling object weight would be, IF DIVIDED by its own mass, which would ALWAYS BE EXACTLY THE SAME NUMBERS...THEN, the result ALWAYS comes out to a nice number "1", no matter if they are feathers or canon balls...

Then the Formula to find the Force on Fall objects only considers Gravity Acceleration constant...multiplied by another constant which is the number 1?...Nope, actually we do not even need to show it.

A free-falling object is an object that is falling under the sole influence of gravity. That is to say that any object that is moving and being acted upon only be the force of gravity is said to be "in a state of free fall." Such an object will experience a downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s.

Physics Class Room

Do you all agree with that?...and so can we all apply it to reality?...I do not think so!!!

And so, Bistander, if you agree with "Sir Isaac Newton" Free Fall Formula above, then please agree to stand under the Steel Ball falling down...and so I will choose to let the feathers fall on my face...

After all their weight divided by its mass has been "magically diminished" to exactly just a number one to both...so both would be exactly the same impacting force...correct?

Whenever You are ready let me know and I will contact Brian Cox in London... to repeat that experiment with you under the ball...

EDIT NOTE: You can NOT wear any special impact suits, nor helmets as I would not wear nothing to let feathers hit me...


Regards


Ufopolitics