riddle me this batman... a leedskalnin riddle?

[Ernst]

the (empiracle ) evidence you are talking about DOES exist... in the form of a 1200 ton castle in homestead florida!

As far as I know, no one but the builder himself knows how it was done. And no one has ever seen him at work. This castle proves that it can be build by just one man, but nothing beyond that.

I've spent over a whole year dissecting his writings and what i've come up with is a root type of knowledge based on his discoveries. kind of like the origin of the egg/chicken dilemma.

If you have spend that much time I am interested in hearing/reading what you have learned. Saves me the time re-dissecting his work.

Ernst.

[logos]

As far as I know, no one but the builder himself knows how it was done. And no one has ever seen him at work. This castle proves that it can be build by just one man, but nothing beyond that.



If you have spend that much time I am interested in hearing/reading what you have learned. Saves me the time re-dissecting his work.

Ernst.

first, you are correct in stating that only the builder ACTUALLY knows how it was built. but the builder left behind him a LOT of information related to the work. i'm not saying it's easy but if it was everybody would do it

second, i am preparing to share my research with everyone soon. in fact i am trying to get it done as soon as possible. there are a lot of restraints otherwise, but all my notes, will be available to the world soon

[logos]

As far as I know, no one but the builder himself knows how it was done. And no one has ever seen him at work. This castle proves that it can be build by just one man, but nothing beyond that.



If you have spend that much time I am interested in hearing/reading what you have learned. Saves me the time re-dissecting his work.

Ernst.

if you are interested in ed's work i STRONGLY suggest you start reading magnetic current. the language is EXTREMELY hard to understand and it's talking abot a lot of stuff at once too... but it's not a long read (30 something pages) so it's not unbearable

[Uncle Charlie]

In reply to your initial post question about generating electricity without magnets, have you studied electrostatic generators? Examine the Wimshurst machine. It uses electrostatic induction, or influence, and does not use friction to produce considerable voltage (but sadly only limited current). No magnets involved. Its much better than rubbing your hands together but I'm not sure it will ever be useful enough to move large stones for castle building.

Is there an online version of the book?

Thanks,
Charlie

[Ernst]

Is there an online version of the book?

Yes, I found a few. For example: this one
Also found one with pics, but forgot the link. Use google....


Ernst.

[logos]

the idea is to think in terms of the early 1900's... only then can u really apply logic into what's going on.

radio frequencies were used back then, also rf receivers that used no batteries or electricty to work.

magnetic current is very difficult to read (at least for me) because the whole concepts of what ed's talking about was something that was much more mainstream back then. imagine that radio was just getting started, tesla was trying to transfer electricity wirelessly, hubbard was messing with his coils and countless other breakthru's in technology occurred because of a better understanding of the way physics worked. i spent a lot of time RElearning things to pput them into perspective. it's critical in order to decypher ed's work because you grasp what IS important and what isnt!

[Ernst]

i spent a lot of time RElearning things to put them into perspective.

I had exactly the same problem with Tesla's work. It is like you have a 'built-in circuit' that immediately maps what you read on today's science and that is what makes everything very confusing. I think it took me a more than 1 year to stop doing that and another few years to stop searching for solutions in today's science and find them in 100 years old science.
About at that point you will start to see the major flaws in today's science and you will be able to replace those with the solutions from the old days. After reaching that point things start falling into place and real progress is being made.

After university you have been fed with so much %##@ that you need a few years detox...

(haven't had time for Ed yet, but I will have a look as soon as I can)

Ernst.

[logos]

I had exactly the same problem with Tesla's work. It is like you have a 'built-in circuit' that immediately maps what you read on today's science and that is what makes everything very confusing. I think it took me a more than 1 year to stop doing that and another few years to stop searching for solutions in today's science and find them in 100 years old science.
About at that point you will start to see the major flaws in today's science and you will be able to replace those with the solutions from the old days. After reaching that point things start falling into place and real progress is being made.

After university you have been fed with so much %##@ that you need a few years detox...

(haven't had time for Ed yet, but I will have a look as soon as I can)

Ernst.

you are absolutly correct!

the second thing i did was stop listening to OTHER people's interpretations and summary's of old science and started reading the actual findings. there was SOOO much garbage available about ed;s work that i spent a good 3-4 months listening to what people were saying only to figure out recently that nobody really new what they were talking about. leylines, secret numbers 7129/6105195 and all that crap... literally spent endless nites following dead ends like these. i found ED's writings very hard to read but i had a one up because i can read "broken" english... i.e. english talked by immigrants (my parents were american immigrants :P

my research and work has no real conclusions. they are just logical deductions based on the apparatus and all the associated parts. i think that any REAL takers on ed's work will find it extremely helpful. in fact i know that some people managed to get the generator to work in part but they arent talking for 2 main reasons: fear and cashing in on the results. neither is productive to the world

there are rare exceptions that i WILL listen to people explain other's work and usually the exception is that the person actually produced results... i.e. they figured out the science. for example like EP Dollard.

[morpher44]

Joe Tate

There is this well known circuit now that uses germanium diodes, capacitors, and a connection to Earth Ground and a WIRE to generate power. Very easy and it works. It was created by Joe Tate in 1979.

Recently I purchased the book "22 Radio and Receiver Projects For the Evil Genius", by Tom Petruzzellis.

It was a Christmas present for myself. :-)

Anyway, in Chapter 17, I was thrilled to find that some experimenters have improved on Joe Tate's circuit and it is now on Steroids.

I think this classic circuit can be used for all sorts of stuff in terms of conversion from a single-wire AC source to DC power.

My only problem with Joe Tate's original circuit when I played around with is, is that I kept pushing it too far and BURNING UP my little diodes.
Great fun.

--morpher44

[boguslaw]

If energy around is static ,then there is no energy around; if it's dynamic then I bet it won't offend if we twist it a bit for our usage, right ?

[logos]

If energy around is static ,then there is no energy around; if it's dynamic then I bet it won't offend if we twist it a bit for our usage, right ?

think about it more logically. when we look out your window, the air between any 2 objects is void according to our sense of sight. but look DEEPER into it and of course there are molecules, atoms, etc... the deeper you go in the more that is actualy there! so nothing is TRULY static as EVERYTHING in nature constantly moves and never in straight lines.

Researching ED's work gives you a point of just such a state of matter which he calls " magnets" or "north and south pole magnets". and apparaently there is quite an abundance of them that CAN be harnessed! so you are right in your assumption boguslaw

[logos]

for people who know about RF

can somebody identify what is on top of the castle? is that an antenna?
http://www.code144.com/121126/rcc/IMG_0432.jpg

[logos]

In reply to your initial post question about generating electricity without magnets, have you studied electrostatic generators? Examine the Wimshurst machine. It uses electrostatic induction, or influence, and does not use friction to produce considerable voltage (but sadly only limited current). No magnets involved. Its much better than rubbing your hands together but I'm not sure it will ever be useful enough to move large stones for castle building.

Is there an online version of the book?

Thanks,
Charlie

an electrostatic generator might be something like what Ed created using the iron on top of the building! but it's purpose was not, (i think) to generate electricty, but magnetic current.

i found this pic (img0432) VERY recently on code144.com. what is that on top of the building? it looks like something out of Tesla's wireless setup! also there seems to be another antenna to the left of the castle too. and also the affedavit's about some kind of grid with wires elevated from the ground (which was enough to send the FBI to investigate Ed ) . also evidence of wires scattered around the grounds AND a lot of wire (looks like steel, not copper) in the workarea (edws).

pic img 0626 which is an older pic of the castle, you can still see what looks like an iron ring on the roof (IRON ABOVE HOME KEY).

[logos]

bump...

[/B]

can somebody identify what is on top of the castle? is that an antenna?
http://www.code144.com/121126/rcc/IMG_0432.jpg

is this a HAM radio type of antenna?
if it is, it explains a HELLUVA lot!!

[Rubberband]

Yes

can somebody identify what is on top of the castle? is that an antenna?
http://www.code144.com/121126/rcc/IMG_0432.jpg

Your answer is here at 10 minutes Coral castle - Nikkor 18-55mm lens and Nikon D5100 - YouTube just thought about edit