Crème de la crème (perhaps)

[erfinder]

yeah – I’ve got the plan barbosi that’s why Its my thread , thanks for your wishes of good luck although I doubt very sincere.
Ren you must have hard drive space to waste. I have seen that contraption of erfinders and its cousins invade different threads across this forum and others . Like a raddled old pro forced to ply for trade in the provinces. I have yet to see a schematic of the thing never mind the constructional details I have no Idea of what COP>1 figures are claimed for it . Or even what Its ambition is. It usually arrives uninvited in the middle of a thread to which it has no relation accompanied by the patter ..Ahhh at last I am amongst like minds who can treat my work with the gravitas it so richly deserves . Well of course that doesn't last to long. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell you an expert on waveforms and sound mixing who doesn’t know an overtone from a harmonic is going to know the square root of F all about resonant make up never mind conjecture on stochastic resonant composition does it ?
All that aside Its nothing what so ever to do with the thread topic is it ? 'Invaluable information'
what for ? without full disclosure, drawings , plans and schematics its just another load of 'old tat'
If it is as you seem to think 'Invaluable' well erfinder had best open a thread dedicated to the things. quickly for the sake of humanity!
I suggests he starts it with a full and detailed description. Its an open forum for the open discussion and exchange of information concepts Idea's and experiences .
I'm sure the invaluable contraptions will receive all the attention they merit, … Oh be still my beating heart … I eagerly await with baited breath ! In the mean time its just more meaningless flotsam and jetsam I certainly don’t want it on my thread neither do I want folks who are gullible enough to be side tracked by it for more than a post or two .. (which is its usual life span on all the other threads and forums)
If you don't like that well 'sling your hook' goodbye and a safe journey to you.!

Is all that negativity you're throwing in my direction really necessary? Screw it man, in your "opinion" to which you are entitled, I'm misled, I have no problem with you having an opinion.

Now you are disturbing the flow...get off the damn high horse, and get on with the show, teach me something.


Regards

[Bob Smith]

Duncan
I started asking people to look into the relationship between resonance and cold electricity back in 2007-08 after seeing this effect happen with someone else's circuit and a lead acid battery. I've come to understand better the principles of what I was seeking thru the 3BGS thread and my own research. Some of your postings have confirmed the understanding I've arrived at. I found Erfinder's work clarified it even further and provided an avenue for further understanding elements common to the resonant battery and other systems. I didn't mean to derail your thread, and I'm sorry you don't see the relevance of Erfinder's findings to the thread as I did. I would hope that within the scope of a thread, we would all be free to share as much as we see fit for reasons that only we ourselves know best. For this reason, each individual's degrees of disclosure and personal reasons for disclosing what they see fit to disclose must be respected. None of us has stood in the other's shoes.
Respectfully,
Bob

[dR-Green]

Undertones can be harmonic, too.

[Duncan]

Undertones can be harmonic, too.

Overtones !! undertones are a hypothetical component of a single side band carrierI haven't considered in any way .
Study quartz transmitter oscillators you'll quickly discover they are tuned in one of two ways .. either to a harmonic progression or to an overtone progression . In practice one of these is selected and multiplied many times . I worked for example on one set where the 15th overtone was selected in the MHz range and that multiplied up into the GHz range .that then is millions and millions of times an overtone is not a harmonic. Ergo harmonics are never overtones . (at infinity perhaps) certainly
Not when counting and not in nature, If you can't grasp this you will never begin to understand transformation
PS here's a fair starting point http://www.northcountryradio.com/PDFs/070302007.pdf

here's an overtone progression .. 3rd 9th 15th 21st 27th 33rd 39th
so you tell me when those odds (overtones) .... ever ever become evens (harmonics) - keep in mind this is real progressions , in the real world .. not the smoke in text books and maths & science . The linear wave progressions are smothered and missing there. you have to dig for the truth

[Duncan]

Duncan
I started asking people to look into the relationship between resonance and cold electricity back in 2007-08 after seeing this effect happen with someone else's circuit and a lead acid battery. I've come to understand better the principles of what I was seeking thru the 3BGS thread and my own research. Some of your postings have confirmed the understanding I've arrived at. I found Erfinder's work clarified it even further and provided an avenue for further understanding elements common to the resonant battery and other systems. I didn't mean to derail your thread, and I'm sorry you don't see the relevance of Erfinder's findings to the thread as I did. I would hope that within the scope of a thread, we would all be free to share as much as we see fit for reasons that only we ourselves know best. For this reason, each individual's degrees of disclosure and personal reasons for disclosing what they see fit to disclose must be respected. None of us has stood in the other's shoes.
Respectfully,
Bob

perhaps It might Bob ... please link me to the thread where all the information on erfinders contraptions is, the one where 'his work' regarding whatever he is doing and how or why is explained and he isn't dancing with Ren concerning 'invaluable information' you seem to have the advantage over me at the moment in that regard I tried to see what possible connection these things could possibly have and of course searched the forum for information . and particularly erfinder's thread I found this .. you'll learn loads .. enjoy

http://www.energeticforum.com/john-b...tml#post130833

PS Do you think UFO has it right ... nothing to do with shoes , all to do with noise ,opposition noise!

.

[dR-Green]

Overtones !! undertones are a hypothetical component of a single side band carrierI haven't considered in any way .
Study quartz transmitter oscillators you'll quickly discover they are tuned in one of two ways .. either to a harmonic progression or to an overtone progression . In practice one of these is selected and multiplied many times . I worked for example on one set where the 15th overtone was selected in the MHz range and that multiplied up into the GHz range .that then is millions and millions of times an overtone is not a harmonic. Ergo harmonics are never overtones . (at infinity perhaps) certainly
Not when counting and not in nature, If you can't grasp this you will never begin to understand transformation
PS here's a fair starting point http://www.northcountryradio.com/PDFs/070302007.pdf

here's an overtone progression .. 3rd 9th 15th 21st 27th 33rd 39th
so you tell me when those odds (overtones) .... ever ever become evens (harmonics) - keep in mind this is real progressions , in the real world .. not the smoke in text books and maths & science . The linear wave progressions are smothered and missing there. you have to dig for the truth

An overtone is any frequency higher than the fundamental frequency of a sound. Using the model of Fourier analysis, the fundamental and the overtones together are called partials. Harmonics, or more precisely, harmonic partials, are partials whose frequencies are integer multiples of the fundamental (including the fundamental which is 1 times itself). These overlapping terms are variously used when discussing the acoustic behavior of musical instruments.[1] (See etymology below.) The model of Fourier analysis provides for the inclusion of inharmonic partials, which are partials whose frequencies are not whole number ratios of the fundamental (such as 1.1 or 2.14179).

When a resonant system such as a blown pipe or plucked string is excited, a number of overtones may be produced along with the fundamental tone. In simple cases, such as for most musical instruments, the frequencies of these tones are the same as (or close to) the harmonics. Examples of exceptions include the circular drum, – a timpani whose first overtone is about 1.6 times its fundamental resonance frequency.,[2] gongs and cymbals, and brass instruments.

Musical usage term

An overtone is a partial (a "partial wave" or "constituent frequency") that can be either a harmonic partial (a harmonic) other than the fundamental, or an inharmonic partial. A harmonic frequency is an integer multiple of the fundamental frequency. An inharmonic frequency is a non-integer multiple of a fundamental frequency.

Some musical instruments produce overtones that are slightly sharper or flatter than true harmonics. The sharpness or flatness of their overtones is one of the elements that contributes to their unique sound. This also has the effect of making their waveforms not perfectly periodic.

Overtone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In music, the undertone series is a sequence of notes that results from inverting the intervals of the overtone series. While overtones naturally occur with the physical production of music on instruments, undertones must be produced in unusual ways. The overtone series being based on harmonic division, the undertone series is based on arithmetic division.

Methods for producing an undertone series

The overtone series can be produced physically in two ways—either by overblowing a wind instrument, or by dividing a monochord string. If a monochord string is lightly damped at the halfway point, then at 1/3, then 1/4, 1/5, etc., then the string will produce the overtone series, which includes the major triad. If instead, the length of the string is doubled in the opposite ratios, the undertones series is produced. Similarly, on a wind instrument, if the holes are equally spaced, each successive hole covered will produce the next note in the undertone series.

Undertone series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In music and dynamics, subharmonic or undertone frequencies are frequencies below the main frequency of a signal.

Subharmonic frequencies are frequencies below the fundamental frequency of an oscillator in a ratio of 1/n, with n a positive integer number. For example, if the fundamental frequency of an oscillator is 440 Hz, sub-harmonics include 220 Hz (1/2) and 110 Hz (1/4). Thus, they are a mirror image of the harmonic series, the undertone series.

Subharmonics can be produced by signal amplification through loudspeakers. They are naturally produced by bells, giving them their distinct sound.

Subharmonic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Harmonics can be overtones or undertones. Overtones or undertones don't have to be harmonic, but they can be.

[Duncan]

Overtone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Undertone series - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Subharmonic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Harmonics can be overtones or undertones. Overtones or undertones don't have to be harmonic, but they can be.

This isn't music this is the real world natures tempo !! music is an artificial scale put in place by Newton in the 1600s get it out of your head banish it , It is an intentional confusion. If there were a natures instrument each octave would require its own keyboard , just get it firmly in your head .. an overtone is never a harmonic

The Science of Music by Eric Dollard (3 of 12) - YouTube

If you can't grasp that I'm afraid your going nowhere with this . as its key to transformation

[Duncan]

The scale is irrelevant. A musical keyboard merely produces pre-determined frequencies at a given physical location along the keyboard. The same scale can be produced with a simple signal generator through manually setting it to produce a particular frequency, as well as any other frequency in between those that are programmed into a keyboard. Musicians have been using samplers for a few decades already. By the miracle of this technology one may assign whatever frequency they wish to whatever "key" they choose on a keyboard thus producing their own scale. Simple.

Frequencies are either harmonic relative to each other, or they are not. One frequency may be above or below any given frequency, and then it can be referred to as either an overtone or an undertone respectively, and this overtone or undertone may or may not be harmonic with the fundamental frequency. If you can't, or refuse to, learn from one thing because you think it is "music" and therefore irrelevant to the rest of reality then I'm afraid it is you who is going nowhere with it. So-called "audio frequency" multiplied becomes "radio frequency". Where is the difference, other than the fact your ears no longer respond to it?

If you can't comprehend that in electronics (in fact in the natural world) their are overtone and harmonic strings and they are never one you simply will never grasp this concept.

I have now shown you the case with Bells

and with high frequency quartz oscillators

and with High tension power lines

these are all natural progressions in time and space it is of course another dimension in practice ... (just as radio is to electricity) to view it in a musical sense is simply a meaningless nonsense not only is the scale corrupted your considering a different dimension -- It is almost akin to asking what the non frequency of a note is .. it can't be done . The wave shapes of overtones (the real ones) are also distinct .... you need to radically alter your view when counting harmonics are never overtones

[ren]

.... Ren concerning 'invaluable information'


.

I dont know why you keep phrasing it like that, Its not like you are quoting me. Must be hard reading all the way through my two sentence post and accurately quote me at the end.

For the record, I believe Erfinder has EXCEPTIONAL information, on real, tested devices he has built and studied extensively. In my opinion he has no desire to prove a device as being "COP whatever" merely a desire to truly understand the mechanisms at play. There is only so much one can do without testing ones theories on the bench, so the "build" is inevitable at this stage. But do not mistake the build/s as the end product. You see nothing special or valuable about the information he has presented, so he removed the information. Im just glad I got a chance to save it, because I felt it was inspirational and exceptional.

So since this is your thread and your theories, perhaps you could develop a simple idea to test them? Some basic configuration that would allow others to test and comprehend what you are attempting to convey.

No offense, but when I read alot of your posts I cant quite figure out if you are trying to convince me or yourself of what you say. I know I have at times resorted to writing out my ideas in an attempt to clarify them for easier presentation to others. Language can be THE biggest hurdle sometimes.

A little bit of formatting would go along way in your posts too. Its hard to effectively absorb when there is a lack of paragraphs, full stops etc.

Perhaps you were upset about my comments before, I do hope you realise that none of them were directed at you at all. Yet you have kicked up a couple of times since, almost like you are harboring some jealousy that I find Erfinders work and words inspirational. I dont want to upset anyone further or interrupt your thread any more, just know that I give credit where I think credit is due.

Hope you can come up with some clarity on what you want to achieve here, along with perhaps a way to test your understanding/theory. I might even build it if it inspires me.

Regards

[Duncan]

I'm not viewing it in a purely musical sense, you are, which is why you don't get it. You are too determined to disagree. As I said, so-called "audio frequency" simply refers to a convenient definition for a group of frequencies given the frequency range of human hearing. The fundamental rules and laws are universally applicable. You like to dismiss conventional things, so dismiss the ridiculous idea that the made up human definition must make things fundamentally different when in fact they are exactly the same thing.

An AC electrical system works at 50-60 cycles per second - how come you can hear a transformer working? Why is it producing a definite pitch, a musical note you might say, if it's supposed to be an electrical system, and electricity has no relevance whatsoever to audio or music? Did you forget that relatively modern audio systems and musical instruments are also electrical or electronic? Are you aware of the principal on which they work? Connect your signal generator to a regular electrical transformer and drive it at a frequency of 50 CPS and measure how it works. Now connect the signal generator to a speaker. What happens? Technological alchemy?

I am not determined to dis agree I am trying to correct your perception because its important. In a desperate attempt to get you to grasp this first think of your ear and how it works .. Its a drum it has to be hit by an impulse. That is a linear wave . Now consider a bell .. it is a driven device also driven by an impulse . .. you clout it! The bell resonates depending on its physical size and composition . Here is the transform then at resonance where you know it must be … an impulse wave .. you hit the bell with a clapper , then a conversion to a harmonic resonant series which in turn must be converted to impulse waves in order for you to hear them, the only frequency or wave you would be aware of musically is the primary resonant frequency and a few harmonics
the linear impulse wave you know must be there you are oblivious to its shape or frequency,
now do you start to see how worthless musical conceptions are … they hardly relate at all,
the velocity relates by pi/2 but that's about all

[erfinder]

perhaps It might Bob ... please link me to the thread where all the information on erfinders contraptions is, the one where 'his work' regarding whatever he is doing and how or why is explained and he isn't dancing with Ren concerning 'invaluable information' you seem to have the advantage over me at the moment in that regard I tried to see what possible connection these things could possibly have and of course searched the forum for information . and particularly erfinder's thread I found this .. you'll learn loads .. enjoy

http://www.energeticforum.com/john-b...tml#post130833

PS Do you think UFO has it right ... nothing to do with shoes , all to do with noise ,opposition noise!

.

Man stop..you're making me blush, all this attention you are throwing my way.

Love and light Duncan, Love in light.


Regards

[Duncan]

I dont know why you keep phrasing it like that, Its not like you are quoting me. Must be hard reading all the way through my two sentence post and accurately quote me at the end.

For the record, I believe Erfinder has EXCEPTIONAL information, on real, tested devices he has built and studied extensively. In my opinion he has no desire to prove a device as being "COP whatever" merely a desire to truly understand the mechanisms at play. There is only so much one can do without testing ones theories on the bench, so the "build" is inevitable at this stage. But do not mistake the build/s as the end product. You see nothing special or valuable about the information he has presented, so he removed the information. Im just glad I got a chance to save it, because I felt it was inspirational and exceptional.

So since this is your thread and your theories, perhaps you could develop a simple idea to test them? Some basic configuration that would allow others to test and comprehend what you are attempting to convey.

No offense, but when I read alot of your posts I cant quite figure out if you are trying to convince me or yourself of what you say. I know I have at times resorted to writing out my ideas in an attempt to clarify them for easier presentation to others. Language can be THE biggest hurdle sometimes.

A little bit of formatting would go along way in your posts too. Its hard to effectively absorb when there is a lack of paragraphs, full stops etc.

Perhaps you were upset about my comments before, I do hope you realise that none of them were directed at you at all. Yet you have kicked up a couple of times since, almost like you are harboring some jealousy that I find Erfinders work and words inspirational. I dont want to upset anyone further or interrupt your thread any more, just know that I give credit where I think credit is due.

Hope you can come up with some clarity on what you want to achieve here, along with perhaps a way to test your understanding/theory. I might even build it if it inspires me.

Regards

You may believe what you like. At this point in time I tend to agree with UFO .. you and erfinder are noise nothing more or less, not only noise but in erfinders case noise that doesn't know electrical overtone wave constructs .
Dumb cop .. and dumber cop. ? If the guys got exceptional information .. then share it . If he isn’t going to do that he can sling his hook off my thread anyway. Its an open forum for the sharing of information! And I'm not erfinders unpaid private tutor so teach me something indeed!
I am of course heartbroken that you struggle with my punctuation , I don't much like struggling through your fawning drivel regarding the exceptional erfinder either. So lets not suffer any more mutual pain . Why don't you and erfinder go and open a thread on mutual admiration and exceptional contraptions . I'm sure it will be hugely attended. I might come and inject some revenge noise myself.

[Duncan]

I'm talking about audio systems and frequencies, harmonics and such that can become audible insofar as the analogy/description is applied to music or the audio frequency range, not sound in air. The waveform produced by a synthesizer doesn't become "sound" until the signal is put through a speaker. The speaker only converts the waveform from an electrical signal into sound in air. Everything is in the waveform.

No I don't see how worthless musical conceptions are. One may train themselves to be able to identify basic waveforms and frequencies. Even complex chords and harmonics and melodies that have been heard may be reproduced at will, a chord can be analysed quite easily and broken down into its basic fundamental and harmonic components and instantly reproduced by another musician. But I don't need to be aware of the waveform that's being played to be able to hear the music. The sound IS. Remove any single component no matter how seemingly insignificant, and it becomes another sound. This is the essence of subtractive synthesis.

Subtractive synthesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voltage controlled oscillators, filters, frequency response... It's starting to sound like a radio system

Well of course it is .. as electricity is to Radio .. so magnetic current is to wireless .. Teslas wireless .. the one thats buried with the linear wave thats buried .. that I'm trying to get you to see .... and I think you start
Radio's = transverse wave Wireless = logtitudanal wave

[Duncan]

Oh, you're one of "them". I have been through this with someone before, they were trying to be awkward with the use of the term "radio". I use it broadly, not specific to any particular method or a person's technology. When I say "radio" I mean "radio frequencies", and the devices and methods that are associated with it. In the same way when I say "audio" I am referring to audio frequencies and associated technology and techniques, NOT to rap music as opposed to classical music, for example.

A radio frequency oscillator or amplifier connected to an antenna will radiate the signal. The exact same oscillator or amplifier connected to a TMT will do what Tesla said. In this way the word "radio" is applicable to it all, there is no difference in the radio frequency equipment that is powering it all.

Also, I would guess that you must already know this but your posts over the last couple of pages have made me wonder whether you do, Tesla's wireless uses the earth as the transmission medium, not the air.

your determined efforts to remain an obtuse oaf also start to convince me you are simply more Intimidation . And not very bright intimidation at that .
neither the transverse Hertzian waves of radio (of which you seem to have a very tentative grasp) Nor the linear Impulse waves of the Tesla system of which you are blissfully ignorant and determined to remain so, propagate exclusively by ground or heaviside layer, rather a proportion of each .
Certainly the Radio systems tends to favour heaviside layer propagation whilst the very much more concentrated impulse wave with a much faster velocity of 292000 miles /sec tends to favour ground propagation. .
Even so frequency (or repetition rate in the case of wireless) still plays a large part.
so Even if the feeble Radio system is operated at low frequency the majority of its propagation is by ground wave.
I pointed out at the opening post of this thread, It is part and parcel of other work in progress and at least a working knowledge of radio systems would be beneficial whilst you seem to know what a radio might be and at a push, with a little help from a carer might be able to switch one on. you certainly have no grasp at all of radio propagation methods. As for Wireless two short planks comes to mind. …

Here for the enjoyment enjoyment of others however is a work describing the nature of longitudinal transmission and its waves.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...nsYDc2dOJtn6FA

Redirect Notice of Wireless Power by Eric Dollard_OCR.pdf&ei=LwrSUoS8CMOshQfp7IAQ&usg=AFQjCN HHSGEHeIGTTudLHxaq1yuMij7oqw&sig2=DN6jF7Q9nsYDc2dO Jtn6FA

This is one of those machines although of course they have all by enlarge been intentionally destroyed by tptb (all trace of the use of the longitudinal wave being the intention ). The teeth used to originally provide impulse's can be seen also the scale of the ground workings can be seen by request .
.
Grimeton Radio Station - My Alexanderson Day visit on July 3 2011 - YouTube

Here also is a series of demonstrations regarding the use of the longitudinal wave and its propagation and wave shape (6 in all) you will see quite clearly it is an impulse repetition nothing to do with harmonics what so ever .

Part 1 of 6: Eric Dollard Tesla Longitudinal wave Energy SBARC Ham Radio with Chris Carson - YouTube

you will see on video 3 the SWR ratio required for longitudinal propagation is infinity , .. The impulse square wave! As a transform of Trigonometric functions will tell you .
Without at least some very basic radio theory. I don't think I can progress you at all drgreen .
I now propose to ignore your worthless prattle. Its obviously confused .
Be all means return when you have learnt some basic well … radio theory really , never mind wireless I also start to think you are 'one of them' and I certainly don't mean some one who knows what a wireless system is!
I did have you in the ' stupid but savable ' category I now think your just totally beyond the pail.

[Duncan]

A little bit of practical work for you to try … or just consider if. you like .
Power in DC circuits = VI that's fair enough isn't It?
In AC circuits of course that alters power becomes VI cos θ ….θ being the angle between current and voltage
.
When current and voltage are 90 degrees out of phase what is the power

Obviously if θ is 90 deg the cos of 90 deg is zero and no power will be consumed . In practice just throwing any capacitor in that circuit will not result in perfect resonance never the less .. pretty close and by adjusting the size of that capacitor you can get much closer anyway .
The main current component after the capacitor is referred to as Magnetic current and the power component volts x magnetic current is known as 'the watt less component'
for obvious reasons the dogma, text books and science say it can do no work ! John Bedini .Edward Leedskalnin , Moray and many others say otherwise . I agree !
Magnetic current is actually freely available it is a natural product of the ground , some call it telluric current. It enters the grid system via the neutral conductor which in turn is bonded to ground.
Regardless of how it may enter the system the books and theory say its basically impossible to do anything useful with it. So It would be impossible to charge a battery with this circuit . That I have scribbled on the back of this envelope wouldn't it ?



do you agree with the books .. or me ?
I suggest not only will that battery charge the nearer to resonance you can get …. the faster and better it will charge.
Try it and watch you house meter . But first see if the impossible can happen .. and magnetic current (VARs) can charge a battery at all. If it does .. if it does we'll think about making it better! There are people using this very technique to pump power back onto the grid and the power companies end up paying them!Its not what you really want though is it? Surly you want rid of the grid altogether ?
Still try it and see what your findings are, this is electrostatic exchange resonance is bringing magnetic current into being… This is a crude example but it'll show you the way of the thing .. cheaply and quickly .