My patent refused...

[Ernst]

While testing with my first magnifying transmitter (partial) set up, we noticed an increase in energy in the system. This principle we tried to put into a patent which we consequently registered. The Dutch patent system registers any patent with the correct lay-out, but within 6 (or 9 month, I forgot) you need to make an extra payment to verify if your patent concerns something new and something that can be build.
We just got the result of this verification:
- German patent DE 102008029441 A1 describes a very similar principle, so what I describe is not considered new.
- I wrote that part of the output energy can be used to power the system. Their response to this: "That would make it a perpetuum mobile, and break the laws of thermodynamics, so it can not be build"


First....
The German patent does indeed describe the same principle but with a very complicated system and at wrong frequencies (Schumann). The explanation given in that patent is wrong and if you would build according to that description it will not work.
He probably noticed that later on, because he stopped to pay the annual patent fee and the patent's current status is "disposed".
Second...
A petrol engine uses part of the produced energy to generate electricity for the spark plug, so that must be a perpetuum mobile too, then! Impossible to build.

So much for the Dutch patent office.
Well, not that it bothers me in any way. The main reason to patent it was to make sure that no one else could patent it and that has been accomplished. The owner of the German patent can no longer file claims because he stopped to pay the annual fees.
So this part is free now.
But this is only a small detail, the second patent which is still being scrutinized will blow your mind (but first theirs). Details on that one will be released next year.
We're building the prototype so there will not be any "Impossible to build" comment.
The building (small tower) is done, I am working on grounding, spark gap and coil designs.
We will put up some pictures soon...


Ernst.

[Hrothgar]

Bummer

You've got to be tricky with the terminology. Even on the meg patent they claimed it used the magnets as fuel. Even though the process itself doesn't harm the magnet anymore than sitting on the shelf.

[boguslaw]

I thought,magnifying transmitter have been totally understood already,hmm.... Something missing still.The inertia you must use, that's sure. Use the force.

[wrtner]

What is the number of your application? What is it called? You will need an "inventive step" and "novelty".

[MasterBlaster]

I thought,magnifying transmitter have been totally understood already,hmm.... Something missing still.The inertia you must use, that's sure. Use the force.

Patent US1119732 - Apparatus for transmitting electrical energy. - Google Patents

[Ernst]

Ok, I'll explain. The German patent gives a completely wrong explanation, and also a rather complicated one, as is his apparatus. It is much simpler, and can be achieved much simpler.
First the two keys:
1891-05-20: Experiments with Alternate Currents of Very High Frequency and Their
Application to Methods of Artificial Illumination

First, we naturally inquire, What is electricity, and is there such a thing as electricity? In interpreting electric phenomena: we may speak of electricity or of an electric condition, state or effect. If we speak of electric effects we must distinguish two such effects, opposite in character and neutralizing each other, as observation shows that two such opposite effects exist. This is unavoidable, for in a medium of the properties of ether, we cannot possibly exert a strain, or produce a displacement or motion of any kind, without causing in the surrounding medium an equivalent and opposite effect. But if we speak of electricity, meaning a thing, we must, I think, abandon the idea of two electricities, as tie existence of two such things is highly improbable. For how can we imagine that there should be two things, equivalent in amount, alike in their properties, but of opposite character, both clinging to matter, both attracting and completely neutralizing each other? Such an assumption, though suggested by many phenomena, though most convenient for explaining them, has little to commend it. If there is such a thing as electricity, there can be only one such thing, and; excess and want of that one thin, possibly; but more probably its condition determines the positive and negative character. The old theory of Franklin, though falling short in some respects; is, from a certain point of view, after all, the most plausible one. Still, in spite of this, the theory of the two electricities is generally accepted, as it apparently explains electric phenomena in a more satisfactory manner. But a theory which better explains the facts is not necessarily true. Ingenious minds will invent theories to suit observation, and almost every independent thinker has his own views on the subject.

It is not with the, object of advancing an opinion; but with the desire of acquainting you better with some of the results, which I will describe, to show you the reasoning I have followed, the departures I have made—that I venture to express, in a few words, the views and convictions which have led me to these results.

I adhere to the idea that there is a thing which we have been in the habit of calling electricity. The question is, What is that thing? or, What, of all things, the existence of which we know, have we the best reason to call electricity? We know that it acts like an incompressible fluid; that there must be a constant quantity of it in nature; that it can be neither produced nor destroyed; and, what is more important, the electro-magnetic theory of light and all facts observed teach us that electric and ether phenomena are identical. The idea at once suggests itself, therefore, that electricity might be called ether. In fact, this view has in a certain sense been advanced by Dr. Lodge. His interesting work has been read by everyone and many have been convinced by his arguments. His great ability and the interesting nature of the subject, keep the reader spellbound; but when the impressions fade, one realizes that he has to deal only with ingenious explanations. I must confess, that I cannot believe in two electricities, much less in a doubly-constituted ether. The puzzling behaviour of the ether as a solid waves of light anti heat, and as a fluid to the motion of bodies through it, is certainly explained in the most natural and satisfactory manner by assuming it to be in motion, as Sir William Thomson has suggested; but regardless of this, there is nothing which would enable us to conclude with certainty that, while a fluid is not capable of transmitting transverse vibrations of a few hundred or thousand per second, it might not be capable of transmitting such vibrations when they range into hundreds of million millions per second. Nor can anyone prove that there are transverse ether waves emitted from an alternate current machine, giving a small number of alternations per second; to such slow disturbances, the ether, if at rest, may behave as a true fluid.

1905-01-07: The Transmission of Electrical Energy Without Wires as a Means for
Furthering Peace

But the fact that stationary waves are producible in the earth is of special and, in many ways, still greater significance in the intellectual development of humanity. Popularly explained, such a wave is a phenomenon generically akin to an echo—a result of reflection. It affords a positive and uncontrovertible experimental evidence that the electric current, after passing into the earth travels to the diametrically opposite region of the same and rebounding from there, returns to its point of departure with virtually undiminished force. The outgoing and returning currents clash and form nodes and loops similar to those observable on a vibrating cord. To traverse the entire distance of about twenty-five thousand miles, equal to the circumference of the globe, the current requires a certain time interval, which I have approximately ascertained. In yielding this knowledge, nature has revealed one of its most precious secrets, of inestimable consequence to man. So astounding are the facts in this connection, that it would seem as though the Creator, himself, had electrically designed this planet just for the purpose of enabling us to achieve wonders which, before my discovery, could not have been conceived by the wildest imagination. A full account of my discoveries and improvements will be given to the world in a special work which I am preparing. In so far, however, as they relate to industrial and commercial uses, they will be disclosed in patent specifications most carefully drawn.

Tesla does not at this time want to reveal what he has really found, what this most precious secret is. He therefore adds a bit of misleading information:

the entire distance of about twenty-five thousand miles, equal to the circumference of the globe

. Some people have fallen for this and have not found their way out (yet) .
In his later articles Tesla specifically explains that the impulse travels through the centre of the Earth, he then also describes how the effect of this impulse travels over the outside of the Earth with a varying velocity, because it is the spherical projection of the pulse through the centre of the Earth travelling at a fixed velocity.
This means that there is a true cause for electrical effects, as he described before "the equalisation of ether stresses". This runs through the centre of the Earth, causing charge movement in the outside layers of the Earth which again cause electrical and magnetic effects outside the Earth.

continued in next post...

[Ernst]

This has a very important consequence....
1900-06-00: The Problem of Increasing Human Energy - With Special References to the
Harnessing of the Sun's Energy.

Though we may never be able to comprehend human life, we know certainly that it is a movement, of whatever nature it be. The existence of movement unavoidably implies a body which is being moved and a force which is moving it. Hence, wherever there is life, there is a mass moved by a force. All mass possesses inertia, all force tends to persist.

The same text slightly edited:

Though we may never be able to comprehend electrical currents, we know certainly that it is a movement, of whatever nature it be. The existence of movement unavoidably implies a body which is being moved and a force which is moving it. Hence, wherever there is an electrical current, there is a mass moved by a force. All mass possesses inertia, all force tends to persist.

All mass possesses inertia, for that reason it takes energy to put it in motion which is released/converted when the motion is arrested.
But a force does not possess this inertia, so strictly speaking it does not take energy to put it in motion.

again:
1900-06-00: The Problem of Increasing Human Energy - With Special References to the
Harnessing of the Sun's Energy.

The ideal development of the war principle would ultimately lead to the transformation of the whole energy of war into purely potential, explosive energy, like that of an electrical condenser. In this form the war-energy could be maintained without effort; it would need to be much smaller in amount, while incomparably more effective.
---//---
The apparatus will be one of specifically great power, but only a few individuals will be required to operate it. This evolution will bring more and more into prominence a machine or mechanism with the fewest individuals as an element of warfare, and the absolutely unavoidable consequence of this will be the abandonment of large, clumsy, slowly moving, and unmanageable units. Greatest possible speed and maximum rate of energy-delivery by the war apparatus will be the main object.

Guess what that means.
The greatest/fastest change of potential will put the most electricity in motion. Like using a hammer instead of just pushing a nail into the wall.
This can be accomplished by a using a spark gap with highly charged caps of relatively great capacitance. This is used to create resonance in the Earth.

Next key:
Tesla views the Earth as a highly (negatively) charged sphere floating in space. What does such charge 'normally' do? It WANTS to escape. So if we create a standing wave IN the Earth (NOT in the surrounding atmosphere) we create 2 high voltage spots on the Earth's surface; one where our machine is located and one on the opposite side. Electric charges moving between them (wanting to escape) will form a 'cloud' slightly outside the Earth at these two high voltage points. This causes the air to be more conductive at those points which is a property that can be verified (I have verified this).
I am not sure but this is I think what Tesla tries to explain in his fountain patent. The rotation caused by the primary/secondary coils pulls up some of the Earth's electric charge.

Finally:
By creating a high voltage (high power) discharge, we "suck up" some of this escaped charges (see "pinch effect"). So the receiving terminal receives more charge than was released from the "sending" terminal. More charge at the same voltage allows for more current, so we have gained some energy here.

Well, for the sake of brevity I left out small details which you can surely add by yourself.
The effect can be seen in some of my video's, though the explanation that is given there is not 100% correct, nor complete. What is written here is, to the best of my knowledge, the correct explanation. (still not 100% complete though )

The German patent describes apparatus that may under the right circumstances create the same effect. But in a very complicated manner. And since his explanation is wrong he provides the wrong parameters to get it to work.

Enjoy!

Ernst.

[TheoriaApophasis]

But a force does not possess this inertia, so strictly speaking it does not take energy to put it in motion.

Ernst.

Incorrect

motion necessitates the discharge of inertia, All motion in impetus is DEcreasing, not increasing without the continuous application of force which is inertia in discharge.

Maybe you were incorrectly speaking of acceleration towards a gravitational voidance (falling towards the Earth, etc).

The force of that which is running away from inertia is equal to the speed of that which is returning to inertia. The speed of one is very great and its force very little. On the contrary the force of the other is very great and its speed very little.

High force, centrifugal = low inertia……………increasing inertia = LOW force. Force is expressed by empirical movement.


Increasing motion can only exist in a force of countervoidance, not in discharge, in which all motion is instant and a discharge of inertia and instantly decreasing.

Motion is discharge, acceleration is charge, a move to counterspace, there can be no acceleration without the discharge of inertia. All motion is a discharge expressed in force, which is the discharge of a modality of one of 4 expressions of inertia, or Ether modalities. Force is not inertia, rather its antithesis, magnetism, or a radial and or transverse Ether modality.

Only the LOSS of inertia = force, NOT inertia itself, which is NOT a force.

Force is a binary dynamic concept, weight is a static concept and is location and medium specific. Movement and motion are both IMPLICIT of “force” and denote a change or changing pressure gradient between 2 or more objects.



motion vs. acceleration vs. force vs. inertia

[Ernst]

Just noticed that the important part of the first quote was still missing.
It continues:
1891-05-20: Experiments with Alternate Currents of Very High Frequency and Their Application to Methods of Artificial Illumination

Returning to the subject, and bearing in mind that the existence of two electricities is, to say the least, highly improbable, we must remember, that we have no evidence of electricity, nor can we hope to get it, unless gross matter is present. Electricity, therefore, cannot be called ether in the broad sense of the term; but nothing would seem to stand in the way of calling electricity ether associated with matter, or bound other; or, in other words, that the so-called static charge of the molecule is ether associated in some way with the molecule. Looking at it in that light, we would be justified in saying, that electricity is concerned in all molecular actions.

Now, precisely what the ether surrounding the molecules is, wherein it differs from ether in general, can only be conjectured. It cannot differ in density, ether being incompressible; it must, therefore, be under some strain or is motion, and the latter is the most probable. To understand its functions, it would be necessary to have an exact idea of the physical construction of matter, of which, of course, we can only form a mental picture.

But of all the views on nature, the one which assumes one matter and one force, and a perfect uniformity throughout, is the most scientific and most likely to be true. An infinitesimal world, with the molecules and their atoms spinning and moving in orbits, in much the same manner as celestial bodies, carrying with them and probably spinning with them ether, or in other words; carrying with them static charges, seems to my mind the most probable view, and one which, in a plausible manner, accounts for most of the phenomena observed. The spinning of the molecules and their ether sets up the ether tensions or electrostatic strains; the equalization of ether tensions sets up ether motions or electric currents, and the orbital movements produce the effects of electro and permanent magnetism.

About fifteen, years ago, Prof. Rowland demonstrated a most interesting and important fact; namely, that a static charge carried around produces the effects of an electric current. Leaving out of consideration the precise nature of the mechanism, which produces the attraction and repulsion of currents, and conceiving the electrostatically charged molecules in motion, this experimental fact gives us a fair idea of magnetism. We can conceive lines or tubes of force which physically exist, being formed of rows of directed moving molecules; we can see that these lines must be closed, that they must tend to shorten and expand, etc. It likewise explains in a reasonable way, the most puzzling phenomenon of all, permanent magnetism, and, in general, has all the beauties of the Ampere theory without possessing the vital defect of the same, namely, the assumption of molecular currents. Without enlarging further upon the subject, I would say, that I look upon all electrostatic, current and magnetic phenomena as being due to electrostatic molecular forces.

The bold part is the most relevant in this.
Another quite relevant quote I should add:
1900-06-00: The Problem of Increasing Human Energy - With Special References to the Harnessing of the Sun's Energy.

But in adding new mass to the old, three cases again present themselves. Either the mass added is of the same velocity as the old, or it is of a smaller or of a higher velocity. To gain an idea of the relative importance of these cases, imagine a train composed of, say, one hundred locomotives running on a track, and suppose that, to increase the energy of the moving mass, four more locomotives are added to the train. If these four move at the same velocity at which the train is going, the total energy will be increased four per cent.; if they are moving at only one half of that velocity, the increase will amount to only one per cent.; if they are moving at twice that velocity, the increase of energy will be sixteen per cent. This simple illustration shows that it is of greatest importance to add mass of a higher velocity. Stated more to the point, if, for example, the children be of the same degree of enlightenment as the parents,—that is, mass of the "same velocity,"—the energy will simply increase proportionately to the number added. If they are less intelligent or advanced, or mass of "smaller velocity," there will be a very slight gain in the energy; but if they are further advanced, or mass of "higher velocity," then the new generation will add very considerably to the sum total of human energy. any addition of mass of "smaller velocity," beyond that indispensable amount required by the law expressed in the proverb, "Mens sana in corpore sano," should be strenuously opposed. For instance, the mere development of muscle, as aimed at in some of our colleges, I consider equivalent to adding mass of "smaller velocity," and I would not commend it, although my views were different when I was a student myself. Moderate exercise, insuring the right balance between mind and body, and the highest efficiency of performance, is, of course, a prime requirement. The above example shows that the most important result to be attained is the education, or the increase of the "velocity," of the mass newly added.

Adding mass refers to adding charge. Velocity refers to voltage. The charge that you add in this scheme comes from a 2 billion volt negative Earth. This puts a maximum on the system, however practical issues will dictate a much lower maximum.
In his literal case, the energy is given by mv²/2, in the edited/decoded version the energy is given by CV²/2, C being the capacitance of the larger top load (referring to the Rare Notes diagrams). So you see that the increase in energy increases with the square of the operating voltage. For that reason an as high as possible working voltage is desired. For me, the effects become visible at roughly 520KV, but when you double the voltage the energy increase will quadruple. So while below the 1 MV the increase may be small, at 20 MV the increase may be quite significant.

Well, so much for now.

Ernst.

[boguslaw]

Ernst

Thank You. I completely agree with you, except maybe ...leave fountain patent alone, I don't see it's related here.
The other problem is the practicality of such big voltages.I would say, don't mess with weather, or may somebody blame you for the next tornado

[aljhoa]

Incorrect

motion necessitates the discharge of inertia, All motion in impetus is DEcreasing, not increasing without the continuous application of force which is inertia in discharge.

Maybe you were incorrectly speaking of acceleration towards a gravitational voidance (falling towards the Earth, etc).

The force of that which is running away from inertia is equal to the speed of that which is returning to inertia. The speed of one is very great and its force very little. On the contrary the force of the other is very great and its speed very little.

High force, centrifugal = low inertia……………increasing inertia = LOW force. Force is expressed by empirical movement.


Increasing motion can only exist in a force of countervoidance, not in discharge, in which all motion is instant and a discharge of inertia and instantly decreasing.

Motion is discharge, acceleration is charge, a move to counterspace, there can be no acceleration without the discharge of inertia. All motion is a discharge expressed in force, which is the discharge of a modality of one of 4 expressions of inertia, or Ether modalities. Force is not inertia, rather its antithesis, magnetism, or a radial and or transverse Ether modality.

Only the LOSS of inertia = force, NOT inertia itself, which is NOT a force.

Force is a binary dynamic concept, weight is a static concept and is location and medium specific. Movement and motion are both IMPLICIT of “force” and denote a change or changing pressure gradient between 2 or more objects.



motion vs. acceleration vs. force vs. inertia

Proper angle gyro in a butt "stops" recoil.

Al

[mikrovolt]

I am sorry Ernst.
A lot of good people getting screwed.
Some companies tried 3 times to obtain patent rights and almost 17 years later
the too big to fail are laughing.

It is a shame everyone else is too small to succeed.

[Ernst]

Just wait and see, Microvolt.
I have got another one in my sleeve...

The promised pictures are still not officially online, but here is a preview.
My micro Wardenclyffe which will operate on 2 MV (or there about).



Ernst.

[boguslaw]

Just wait and see, Microvolt.
I have got another one in my sleeve...

The promised pictures are still not officially online, but here is a preview.
My micro Wardenclyffe which will operate on 2 MV (or there about).



Ernst.

Ernst
Wow ! That's incredibly big device ! How did you managed to get support from the people ? I'm trying trying and even my family is ignoring me and think only about theirs prosaic earthbounds needs and took so much of my time to accomplish them, to support to help... yet give no time for my ideas..."blind, faint-hearted, doubting world!"

[aljhoa]

Just wait and see, Microvolt.
I have got another one in my sleeve...

The Invention Secrecy Act of 1951 (Pub.L. 82–256, 66 Stat. 3, enacted February 1, 1952, codified at 35 U.S.C. §§ 181–188) is a body of United States federal law designed to prevent disclosure of new inventions and technologies that, in the opinion of selected federal agencies, present a possible threat to the national security of the United States.

The U.S. government has long sought to control the release of new technologies that might threaten the national defense and economic stability of the country. During World War I, Congress authorized the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to classify certain defense-related patents. This initial effort lasted only for the duration of that war but was reimposed in October 1941 in anticipation of the U.S. entry into World War II. Patent secrecy orders were initially intended to remain effective for two years, beginning on July 1, 1940, but were later extended for the duration of the war.
Invention Secrecy Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Government Secrecy Orders on Patents Have Stifled More Than 5,000 Inventions | WIRED


Al