Aetheric stream/Radiant Energy extraction; Solid State vs analog technology

[amigo]

Hi all,

I have been reading Gerry Vassilatos's book Secrets of Cold War Technology regarding Tesla's experiments into Aether streams and Radiant Energy.

If Gerry's research is correct, Tesla achieved pure Aether streams using magnetic arc disrupter where electrons were blow away by strong magnetic field leaving pure aetheric steam flowing forward.

So if that is correct, then are we even getting any closer, or at all, to extracting RE from aether flows through our Solid State circuits or not? How exactly are Solid State circuits achieving what analog Tesla ones did?

The more I read the more I get a picture that Back EMF that's being siphoned from the coil kicks has nothing to do with RE or Aetheric streams. Yes, some will say that capacitor (if in the circuit) is used to convert the aetheric energy to electron current but I see no real evidence of aetheric flow, based on characteristics Tesla described regarding gaseous flow of siler-white streamers on the surface of conductors he was associating with pure aether streams.

Further more, use of metals (copper conductors) in presence of aetheric streams could induce creation of electron currents which would impede the whole process.

To me this whole business of Back EMF seems more and more about recovering electron currents, normally suppressed or filtered and directing them into batteries, than actual extraction of Radiant Energy from Aetheric streams.

I know that people have done experimental runs that might prove otherwise but those were computed on charge/discharge principles. What about the characteristic gaseous flow associated with Aether that's obviously missing - shouldn't it be visible as an indication of presence of Aether flow?

I'm wondering if the rest of you have thought about this in detail and what you think about the whole subject...

[CitizenDC]

Hi all,

I have been reading Gerry Vassilatos's book Secrets of Cold War Technology regarding Tesla's experiments into Aether streams and Radiant Energy.

If Gerry's research is correct, Tesla achieved pure Aether streams using magnetic arc disrupter where electrons were blow away by strong magnetic field leaving pure aetheric steam flowing forward.

So if that is correct, then are we even getting any closer, or at all, to extracting RE from aether flows through our Solid State circuits or not? How exactly are Solid State circuits achieving what analog Tesla ones did?

The more I read the more I get a picture that Back EMF that's being siphoned from the coil kicks has nothing to do with RE or Aetheric streams. Yes, some will say that capacitor (if in the circuit) is used to convert the aetheric energy to electron current but I see no real evidence of aetheric flow, based on characteristics Tesla described regarding gaseous flow of siler-white streamers on the surface of conductors he was associating with pure aether streams.

Further more, use of metals (copper conductors) in presence of aetheric streams could induce creation of electron currents which would impede the whole process.

To me this whole business of Back EMF seems more and more about recovering electron currents, normally suppressed or filtered and directing them into batteries, than actual extraction of Radiant Energy from Aetheric streams.

I know that people have done experimental runs that might prove otherwise but those were computed on charge/discharge principles. What about the characteristic gaseous flow associated with Aether that's obviously missing - shouldn't it be visible as an indication of presence of Aether flow?

I'm wondering if the rest of you have thought about this in detail and what you think about the whole subject...

>> I'm wondering if the rest of you have thought about this in detail and what you
>> think about the whole subject...

Hi amigo,

I think we can do better in terms of experimenting than what we are currently doing if we had a better understanding of the nature of vacuum/radiant/ether energy.
Many times I see people mention that their experiment is producing radiant energy or its extracting energy from the Ether or this or that. I read it and go Well now.. I dont have knowledge to challenge what this guy or gal is saying right now.
In my experience, experimenters or inventors rarely produce a theory, maybe because they fear ridicule or they are unsure. To me, this is counter productive. We learn by making mistakes, by taking a point of view, debating it, and by debating and challenging learning more about the subject.

If folks would say "Guys, I dont know whats happening here, but this is my take based on ony points a, b and c, that this is X type energy flowing in here based on what we know about energy x."
This would open the door to discussion and allowing folks to debate this to distill the true effect ocurring and over time to establish a solid foundation for all this free energy lingo that is being used.
When all of us are on the same page, there will be less confusion, more clarity and quicker advancements will naturally be made.

cheers

[darkwizard]

Tesla: "Whenever I received the effects of a transmitter, one of the simplest ways [to detect the wireless transmissions] was to apply a magnetic field to currents generated in a conductor, and when I did so, the low frequency gave audible notes."

apply a magnetic field to currents generated in a conductor

Scalar wave , radiant energy generation.

You must read Tom Bearden

[Sephiroth]

To me this whole business of Back EMF seems more and more about recovering electron currents, normally suppressed or filtered and directing them into batteries, than actual extraction of Radiant Energy from Aetheric streams.

BURN THE HERETIC!!!! lol... just kidding!

I don't yet fully understand these systems so can't really comment in detail, but from my own observations I don't think the standard form of "back emf" being used to directly charge batteries or caps is what radiant/aetheric energy is. But it has potential.

As you said the problem is the current flow. Looking at the scope shots I see a sharp (but rather short) spike followed by a sloped step and when I see this I see the "electron current" flowing. Though once you take the batteyr/cap being charged away you get the huge and incredibly brief spikes. I believe this is more similar to what tesla was refering to. Short, sharp pulses of high voltage.

The problem is as soon as we connect a load the spikes disappear. This is due to the dynamic nature of the "collapsing magnetic field". That isn't a bad thing since it is ideal for charging batteries, but I am still experimenting with ways to preserve the spikes while using them to see what the difference in behavior is.

Don't give up on it just yet

[boguslaw]

BURN THE HERETIC!!!! lol... just kidding!

I don't yet fully understand these systems so can't really comment in detail, but from my own observations I don't think the standard form of "back emf" being used to directly charge batteries or caps is what radiant/aetheric energy is. But it has potential.

As you said the problem is the current flow. Looking at the scope shots I see a sharp (but rather short) spike followed by a sloped step and when I see this I see the "electron current" flowing. Though once you take the batteyr/cap being charged away you get the huge and incredibly brief spikes. I believe this is more similar to what tesla was refering to. Short, sharp pulses of high voltage.

The problem is as soon as we connect a load the spikes disappear. This is due to the dynamic nature of the "collapsing magnetic field". That isn't a bad thing since it is ideal for charging batteries, but I am still experimenting with ways to preserve the spikes while using them to see what the difference in behavior is.

Don't give up on it just yet

Radiant energy is like a sail on a yacht. To keep the correct movement you must orientate sail to the continuous (or occuring with exact and high repeatability) , unidirectional wind or you stuck on the center of the lake...

Boguslaw

[amigo]

Thanks for the replies everyone

See the thing is, when you say "electron flow" how do we know? We can't really see it and we are to assume that something of sorts is happening and that our Amp meter is measuring current. But as Peter and others elsewhere noted, measuring currents is really measuring a voltage drop over a shunt.

Regarding Bearden, the more I read and the more I learn, the less I subscribe to what he says because he's involving the "new age" theories into what Tesla, in my humble opinion already discovered and defined. Tesla did it in front of witnesses, while Bearden is only theorizing.

Next, I have been thinking much about Tesla's experiments and I am still not clear is incredibly high voltage really necessary to fracture the connection between electron and aether currents?

In later years it seems that Tesla have found a way to produce aetheric flows from non-million volts sources (the incident with a black box and the electric car in the 1930s comes to mind).

Another thing, and this I feel is rather important, that I'm not clear about is do we need to have a real electrostatic DC generator like Tesla did and the magnetic spark gaps, or do our solid-state circuits produce identical results (I say identical because similar might not cut it - to get to the aetheric streams).

Tesla had a motor/generator produce DC, though I am not sure of what magnitude (perhaps it's written somewhere in some patent or text). So how high of the voltage did it need to be to start the effect.

For example, where is the "demarkation" zone in any of our solid-state circuits where we fracture electrons and aether, separate the two and only allow aether to flow. Tesla clearly had the spark gap and electrons did not cross it only aether, when circuit was tuned properly.

What about the PWM DC we are creating, around 1-30KHz, was his generator producing pulsed DC or was it pure DC that he later pulsed through the spark gap (there could a difference here because PWM might not be able to build up enough potential perhaps?)

In my previous post I noted that aetheric streams produce visible results, so couldn't we assume that if there was pure aether present those streams would be visible, as gaseous apparitions?

Technically we should be able to detect presence of aether using a NE-2 even anywhere around the circuit or on the skin of our conductors pass the point of "demarkation" if we were really fracturing electron and aetheric currents and stopping the electron one.

I know I got more questions than answers but I want to know about your questions (and answers) and what do you contemplate about.

[Sephiroth]

"See the thing is, when you say "electron flow" how do we know? We can't really see it and we are to assume that something of sorts is happening and that our Amp meter is measuring current. But as Peter and others elsewhere noted, measuring currents is really measuring a voltage drop over a shunt."

That is why i use the inverted commas

I agree with what you are saying though surely there can be more than one way of interacting with the aether's energy.

There is only one modern "Free energy device" I can think of that even comes close to Tesla's work and that is the Grey Motor. In fact Grey's motor ticks all the boxes you are looking for

So does that make every other claimed over unity device a fiction? I think not.

Have you read Aaron's book, The Quantum Key. It's fascinating. If the model of electricity he presents (ie. the Heaviside Flow) is accurate, then I can see that there could be limitless possibilities to tap into the aether energy electrically.

[amigo]

As I said I am not subscrbing to any Quantum theories because they are just theories. Further more the whole Quantum Mechanics field is jaded from the getgo in my humble opinion.

That does not negate the idea that Universe might (and could be) electric, but any theory put out by orthodox science will receive most scrutinized and least favourable position in my mind until absolutely proven factual, beyond shadow of a doubt (alternatively I'd say to the last: yea right, good luck with that, they have changed their mind so many times in the past about other things no one should hold their breath over this either)

Regarding Grey, how many have actually built a working motor beside Bedini (according to Bearden in Energy from the Vaccum pt.2)?

I still have to go back to Tesla because he's done all these things 110 years ago and yet nobody so far had replicated his experiments and findings (aside from Eric Dollard confirming certain things back in the 1980s), and I wonder why not...

[Shamus]

Welcome to the club!

Believe me, Amigo, I know a thing or two about doubts and it's good to have them because they can point us in a direction or two that we might not have seen otherwise. It's a good to actually *think* about this stuff and see if it really makes any sense because, as I'm sure you know, that is the path to true wisdom.

Regarding Bearden, the more I read and the more I learn, the less I subscribe to what he says because he's involving the "new age" theories into what Tesla, in my humble opinion already discovered and defined. Tesla did it in front of witnesses, while Bearden is only theorizing.

I'm not sure what you mean by "new age"; where I'm from it has definite religious connotations and I've never seen anything from Mr. Bearden to indicate that he weaves the new age religion into what he teaches. I'm just guessing here, but I think what you mean is that he mixes it with quantum mechanics; if that's what you mean then I don't really see much of problem because for all its "spookiness" it does seem to accurately describe the world of the very small. Can I prove it? No, of course not. But the descriptions and math seem to work.

Plus, I don't recall Mr. Bearden ever presenting himself as anything but a theorist; it would seem that he leaves implementation to others. That and also attempting to put inventions like the VTA or the Fogal transistor on solid theoretical ground. Again, I have no investment in him or anyone he's affiliated with, but he does seem to be an honest man and his theories make sense to me.

What about the PWM DC we are creating, around 1-30KHz, was his generator producing pulsed DC or was it pure DC that he later pulsed through the spark gap (there could a difference here because PWM might not be able to build up enough potential perhaps?)

Looking at a regular SSG or even SS circuit, the coil is more than capable of building high voltage potentials. A coil of any stripe is an inductor and inductors resist changes in *current*. So if you have a constant current flowing through an inductor and then suddenly remove power, you will get a high voltage spike as the inductor uses its magnetic field to try to keep the current flowing. If the time in which the current goes to zero is very short, it will kick out a high voltage spike--the shorter the transistion from power to no power the higher the voltage will be.

Now, it's time to do a couple of experiments. Get a bifilar coil and a couple of neon bulbs. First, connect the ends of one neon to the ends of one strand of the coil. Connect 12V to the neon so that the battery, neon and coil are all in parallel for a few seconds (NOTE: I used a battery of 8 1.5V cells--don't go crazy with the amperage!). Now, quickly remove the power and note what happens. Second, connect another neon to the other strand and connect 12V in the same place for a few seconds. Again, quickly remove the power and note what happens.

In my previous post I noted that aetheric streams produce visible results, so couldn't we assume that if there was pure aether present those streams would be visible, as gaseous apparitions?

Maybe, maybe not. The only way to know is to experiment and see if others can replicate what you do. Of course it would be nice if someone who has already done those experiments could offer their experience, but you might have to wait a long time before someone comes forward with the data.

[Aaron]

value of replication

Regarding Grey, how many have actually built a working motor beside Bedini (according to Bearden in Energy from the Vaccum pt.2)?

Hi Amigo,

Do you believe that if someone were to replicate the Gray Tube effect and other exotic technologies/claims that it implies they must have a more accurate understanding than someone that can't make it work?

[Sephiroth]

Hi Amigo,

The problem is it's ALL theory... even Tesla's work. If you haven't seen a working replication then what is to make you believe in Tesla's car over stan meyer's dune buggy? I think an open mind is required (with healthy skepticism!) and form experiments based on the theories to attempt to verify them for ourselves.

[amigo]

Thanks guys, lots of food for thought, as they say...

I guess I'm just tired of all this theorizing. Everyone has a theory but we are rarely seeing real practical things or confirmations of those theories. Couple that with "urban legends" as I like to call them, and it's pretty hard to discern what's true and what's not....

Aaron, I think that's where reference could come in play, the "urban legend" one, regarding Bedini replicating Gray Motor. If he did it, where is it, all I have is Bearden saying so and no matter how much I'd like to believe him it would be nice to see it ...

But yeah, one would hope that if someone can replicate something they might have more insight into it. Otherwise it could all be mere luck and circumstance that leads to successful replication.

Sephirtoh, I know I'm being biased here when I talk about Tesla actually getting things done, but I feel it should be mentioned. He did practically show an awful lot to full auditoriums of scientists, as well as numerous witnesses who were common folk.

That ought to count for something, so either we are lacking some aptitude today to replicate his experiments or maybe our overlords are jamming all frequency bands so it's impossible to make anything work (LOL how's that for a conspiracy )

Shamus, at first I found Bearden fascinating and all. His theories do appear to have some common sense in them or at least something new compared to orthodox science. But, he's also a retired military guy and that's a red flag in my books not to eat the cake he's sharing without asking beforehand what's in it.

Otherwise, you are right, we all need to do much more experimenting. Somehow I get a feeling we presume many claims without testing them first through simple and repeatable process of experimentation that would confirm or deny them, and set the record straight.

[amigo]

Now, it's time to do a couple of experiments. Get a bifilar coil and a couple of neon bulbs. First, connect the ends of one neon to the ends of one strand of the coil. Connect 12V to the neon so that the battery, neon and coil are all in parallel for a few seconds (NOTE: I used a battery of 8 1.5V cells--don't go crazy with the amperage!). Now, quickly remove the power and note what happens. Second, connect another neon to the other strand and connect 12V in the same place for a few seconds. Again, quickly remove the power and note what happens.

That is always amusing, watching the orange glow and violet flashes inside the NE come up while I interrupt the battery connection.

Now...why can't I automate this?

I thought if I hooked up a square wave oscillator (few Hz to start) and have the coil connected through a transistor, I get nothing. Perhaps my oscillator is the problem, should the duty cycle be < 10% ?

[Shamus]

Hi Amigo,

I really couldn't tell you without seeing the circuit, but I think you've got the right idea. The trick is a quick *shutoff*, with the coil doing all the work trying to keep the current going. Remember the pendulum? Almost the same idea.

That experiment with the coil by itself has really got me thinking about how all of this stuff fits together and I think I'm finally getting it. I think all that banging my head into a wall has finally done me some good.

[amigo]

Circuit is really nothing, it's a transistor driven coil with a trigger source. I tried using square waves, pulses (74HC14, NE555) and yet nothing, the NE-2 won't light up as it does when I manually interrupt the power.