A New Principle

[mrbreau]

If I do the same things the same way and expect different results then that is, by any definition of the word that I am aware of, insanity. And for me to blindly follow where others have gone to get the results others have gotten is just another form of insanity. Yet, that is exactly what I’ve been doing for the last year and a half, practicing one form of insanity or the other. These things are changing!

Yesterday, I was hanging out my wash. (This is my way of combating global warming, if there is such a thing. Since I don’t use electric power to dry my clothes it saves fuel. And too, the natural evaporation of the moisture from the clothes is cooling to the surrounding air.) I had a revelation in the process of hanging out my wash to dry.

It occurred to me that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE in allowing the clothes to dry on the line and making the clothes dry in a dryer. And so I realized, for me at least, that what I’ve been doing for so long was to *try* to make things happen. Isn’t that the American/human way? And of course, *trying* is not *doing* as far as I can tell. Trying is a vague attempt at doing something without any faith or trust in the outcome.

Let me give you an example of how this principle works in out in everyday experiments. We make a coil of wire and pass it by a magnet to produce electricity. To me, this is drying clothes in a *dryer* and not hanging them on the line. I’m not sure what *hanging them on the line* would be in this instance, some kind of antenna? Or battery? How else would we allow electricity to be useful? Nathan Stubblefield comes to my mind here.

So far as I am aware, any way to capture radiant electricity will not be sufficient to run an electric motor. The one possible exception is EV Gray and his motor. But the principle behind that motor escapes everyone who has tried to duplicate/replicate it. THERE HAS GOT TO BE A FIRST PRINCIPLE!

I have an obsession with principles and have had that obsession for a long time. My definition of a principle is some truth that can be made as large or small as needed and stays the same! For example, two plus two are four. It doesn’t make any difference how large or small the *two* is made the answer will ALWAYS be four of like. For example 2000 plus 2000 equal 4000, or, .0002 plus .0002 equal .0004. So, two of anything plus two of the same equal four total.

Now I am on to figuring out how to ALLOW electricity to happen.

Warren
..

[lamare]

A new principle

You might want to take a look of how I think the Gray tube might be working:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...gray-tube.html

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent!

If I do the same things the same way and expect different results then that is, by any definition of the word that I am aware of, insanity. And for me to blindly follow where others have gone to get the results others have gotten is just another form of insanity. Yet, that is exactly what I’ve been doing for the last year and a half, practicing one form of insanity or the other. These things are changing!

Yesterday, I was hanging out my wash. (This is my way of combating global warming, if there is such a thing. Since I don’t use electric power to dry my clothes it saves fuel. And too, the natural evaporation of the moisture from the clothes is cooling to the surrounding air.) I had a revelation in the process of hanging out my wash to dry.

It occurred to me that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE in allowing the clothes to dry on the line and making the clothes dry in a dryer. And so I realized, for me at least, that what I’ve been doing for so long was to *try* to make things happen. Isn’t that the American/human way? And of course, *trying* is not *doing* as far as I can tell. Trying is a vague attempt at doing something without any faith or trust in the outcome.

Let me give you an example of how this principle works in out in everyday experiments. We make a coil of wire and pass it by a magnet to produce electricity. To me, this is drying clothes in a *dryer* and not hanging them on the line. I’m not sure what *hanging them on the line* would be in this instance, some kind of antenna? Or battery? How else would we allow electricity to be useful? Nathan Stubblefield comes to my mind here.

So far as I am aware, any way to capture radiant electricity will not be sufficient to run an electric motor. The one possible exception is EV Gray and his motor. But the principle behind that motor escapes everyone who has tried to duplicate/replicate it. THERE HAS GOT TO BE A FIRST PRINCIPLE!

I have an obsession with principles and have had that obsession for a long time. My definition of a principle is some truth that can be made as large or small as needed and stays the same! For example, two plus two are four. It doesn’t make any difference how large or small the *two* is made the answer will ALWAYS be four of like. For example 2000 plus 2000 equal 4000, or, .0002 plus .0002 equal .0004. So, two of anything plus two of the same equal four total.

Now I am on to figuring out how to ALLOW electricity to happen.

Warren
..

Dear Warren,

So glad to hear that your "insanity days" are behind you!

You are totally on the right track. There are at least TWO ways (and probably more) to "let electricity happen." The first is an Earth Battery, such as the Nathan Stubblefield cell, and the other is a raised conductor on insulators connected to a capacitor, with the other side of the capacitor connected to a ground plate. The first produces low voltage and the second produces high voltage. The important PRINCIPLE here is that you ask NATURE to provide the VOLTAGE, or as Bearden says "the di-pole" that can't be destroyed!

The TRICK to using these systems for the purpose of generating useful power is the principle of IMPEDANCE MATCHING!

The simplest system, based on the ideas of Stubblefield, that I have come up with is this. The Iron-Copper junction will produce about ONE VOLT in moist earth. This can vary depending on exact placement, but the rule is fairly close. If you bury at least 10 square feet of each metal and connect them to a low leakage capacitor, you will have the beginning of a system. Next, hook a basic "Joule Thief" or "Bedini self-oscillator" circuit to this supply and make sure the system doesn't draw more average current than the system can supply (impedance matching!). The output of the oscillator will raise the voltage above the ONE VOLT source and effectively charge 6 or 12 volt cells.

This is EXACTLY what Nathan Stubblefield used his system for... to charge lead acid batteries!

If you need more power, put more metal in the ground and build a bigger oscillator.

This low voltage system is "safe" for most people to experiment with. The high voltage method can be produce LETHAL voltages and should only be attempted with extreme caution!

So, as you can see, Warren, you had already figured it out!

Also, for motors that run on "Radiant Energy" (which is really just pulsed electrostatics), take a look in this file from Rex Research.

Electrostatic Motors & Generators -- Patents List & 6 Articles

Peter

[dutchdivco]

Question for Peter, all

Peter, Is the high voltage system your talking about the 'insulated conductor'? I have read about how 100-200 feet of insulated copper wire, such as the lead from a ham radio, can develop quite a charge over time, and how this can be used to charge a battery. Also read how others have done similar things using a 3'x4' sheet of aluminum, isolated from the ground.
I have an aluminum trailer. Similar to the airstreams, the 'skin' is aluminum, and it is 8'x8'x36'. If I kept it isolated from the ground, wondering how much current would develop, and whether it would be enough to charge batteries.Any thoughts? I could use this as a suplement to solar cells, and put a switch in the circuit, that would only allow the built up charge to discharge thru the batteries when they were low?(So as to avoid wasting the charge, or 'overcharging' the batteries). Jim

[Peter Lindemann]

Not Recommended

Peter, Is the high voltage system your talking about the 'insulated conductor'? I have read about how 100-200 feet of insulated copper wire, such as the lead from a ham radio, can develop quite a charge over time, and how this can be used to charge a battery. Also read how others have done similar things using a 3'x4' sheet of aluminum, isolated from the ground.
I have an aluminum trailer. Similar to the airstreams, the 'skin' is aluminum, and it is 8'x8'x36'. If I kept it isolated from the ground, wondering how much current would develop, and whether it would be enough to charge batteries.Any thoughts? I could use this as a suplement to solar cells, and put a switch in the circuit, that would only allow the built up charge to discharge thru the batteries when they were low?(So as to avoid wasting the charge, or 'overcharging' the batteries). Jim

Jim,

I don't recommend what you are thinking. The problem here isn't "whether it will work" but rather "how well it will work"? The main issue is the high voltage insulation protocols. The better you insulate the system from the earth, the more likely the electrostatic charge is to accumulate faster than it dissipates.

If you effectively isolate your aluminum trailer from the ground and a charge starts building up, you are most likely to ELECTROCUTE yourself because the skin of your trailer is TOO accessible to be safely charged with HV. These would not be the snappy little shocks you get when you walk across a nylon rug, but something much nastier. So, when I say "electrocute" yourself, think "DIE INSTANTLY"!!!

Any attempts to establish a system like this must be approached with the greatest of respect and caution. Casual and ad-hoc experiments can be extremely dangerous.

John Bedini told me of one system he and Ron Cole built in Southern California in the 1980's. It consisted of about 100 feet of copper wire, no more than 10 feet off the ground, suspended on glass insulators (think old Coke bottles). The capacitor was made from two sheets of 4' x 8' sheet metal separated by plate glass. The ground connection was industrial copper grounding rods pounded into the earth. A one inch safety spark-gap applied across the capacitor started roaring within minutes. The system was so dangerous that they dismantled it.

Just for clarity, take a look at some rural power poles some day. Every pole has a one eighth inch diameter copper wire running from the ground to the top of the pole. Its there in case a lineman had to go to the top and make repairs. Then, to work on the line, he just had to connect the ground line to the dead power line with a short jumper before attempting his repairs. Since the power was off anyway, the REAL danger was the electrostatic voltage that could still be present.

Best wishes,

Peter

[mrbreau]

I Always Did March To A Different Drum Beat

Thanks for all the replies. And Peter, I’m not all that sure that *insanity* is behind me. But thanks for the good thoughts anyway. People still say that I’m wired a bit different than most folk. Since I don’t know what impedance is, I had to look it up. I’m still not certain-sure what impedance is. But look at what I found. It seems there are two sides to that coin.

Electrical impedance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Admittance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/2072/eleccsa.htm

These are just three sites I chose at random to post here. There are many, many more.

Everybody talks about resistance, capacitance, inductance, and impedance. All of these things are attempts to MAKE things happen electrically. The upshot is that almost EVERY electrical engineer is stuffing his clothes in the dryer. At least that is the way I see things today. I still don’t know what it takes to hang them on the line, electrically speaking. But I got to wondering about things today.

Suppose that the *batteries* the telegraph people found were actually part of a dipole, the overhead wires being the other part? And suppose that Nathan Stubblefield happened on the same dipole and then developed it from there? I also got wondering about the Bedini charger (SG). Why is it that it doesn’t develop current? The radiant spike must only be half of what is needed/there. But what is the other halfand how do we get it? I’m lost there!!

On another note: today I got a 3 phase motor (2 HP) to run on 90VAC (single phase) and 0.7 Amps. (The plate says it is rated at 5.68/2.9 Amps at 220/440VAC!) This is a real, real old motor and weighs a ton or more. I wonder how much lower I’d have to get the current to be close to radiant electricity. I also wonder how I can do that.

And last night I accidentally connected a single phase motor in series with a three phase motor through a variac. The third leg from the three phase motor went to the hot leg of the single phase. The ground leg from the single phase went to a special earth ground, not the variac’s ground. When I plugged the variac in BOTH MOTORS STARTED RUNNING. I had a clip-on meter on the hot leg from the variac and it showed that no current was there. And the variac was turned to zero. But…….I had another clip-on meter on the hot leg of the single phase motor and it showed current going off the scale, fifteen amps and moving up! Also, there is a ten amp fuse in the hot leg from the variac which didn't blow. I’ll have to do that experiment again to see what I missed.

That is enough for now.

Warren
..

[Inquorate]

Motors

Now, THAT'S interesting.

[dutchdivco]

Peter, Thank you for your detailed reply.I am simply taking it in stages; 1st stage being "will it work?" I was gonna get to the rest, after first establishing a dialogue. They make a rubberised paint, for painting trailer roofs; Why stop at the roofline? Since this works with insulated wire, I'm assuming insulating the whole outside of the trailer with this paint wouldn't interfere with its building up of electricity. Also, from what you describe, it sounds like I might not need any solar panels at all! I was thinking of this just as a supplement, to reduce the # of panels, and help on cloudy days and at nite.
Next issue is, would this develop too much of a charge, and blow up my batteries. I assume I could put something in the circuit, like a voltage regulator, that would sense when the batteries were fully charged, and either stop feeding the current to the batteries, (and let it just build up in the structure) or run it directly to ground, without going thru the batteries.
A plan "B", in case using the trailer itself is impractical; Running an insulated copper wire around the perimeter of the roof, mounted (with insulators) about 1' above the roof.Run the current from this thru a coil and spark plug, thru the batteries and to a copper rod in the ground.Is there any way with something like this, to calculate how much electricity will be produced, (captured?) before actually building it? If its possible to harvest this much electricity this way, its hard to believe we are struggling with nuclear power plants, pholtovoltaic cells, etc.Seems to me its much like drying clothes on the line, rather than shoving them in a clothes dryer! JIM

[Vortex]

dutchdivco,

Peter wasn't Joking, this is scary and nasty stuff.

There are more DON'Ts for HV electrostatics than DOs.
See HINTS AND OBSCURE FACTS USEFUL FOR ELECTROSTATIC SCIENCE PROJECTS
to obtain a quick idea of troubles you are looking at.
Make Sure you read the "WHAT CONSTITUTES "INSULATING"?"

[dutchdivco]

Thanks for the link. Heres the thing; I read this; http://members.fortunecity.com/freee...torcharger.htm
I figured if the described set-up would charge 1 battery, that my aluminum trailer would charge a bank of batteries.Or, as i said, at least act as a supplement to solar panels. Went on overunity site to try to learn more, asked questions and felt like I wasn't in the right place. much of what they were talking about, (when not fighting/insulting each other) is fascinating, although i don't understand most of it.So, I've dropped in here.Not looking for overunity, just a way to get off the grid.Since I won't be owning the property i park my trailer on, an 'earth battery' isn't practical. But, either using the trailer itself, or a couple hundred feet of 'insulated' copper wire seems do-able.

[Peter Lindemann]

Wrong Circuit

Thanks for the link. Heres the thing; I read this; http://members.fortunecity.com/freee...torcharger.htm
I figured if the described set-up would charge 1 battery, that my aluminum trailer would charge a bank of batteries.Or, as i said, at least act as a supplement to solar panels. Went on overunity site to try to learn more, asked questions and felt like I wasn't in the right place. much of what they were talking about, (when not fighting/insulting each other) is fascinating, although i don't understand most of it.So, I've dropped in here.Not looking for overunity, just a way to get off the grid.Since I won't be owning the property i park my trailer on, an 'earth battery' isn't practical. But, either using the trailer itself, or a couple hundred feet of 'insulated' copper wire seems do-able.

Dear Jim,

Yes, this article has been floating around for years. Your version has been provided with the wrong schematic, however.

If you read the words carefully, the circuit goes like this. Between the elevated wire and the ground is the CAPACITOR. The discharge circuit then consists of (starting at the HV+ side) the spark plug, then the (+) and (-) terminals of a ignition coil (leaving the HV terminal alone), then to the (+) terminal of the battery, and finally the (-) terminal of the battery is connected to the side of the capacitor connected to the ground rod.

The ignition coil is just used to slow down the discharge impulse and convert the electrostatic energy into a magnetic field so it supplies the battery with some electrons to aid the charge.

That's it.

Don't weld your fillings!!!

Peter

[dutchdivco]

Thanks

Peter; Thanks for the corrected info.I had no idea if this was real or not, as the same site had an article about how to build a device to get rid of 'chemtrails'; they are like contrails from a plane, except they contain mindsapping chemicals, and they are spread by U.N. planes. No offence to anyone, but can you say off your meds? So, its good to know the concept isn't fantasy, AND to have the corect way to hook it up.Maybe i will explore it. Oh, and I lost my fillings when I lost my teeth, so no worries there! Thanks again, Jim

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, I agree we should all try and think more for ourselves and at the same time not throw the baby out with the tub water as they say, I think researching all these different ideas on the net certainly cant hurt because its given me some pretty good avenues of experiment, one in particular at this time which is showing very curious results with similar effects to Dan Quales generator and perepiteia generator which is the speeding up of generator under load.
The worst habit humanity has suffered from is what some call cognitive dissonance which ultimately means condemnation without investigation, lets all at least make an attempt at investigation into whatever the subject before we cast opinions for I highly doubt anyone on this forum has tested the contents of what has been sprayed into the skies because they sure are not all contrails as those dissipate within a few minutes, not hours. and i say has been sprayed because im not sure there still spraying anymore.

peace, love, light

[mrbreau]

Bessler Wheel

I think it a good idea to start posting my findings here instead of the “mechanical motor” thread. The more I work on Bessler the more I realize that there is something not ordinary here. It may be a new principle.

I’ve had to eat a lot of crow with this thing. And what is worse, I’ve had to eat crow because I ate crow! There is so much to learn here with this wheel. For example, it is MY belief that Bessler didn’t use round axles. I found evidence where he actually used six-sided shafts for his axles to cut down on friction. That is amazing!

I also believe that if Bessler had gotten his way and got funded to start a school on mechanics, as he called it, the industrial revolution would have started a hundred years earlier.

Anyway, to kind of bring you all up to date here is a short video, really short. I wasn’t going to release it because there are errors in the wheel as shown. I just discovered the proper way to make the lattice so it would work. In the video there are seventy-two parts to the wheel. I have since cut that number down by half! It is one awakening right after the other building this thing and then rebuilding it.

Link; BesslerPrimarya.flv video by mrbreau - Photobucket

Be aware that I’m not nearly done with this thing yet.

Also be aware that this video will be taken down in three days, March 12th.

Regards,
Warren
..

[mrbreau]

More on a new principle

Link; Are you a critical thinker?

I came across this article this morning which seems to sum up the great problem in uncovering any new principle. Great thinkers of the past had vision too. The author of the article gives a short list of great “critical” thinkers, in her view. For our purposes though, I believe our list to be vastly different. If we are to move forward on the subject of free energy then we must think things differently.

To my mind, I believe it is the difference between Tesla and Edison. Edison was a trial and error man while Tesla thought things out completely. Edison would do a hundred experiments to find out what wouldn’t work. Tesla thought through an experiment to discover what would work. Edison tried and Tesla did. That is just an example of MY WAY OF THINKING.

Now we come to Bessler. I believe Bessler was also a critical thinker. I am studying his book, “Machinen Tractate,” which should be studied as a textbook and not just read as a novel is. I’m discovering that some of the terms and examples he used had two or even three meanings and intents. For example, his advice to “put the horse before the cart” is such a common phrase we normally take it at face value to do things in proper order.

But suppose he had another meaning in mind? Suppose he wanted to direct our attention to NOT place parts in the order we think most likely? Suppose he wanted to convey the idea that we should not try to pull the parts but to push them? After all, a horse does not pull a cart but pushes it! I believe this is how he allows the phenomenon to happen in his device.

Many times I have jumped to certain conclusions while attempting this project only to find out that the assumption was all wrong and something else quite different was meant and then realize that I was partially right in the first place, but only partially right.

This is my view of things concerning Bessler.

Regards,
Warren
..