Tweet
matter refuse to move in linear way
Nice link for patent download
.
I do smell ozone during my experiment.
About Harmonic Energy Exchange Device, it is interesting that it work between 4.5 to 7.5 MHz. A bit similar to Konstantin Meyl 7 MHz resonator. Schauberger mention that a correct procedure of fertilizing land is by neutralizing the polarity of the land at the point where the plant will grow. By creating a thin separating layer ground will be kept negative and air will be positive.
About shape, that remind me of matter build in shape.
About vortex experiment:
Alexandersson - Living Water - Viktor Schauberger and the Secrets of Natural Energy (1990), page 129:
Nice link for patent download
.I do smell ozone during my experiment.
About Harmonic Energy Exchange Device, it is interesting that it work between 4.5 to 7.5 MHz. A bit similar to Konstantin Meyl 7 MHz resonator. Schauberger mention that a correct procedure of fertilizing land is by neutralizing the polarity of the land at the point where the plant will grow. By creating a thin separating layer ground will be kept negative and air will be positive.
About shape, that remind me of matter build in shape.
About vortex experiment:
Alexandersson - Living Water - Viktor Schauberger and the Secrets of Natural Energy (1990), page 129:
The discoveries of two well-known physicists seem to support Viktor Schauberger's theories. The first is Ludwig Bolzmann (1804-1906) whose special field of research was steam technology, the efficiency of which he wanted to improve. To reach the pressures and the high temperatures that this technology demanded, Bolzmann found that the steam's or gas's molecules must be made to move in a straight line for high efficiency. At the same time he made the disappointing discovery that it was virtually impossible to create this straight-line movement, even with two-atom gases, such as hydrogen.
When the two-atom gas was exposed to a moving impulse, it wanted to begin to spin, whereby its own rotation 'ate up' a large part of the energy created, leaving only a small amount to remain. It was even worse with multipleatom gases, such as water steam, where a 'straight motion' was even more difficult to achieve. Bolzmann was very disappointed by these findings, for he thought the study of heat and heat technology were the most important base for the existing technology, and if high efficiency could not be obtained, then it must mean that Nature is mistaken. Low efficiency will cause such extensive fuel depletion, that soon we will exhaust the world's energy supplies, he thought The situation today shows that Bolzmann's fears were justified. At the same time, however, his discoveries confirm Viktor Schauberger's argument that Nature tries to prevent straight line motion.
Small particles wish rather to move in a 'planetary' orbit, rather than to be forced into the straight-line motion which suits our technology. When technologists now continue to use this incorrect model of motion, they are also responsible for the plundering of earth's oil and coal supplies.
The other scientist who, without knowing it, confirmed with his experiments Viktor Schauberger's 'spiral motion' theory was Felix Ehrenhaft (1879-1952), Professor of Physics at Vienna University. Ehrenhaft developed the experiments of other scientists concerning the study of small particles of matter in magnetic fields and/or concentrated light rays. Fine powdered material, for example silver, copper, chrome, coal etc. and even fine water droplets were introduced into evacuated glass tubes. As a tube was shaken the particles moved in suspension. If the particles were then exposed to concentrated rays of light, they started to follow certain paths, in that they turned into a path in a uniform way. Ehrenhaft wrote about this:
"Totally new and surprising was that the particles' motion in the field was not straight, but flowed in screw-like paths with a most regular form, size and uniformity... drops of methyl orange for example ... moved in this way."
Similar results were obtained when the particles were exposed to the influence of a magnetic field. Local gas flows or the 'charge' of the particles were no explanation for the screwlike paths that resulted, which remained unaffected by such influences.
Also interesting was the fact that a centripetal power occurred that influenced particles 130 times more strongly than gravity.
Ehrenhaft's comments on the tests:
"It is improbable that these phenomena of motion in light or magnetic fields can be explained with the help of existing hypotheses; we may be forced to turn to new ones."
When the two-atom gas was exposed to a moving impulse, it wanted to begin to spin, whereby its own rotation 'ate up' a large part of the energy created, leaving only a small amount to remain. It was even worse with multipleatom gases, such as water steam, where a 'straight motion' was even more difficult to achieve. Bolzmann was very disappointed by these findings, for he thought the study of heat and heat technology were the most important base for the existing technology, and if high efficiency could not be obtained, then it must mean that Nature is mistaken. Low efficiency will cause such extensive fuel depletion, that soon we will exhaust the world's energy supplies, he thought The situation today shows that Bolzmann's fears were justified. At the same time, however, his discoveries confirm Viktor Schauberger's argument that Nature tries to prevent straight line motion.
Small particles wish rather to move in a 'planetary' orbit, rather than to be forced into the straight-line motion which suits our technology. When technologists now continue to use this incorrect model of motion, they are also responsible for the plundering of earth's oil and coal supplies.
The other scientist who, without knowing it, confirmed with his experiments Viktor Schauberger's 'spiral motion' theory was Felix Ehrenhaft (1879-1952), Professor of Physics at Vienna University. Ehrenhaft developed the experiments of other scientists concerning the study of small particles of matter in magnetic fields and/or concentrated light rays. Fine powdered material, for example silver, copper, chrome, coal etc. and even fine water droplets were introduced into evacuated glass tubes. As a tube was shaken the particles moved in suspension. If the particles were then exposed to concentrated rays of light, they started to follow certain paths, in that they turned into a path in a uniform way. Ehrenhaft wrote about this:
"Totally new and surprising was that the particles' motion in the field was not straight, but flowed in screw-like paths with a most regular form, size and uniformity... drops of methyl orange for example ... moved in this way."
Similar results were obtained when the particles were exposed to the influence of a magnetic field. Local gas flows or the 'charge' of the particles were no explanation for the screwlike paths that resulted, which remained unaffected by such influences.
Also interesting was the fact that a centripetal power occurred that influenced particles 130 times more strongly than gravity.
Ehrenhaft's comments on the tests:
"It is improbable that these phenomena of motion in light or magnetic fields can be explained with the help of existing hypotheses; we may be forced to turn to new ones."
people need to read this stuff
Comment