High Voltage from Thin Air?

[DrStiffler]

Dear Tecstatic

Please find attached proposal for your review...

Best Regards,
Nuri Temurlenk

@samedsoft

How do you change or shift the spectrum in this circuit? Is this a HV -R controlled switch? It has no similar attributes that an Exciter offers. So I guess you fell the Hv will not suffer ionization loss?

[DrStiffler]

Now I have done a simple experiment.

Instead of trying to measure the voltage at the AV plug, I decided to "measure" the feed voltage needed to just turn on 8 LEDs. I consider this an accurate measure of the AV voltage.

18.5V is required to just weakly turn on the 8 LEDs.

I tested with both center feed and feed to the outside winding off the "hot" wire from my Philips signal generator (PM5193).

I can not confirm center feed is more effective, however there is a distraction.

The spiral coil, inner diameter 8.2mm, outer diameter 44.6mm, 36 turns, 30.96uH is like two different creatures with these two feeds.

I found 5 frequencies lighting the LEDs for each feed, but to my surprise the frequencies were not the same.

Also the resonant frequencies were not the same when tested when connecting the coil to the signal generator with a series resistor in the ground line. I monitored the voltage over the resistor with my scope.

Center feed (hot line) gave 38.5MHz resonant frequency (lowest voltage over resistor)
Outside feed 37.3MHz.

Also with outside feed with square wave, increasing frequency gradually rounded the square signal to a sine like signal.

With center feed I got the more typical reflection pattern that distorts the curve at the transition to sine like wave when increasing the frequency.

Attached are the two curves for each feed, they look the same to me considering my accuracy in measuring. What could distract is that the "efficiency" rises with frequency, and the resonant frequencies are not the same.

The signal generator can max go for 20MHz square signal and then up to 50MHz sine.

The frequency over 20MHz is thus sine the rest square. Based on a comparison, the feed voltage for square wave would be 0.9Volts instead of the 1.1V with the sine.

The blue curve with square points is the center feed.

What do you think ?
Any problems with the way I have tested this ?

@Doc
Thank you very much for the health issue explanation.

@samedsoft
Do you have a link to the Aromaz SEC combo drive circuit ?

Due to an error on my computer I have to reboot before I can add the curve, stand by.
...Now curve added.

Eric

@Tecstatic
Not totally sure what you are headed for here, but I like your result. When you run a graph against a coil for spatial resonance you can indeed see some strange results and be very confusing at first, yet the further you go the clearer it should become.

I have included a link to a plot I did three years ago from exciters using the antenna coil with the ferrite core. I think the similarities should be apparent. Now if you take any number of coils and run a sweep you begin to see something very key in the results. At first you question you generator of Exciter, even your particular setup. Then a commonality will form in your thoughts and one should see what they found over 100 years ago that we ignore today. I know many people hate my coining of 'Spatial Energy Coherence' and or Spatial anything, well that is indeed to bad.

http://67.76.235.52/images/CE4Chart01.gif

[dave_cahoon]

More Resolution ?

Is that plot just the points where you find peaks by turning the dial?
OR
Are you causing the generator to sweep automatically ?
If its automatic can many more points be plotted to see the actual
shape of drops and peaks then use lines to connect the dots...

Nice works there group

Dave

[DrStiffler]

Is that plot just the points where you find peaks by turning the dial?
OR
Are you causing the generator to sweep automatically ?
If its automatic can many more points be plotted to see the actual
shape of drops and peaks then use lines to connect the dots...

Nice works there group

Dave

@Dave

Indeed these are not the exact frequencies, I posted my chart to try and show the commonality from everyone's readings when doing spatial resonance.

When I set out to examine and explore frequency response I let a computer do the walking My RF generator is stepped at 10Hz increments through whatever range I wish to explore and then run another program against the data to fine hot spots (correlations).

Another Hint. Remember the story about Tesla placing a mechanical vibrating device on a building and over time the whole building began to respond? Think for a moment, his little device did not produce every frequency of every type of mass in the building and one would thing that node and anti-note resonance would prevent such a building of a wide spectral response. Yet a simple fundamental seemed to synchronize all type of elemental matter into one building oscillation. So what's the common factor here?

[Armagdn03]

Doc,

Interesting question posed above. Along those same lines of thinking, the infra-red end of the spectrum is also quite interesting in that it is a band of frequency common to all matter. If "heat" is a band of frequency, how is it that all matter shares this commonality, and can interchange freely?

[Tecstatic]

@Tecstatic
Not totally sure what you are headed for here, but I like your result. When you run a graph against a coil for spatial resonance you can indeed see some strange results and be very confusing at first, yet the further you go the clearer it should become.

I have included a link to a plot I did three years ago from exciters using the antenna coil with the ferrite core. I think the similarities should be apparent. Now if you take any number of coils and run a sweep you begin to see something very key in the results. At first you question you generator of Exciter, even your particular setup. Then a commonality will form in your thoughts and one should see what they found over 100 years ago that we ignore today. I know many people hate my coining of 'Spatial Energy Coherence' and or Spatial anything, well that is indeed to bad.

http://67.76.235.52/images/CE4Chart01.gif

Doc,
From ordinary teaching I would not have expected the results from my little experiment in the previous post with different frequencies depending on which end is fed from the signal generator.
It certainly shows there is more to it. Don't consider me a disbeliever of your spatial resonance. At least it goes beyond my skills to explain this with the ordinary textbook teaching.

Let me express my deepest respect for you noticing this and other findings, and hunting it down to a knowledge you share with us.

I did another check of a 38 turn spiral coil with these numbers, outside feed, just the center frequencies:

1740
2130
2740
3840
6400
19120
Then consider these numbers
5220
6390
8220
11520
19200
57360
Being the first numbers * 3

So whats the relation between 2740 and 1740 ? (=1.57)
So whats the relation between 2130 and 6400 ? (=3)
So whats the relation between 6400 and 19120 ? (=3)

As I have done an extra check of the 36 turn:

1950
2382
3062
4282
7112
21182

You can do your own check on these like I did :-)
Let me underline these are the raw numbers I measured, I have done no refitting aftermath for "better" results.

It is a bit strange the number 1.57 appears ( close to 1.54)

If you have a node on one end and anti-node on the other end, you have an odd number of 1/4 wavelengths.
If you have one standing 1/4 wavelength, to fulfill a standing wave with a higher frequency, you have to add one 1/2 wavelength, thus ending up with 3/4. This is a factor of 3. Coincident ?

When we have a standing wave, the amplitude at a given point of the coil is constant, and a third into the coil it is zero when we have 3/4 wavelength.

Because of the very compact spiral coil, this is difficult do detect with the field around the center, but I have seen it with my LED test "sniffer" on an ordinary coil, while the exciter was running.

So is this what asked for Doc, or have I missed the point ?

If so, maybe could you then please consider, if the ground is sufficient moist for some more seeds ?

Eric

[DrStiffler]

Doc,

Interesting question posed above. Along those same lines of thinking, the infra-red end of the spectrum is also quite interesting in that it is a band of frequency common to all matter. If "heat" is a band of frequency, how is it that all matter shares this commonality, and can interchange freely?

@Armagdn03
Hummm... Now I'm not quite sure if you feel you have the answer or are still looking for it?

Let me answer you question with a question, do you consider "Heat" which is only a measurement of the transfer of energy, to be (Lost) forever into the environment or universe?

If we no longer consider the old "Caloric" view then "Heat" is a mathematical convenience, no?

[DrStiffler]

Doc,
From ordinary teaching I would not have expected the results from my little experiment in the previous post with different frequencies depending on which end is fed from the signal generator.
It certainly shows there is more to it. Don't consider me a disbeliever of your spatial resonance. At least it goes beyond my skills to explain this with the ordinary textbook teaching.

Let me express my deepest respect for you noticing this and other findings, and hunting it down to a knowledge you share with us.

I did another check of a 38 turn spiral coil with these numbers, outside feed, just the center frequencies:

1740
2130
2740
3840
6400
19120
Then consider these numbers
5220
6390
8220
11520
19200
57360
Being the first numbers * 3

So whats the relation between 2740 and 1740 ? (=1.57)
So whats the relation between 2130 and 6400 ? (=3)
So whats the relation between 6400 and 19120 ? (=3)

As I have done an extra check of the 36 turn:

1950
2382
3062
4282
7112
21182

You can do your own check on these like I did :-)
Let me underline these are the raw numbers I measured, I have done no refitting aftermath for "better" results.

It is a bit strange the number 1.57 appears ( close to 1.54)

If you have a node on one end and anti-node on the other end, you have an odd number of 1/4 wavelengths.
If you have one standing 1/4 wavelength, to fulfill a standing wave with a higher frequency, you have to add one 1/2 wavelength, thus ending up with 3/4. This is a factor of 3. Coincident ?

When we have a standing wave, the amplitude at a given point of the coil is constant, and a third into the coil it is zero when we have 3/4 wavelength.

Because of the very compact spiral coil, this is difficult do detect with the field around the center, but I have seen it with my LED test "sniffer" on an ordinary coil, while the exciter was running.

So is this what asked for Doc, or have I missed the point ?

If so, maybe could you then please consider, if the ground is sufficient moist for some more seeds ?

Eric

@Tecstatic
Wet behind the ears but drying out fast. Move away from the conventional "Wavelength" view it can not even cover the possibilities at the so called molecular level. It's fine to start out this way so that you can build from it, but one must think of a universal resonance from the macro level and leave the detail to whats called "Nature".

[samedsoft]

@ALL

There is a key distance for receiver. When the one wire length (so the receiver distance) is 9-10 meters, We have maximum efficiency.

When Secondary tower added, we have interesting effects. I will post on youtube...

We have lowered supply to 12 V and we have two receiver towers at 35 mA

I can assure that secondary tower does only adds 5 mA and has %75 brightness.

[eternalightwithin]

If everything is composed of gyroscopic particles (Newman) then it would make sense that matter finding a commonality with infrared.

Edit: Or having some fundamental freq. (Whatever that is)

Doc,

Interesting question posed above. Along those same lines of thinking, the infra-red end of the spectrum is also quite interesting in that it is a band of frequency common to all matter. If "heat" is a band of frequency, how is it that all matter shares this commonality, and can interchange freely?

[Tecstatic]

@Tecstatic
Wet behind the ears but drying out fast. Move away from the conventional "Wavelength" view it can not even cover the possibilities at the so called molecular level. It's fine to start out this way so that you can build from it, but one must think of a universal resonance from the macro level and leave the detail to whats called "Nature".

OK, let me have another try.

To my understanding this technology have 4 levels (unless being a true genius) , where the two first suffer from the hen-egg problem

1. Observing coherence effects
2. Building systems able to cohere
3. Understanding natures mechanisms for the energetic frequencies
4. Designing more clever modulation and topologies to maximize coherence

-1. We (as a group) has observed that some fundamental frequencies are more beneficial than others.

-2. To gain that understanding, we have to have a working system to observe that, but why build such a system, if we don't know the existence of the energy.

I guess this has not been theorized from the beginning, but stumbled upon from non-optimal coherence systems by coincidence.

Doc, you have indicated that you observed these effects, and spent countless hours trying to make sense of the SA specters you collected.

And you have built a series of exciters to investigate this further. These exciters used to explore more the effects.

-3. Often, when understanding some phenomenon, then you don't need to measure so much, but are able to foresee, calculate or model the phenomenon. Having reached this stage, one is able to design much better exciters.

-4. I think the exciters I have seen so far do not use that many frequencies to excite the coils, but because of the coils harmonic properties the specter gets quite complex.

I have before mentioned the word convolution.
If you have an exciter not resonating at a spatial energy frequency, then CEC < 1.
But if the exciter is deigned to match or tune-in to several beneficial frequencies, then we can get a CEC > 1.

The resistor in Rosemary's device is probably important to have right, if it has to work well. A 10 ohms "resistor" is not just a 10 ohms "resistor" with this mode of operation.

But who says the currently used excitation model is optimal. If I have understood this right, the TPU uses heterodyne principles to get a very powerful coherence, even able to destroy the device itself.

You also indicated, that you more likely was 10 rather than 2 steps ahead, so I guess this could maybe be some of it.

Also the topology of the exciter is very simple for "easy" replication. Understanding some of the principles, it is not that hard to make it work, but as a newbie it is hard to make the first exciter work, at least it was for me.

Let me guess you have a much better topology and also smarter modulation in your hidings...

------------

Before I bore you to death with partly speculations, I have another observation from my measurements.

At some frequencies the resonance is far from symmetric.

For my 22 turns spiral coil being at 32.555 MHz center frequency, when stepping down the frequency the curve drops down steeply, so at 32.490MHz the LEDs stop lighting.

Increasing the frequency from the center frequency, the light intensity decreases smoothly and gradually until 36.8MHz is reached.

So 65kHz downwards extinguishes, while upwards 4.31 MHz extinguishes.

At the low end there is also some hysteresis to it. With the LEDs off and increasing to 32.550MHz the LEDs pops on, but to extinguish i must go down to 32.490MHz. To turn on again, I must go up 60 kHz. Strange...

---------

About the infrared so important for Stans Gas Processor.

Maybe the infrared hits a beneficial resonance so the gas gets more energy for combustion...

------

Unfortunately I have just got an invoice worth 2 SAs, so I have to consider whether I am going to buy a SA in the near future. Quite a dip in pocket money.

@samedsoft
Thanks for the link
By the way, if we consider extra receivers properly tuned are not loading the transmitter, what about having a receiver (or two) where the AV plug charges a capacitor, which is pulse discharged into a battery (isolated when not pulsing), maybe even charging the battery powering the transmitter...

Eric

[Armagdn03]

Please forgive a bit of speculation.

This thread has forced me to do a lot of thinking. I have been working on systems very similar to what is being shown here, yet the effects shown here are quite different from my own experience, particularly the frequencies which tend to show up repeatedly, perhaps because I have been after a different effect!

If we consider fundamental particles, to have a few key traits; Particles have a dense nucleus, which is equal in potential (but not volume) to the “space” which surrounds it. It has key characteristics such as the perpendicular forces of electrical rotation, and magnetic circulation creating the well known dipole. All mater is composed of these building blocks. Alone they act microscopically, exerting their influence upon their surroundings according to the extent of their potential. Together they “overtone” working in unison to create a macroscopic copy of the individual parts. This is how magnets and NMRI work.

Dr. Stiffler asked about Teslas earthquake device, and man, what a whopper of a question! Consider the whole to be a conglomeration of parts. The parts can overtone to cause a macroscopic effect. These parts consist of the complete environment surrounding the object in question (in this case the xmitter). Much like NMRI, the exciter may be aligning certain common elements around the coil. Because these are heterogeneous mixtures, different non harmonically related frequencies may arise.
Perhaps I have been building atoms, and the good Doctor has perhaps been aligning them.

This causes power to be "created" at a distance due to the nature of excentric transformers (which has not yet been explained to my knowlege, but is profound in my opinion).

Very interesting work, fantastic, what else can I say!

[Tecstatic]

Sorry for this &quot;OT&quot;

By the way the word "coherence" is used by the leading researchers in Quantum Energy Medicine.

When the human cells cohere, the person is in a healthy condition, when not he is sick.

This is why so much time is spent on frequency therapy research, especially in Russia, where the American Medicine Mafia companies are not in control, at least so far...

The high energetic PapIMI healing device has cured what ordinary MDs label "terminal cancer patients", and has been presented this way:

-Lightning in the box
-40 KV, 10 KA
-Low frequency 1-5 Hz
-Gaseous plasma in the sparking chamber.
-Oxygen excitation energizing the body
-Increase in cellular energy production
-Cellular healing potential restored

The cell electro physiology:
- Trans membrane potential: Negative voltage of the cell compared to the extracellular matrix
- Healthy cell : 70 mV (field 10,000,000 V/meter)
- Inflammation: 40 mV
- Cancer cell: 15 mV

For a normal cell to divide in two, it has to go below 15mV, but after the division the new cells go back to 70mV again.

The cancer cell has lost this ability, but with the papIMI treatment the voltage is lifted to normal, so the avalanche like formation of new cancer cells stops.

The sparks of the loop occurs if iron is nearby, although looking frightening, the sparks are told to be harmless.

By the way, the human body is considered a "free energy device" by some.

Sorry for this OT post (actually is it OT if we consider "device" and "coherence" in a more broad way ?).

Eric

[DrStiffler]

By the way the word "coherence" is used by the leading researchers in Quantum Energy Medicine.

When the human cells cohere, the person is in a healthy condition, when not he is sick.

This is why so much time is spent on frequency therapy research, especially in Russia, where the American Medicine Mafia companies are not in control, at least so far...

The high energetic PapIMI healing device has cured what ordinary MDs label "terminal cancer patients", and has been presented this way:

-Lightning in the box
-40 KV, 10 KA
-Low frequency 1-5 Hz
-Gaseous plasma in the sparking chamber.
-Oxygen excitation energizing the body
-Increase in cellular energy production
-Cellular healing potential restored

The cell electro physiology:
- Trans membrane potential: Negative voltage of the cell compared to the extracellular matrix
- Healthy cell : 70 mV (field 10,000,000 V/meter)
- Inflammation: 40 mV
- Cancer cell: 15 mV

For a normal cell to divide in two, it has to go below 15mV, but after the division the new cells go back to 70mV again.

The cancer cell has lost this ability, but with the papIMI treatment the voltage is lifted to normal, so the avalanche like formation of new cancer cells stops.

The sparks of the loop occurs if iron is nearby, although looking frightening, the sparks are told to be harmless.

By the way, the human body is considered a "free energy device" by some.

Sorry for this OT post (actually is it OT if we consider "device" and "coherence" in a more broad way ?).

Eric

@Tecstatic

Well I still insist that you do not have to hit something with a bat to get a reaction, a tickle with a feather often causes a better response.

My bio-site is closed and only open to those in the field and I have reservations placing anything in the public, but "With No Claims Whatsoever" I will allow a links that I moved over to the SS Site.

Picture #1, LER04132009 shows the first indication of the lesion.
http://67.76.235.52/images/LER04132009.gif
Picture #2, LER05012009.gif indicated rapid growth.
http://67.76.235.52/images/LER05012009.gif
Picture #3, LER05212009.gif shows lesion after three treatments with special exciter and SGate.
http://67.76.235.52/images/LER05212009.gif
Picture #4, LER06152009 Shows full healing.
http://67.76.235.52/images/LER06152009.gif

This links will be pulled if I receive instruction to do so, better look now.

[DrStiffler]

OK, let me have another try.

To my understanding this technology have 4 levels (unless being a true genius) , where the two first suffer from the hen-egg problem

1. Observing coherence effects
2. Building systems able to cohere
3. Understanding natures mechanisms for the energetic frequencies
4. Designing more clever modulation and topologies to maximize coherence

-1. We (as a group) has observed that some fundamental frequencies are more beneficial than others.

-2. To gain that understanding, we have to have a working system to observe that, but why build such a system, if we don't know the existence of the energy.

I guess this has not been theorized from the beginning, but stumbled upon from non-optimal coherence systems by coincidence.

Doc, you have indicated that you observed these effects, and spent countless hours trying to make sense of the SA specters you collected.

And you have built a series of exciters to investigate this further. These exciters used to explore more the effects.

-3. Often, when understanding some phenomenon, then you don't need to measure so much, but are able to foresee, calculate or model the phenomenon. Having reached this stage, one is able to design much better exciters.

-4. I think the exciters I have seen so far do not use that many frequencies to excite the coils, but because of the coils harmonic properties the specter gets quite complex.

I have before mentioned the word convolution.
If you have an exciter not resonating at a spatial energy frequency, then CEC < 1.
But if the exciter is deigned to match or tune-in to several beneficial frequencies, then we can get a CEC > 1.

The resistor in Rosemary's device is probably important to have right, if it has to work well. A 10 ohms "resistor" is not just a 10 ohms "resistor" with this mode of operation.

But who says the currently used excitation model is optimal. If I have understood this right, the TPU uses heterodyne principles to get a very powerful coherence, even able to destroy the device itself.

You also indicated, that you more likely was 10 rather than 2 steps ahead, so I guess this could maybe be some of it.

Also the topology of the exciter is very simple for "easy" replication. Understanding some of the principles, it is not that hard to make it work, but as a newbie it is hard to make the first exciter work, at least it was for me.

Let me guess you have a much better topology and also smarter modulation in your hidings...

------------

Before I bore you to death with partly speculations, I have another observation from my measurements.

At some frequencies the resonance is far from symmetric.

For my 22 turns spiral coil being at 32.555 MHz center frequency, when stepping down the frequency the curve drops down steeply, so at 32.490MHz the LEDs stop lighting.

Increasing the frequency from the center frequency, the light intensity decreases smoothly and gradually until 36.8MHz is reached.

So 65kHz downwards extinguishes, while upwards 4.31 MHz extinguishes.

At the low end there is also some hysteresis to it. With the LEDs off and increasing to 32.550MHz the LEDs pops on, but to extinguish i must go down to 32.490MHz. To turn on again, I must go up 60 kHz. Strange...

---------

About the infrared so important for Stans Gas Processor.

Maybe the infrared hits a beneficial resonance so the gas gets more energy for combustion...

------

Unfortunately I have just got an invoice worth 2 SAs, so I have to consider whether I am going to buy a SA in the near future. Quite a dip in pocket money.

@samedsoft
Thanks for the link
By the way, if we consider extra receivers properly tuned are not loading the transmitter, what about having a receiver (or two) where the AV plug charges a capacitor, which is pulse discharged into a battery (isolated when not pulsing), maybe even charging the battery powering the transmitter...

Eric

@Tecstatic

To my understanding this technology have 4 levels (unless being a true genius) , where the two first suffer from the hen-egg problem

1. Observing coherence effects
2. Building systems able to cohere
3. Understanding natures mechanisms for the energetic frequencies
4. Designing more clever modulation and topologies to maximize coherence

Well (#1) Observing effects is nice, but what I have never seen yet in the public forums is anyone able and willing of able to make valid measurements of the artifacts. This is why in the public arena it is my word and my word alone that a CEC>1 is not only possible but routine. Now this has to be read carefully 'valid measurements'. 99% of people in the public domain do not even come close to having the methods and/or equipment to obtain certifiable measurements.

(#2) Most all replications can produce a CEC>1 if the replicator could see the spectrum and tune a properly constructed exciter. Little good it did me in the distribution of the SEC 15-3 and 15-20 Demo boards as it seemed no one could or would attempt to determine the ability of the circuit. *Note these boards were all tuned before they left our lab.

Now even with the release of the 18 series boards with on-board tuning indication, so what will this help if we still do not properly measure operation?

(#3) Yes, this is at some point going to be required and I feel it could be a hundred years or more before all the fights and objections settle out and a final Theory is accepted by the majority of scientist. But for now its a Religion, you accept and work with it and obtain results with "Faith"

Look at Thermodynamics, macro level view, look at some of the assumptions that work but are indeed wrong as to origin.

How many people drive a automobile and don't understand tiddly about a 4 cycle ICE engine?

(#4) Correct, BUT, you have to have the numbers to base the future work on, otherwise how would you ever know if you were gaining or loosing?

I have at least 10 times a day wondered why I try to get understanding here. I have worked my entire life studying, thinking, experimenting to get to this point and its will never be a hand-out I want people to learn...

Looking at a bunch of Bright LED's, some long FL tubes is great, I do it all the time as I am still today amazed at what an Exciter will do, but (Application) is where everyone should look, BUT only after a measurement base is established.

You know when replicators go there own way and use different coils, try different transistors, do different circuit layouts, rest assured few get CEC>1, but how do they know, how will they know?

Purchase of an SA. Unless you are dedicated to possible application development for yourself or the world or feel you must from a personal view obtain knowledge of a theory that like I say may hang out there for 100 years, I would say, SAVE Your Money.

Enough I need to get to work............