Eric Dollard

[David G Dawson]

Energetic Forum Posting

Aaron,
Have a problem here attempting to Post with pictures and URLs after a refresh and keeps sending me back to the previous page and then says it can't fulfil my request.
However, a short Post is being accepted without problems.
Also noted that Page 71 appeared to be rather long compared to the normal.
Thanks.

Smokey

[Marcus Neuhof]

To judge from his last interview things are not going well for the coyote right now, even if he does appear to have a walk-in freezer which could in the future serve as a lab.

That said, David, your work with the CRD appears (from the perspective of someone who doesn't quite understand all this but finds it fascinating) to be excellent. I was rather hoping his next post would be to comment on your work, instead of what he did post.

But, keep in mind -- in several of his interviews Eric has mentioned that he is considered 100% disabled and unable to interact normally with society (this forum is a sort of society) because of trauma he has suffered in the past.

On a lighter note, the quantum fizicists are now recognizing the existence of the aether, as a "quantum fluid," and appear to have been listening to Bach. They've decided the universe has neither a beginning nor an end. No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

[dR-Green]

Hi Eric, I hope your eye is better. I don't know if you saw this when I posted it before or if it's of interest but this is the result of the first test of transmission through earth using the earthing I had, which comprised of 30cm lengths of 20mm diameter copper pipe in the ground as the diagram shows. The furthest pipe was 60cm in length so technically doesn't count relative to the others, but even with this most basic arrangement it can be seen that there's no 1/distance squared involved, while the received power varies when the distance between the supposed "antennas" (coils) remains constant, the only varying factor being the distance between the earth terminals.





Plans to come include upgrading the earthing to an approx 7 metre diameter circle of 16 ground rods (+1) and putting a direct permanent channel under the garden path, which will then make it more feasible to take a walk through the field next door with a coil over a full wavelength distance to see if there's anything of interest. Also try AM at earth's resonant frequency to see if there's any difference.

[David G Dawson]

Dollard Tantrums

Dollard Tantrums:
For God's sake Eric wake up!
You're acting like a spoilt child!
Got your Lab now have you and you can go back to treating everybody concerned about your welfare like shxxxxxt!?
Is that it?

Have given you the requested data on the two tests for the CRD but no response.
Now have it operating daily and asking for further input, graciously, if you have anything further to add.

Keep posting here to help provide interest to others in other devices that are actually being built and not just being contemplated from behind a keyboard.
You probably don't understand but what people want is something they can understand and work with and that does NOT include pages of beaut Math that you may understand but nobody else does.

You talk of 'Energy Synthesis' but I don't see it happening and neither does anybody else.
We built the CSI (Crystal Set Initiative) but where from there as you are supposedly running this show and we simply seek your guidance.
Again - this IS your Forum - you lead.
What is it that you want?

Smokey

[t-rex]

The Dead Horse Died

It would seem that any interest in the subjects of Tesla and the electrical concepts of him and his contemporaries is non-existent. So, why am I continuing to post on the subject anyway?

Moreover, not only is it a waste of time to engage in the Internem but it has attached me to a psychopathic tweaker, Azab the Arab. The best I seem to get is the rebuke of punky boy farmhands who are busy sodomizing their livestock.

Consequently, I am suspending any further postings or similar efforts on the Internem.

QRT DE N6KPH

[7redorbs]

RE: CRD sensitivity to ray activity in radioactive samples

Hello David,

Firstly might I apologise for not responding to your electron post, however today being Friday the 13th and having just started to respond I thought it a welcome number to begin. Is it prime?

Anecdotes aside I was really rather excited to say the least to hear about the ongoing success with the CRD. Moreover I was absolutely elated to hear of the interesting experience you encountered with your radioactive samples, and that the smaller samples produced a significantly great increase in the detected rays. Might I enquire further as to the radio activity levels of each radioactive sample , both large and the small, with a separate geiger counter?

In the case that the radioactivity of both samples were identical, we of course must now enter into the exciting realm of establishing as to what varied in each of the samples to cause such a large increase. Presuming that no differences exist in radioactivity between the large and small samples, we can propose that the total mass and the surface area to volume ratio of the arrangement is the only sofarknown variable which could potentially influence your results with the CRD. There may be something that I have overlooked, what are your thoughts?

I do not want to get unduly excited as I may have sofar myself misunderstood "what it is" that the CRD detects, the question of course has arisen as to what one detects from a radioactive sample such as uranium or radium if not alpha beta and gamma, and of course the fascination is heightened why a smaller sample would cause the CRD to detect more rays.

We already know for instance that cosmic rays are supposed, in the view of Tesla, supposed, to be responsible for the internal mechanistic activity seen in the particulates of an atom. For instance the conventionally accepted theory put forward by scientists is that the radioactive components alpha beta and gamma rays are all caused internally from processes within the atoms , therefore causing instability and so "blamed" from the causation of charges density, and therefore the "atom self leaks" , decays. For instance , in iron cores in transformers, by increasing the density of the atoms, then less magnetic field lines can escape, as if some "pressure" in the electrical winding of solenoid or transformer coil resulted in a stronger magnetic field being produced. My only theory is that the electric core "traps" the electrical field in some way and prevents it escaping because the "holes" between the atoms in the conductor are smaller. The way in which a magnetic field is produced as a result and at 90 degrees of an electron flow is still not well understood, simply in the scientific realm "it is". "Why" is not important, seemingly, to them. Not to me though! What fascinating! Tesla had a why!! As can be seen Tesla believed that the motivations of the radioactive charges were not caused by atomic perturbations of the atom and its dense charges to cause a "self leaking" but some cosmic ray force was thereby associated as some external pressure which resulted in the internal instability of the matter in the first place. As we have now come to constantly refer to as the potentially primary force. I am bothered though by the fact that a CRD is detected as a result of a moving "electron" itself being dislodged, is there any way to separate the apparatus from itself? This is with some gentle humour intended.

However as pointed out in the conventional nuclear physics sense, we are expected to believe that nuclear decay motivates itself, and that the produced rays are a result of the instability of charges caused by the dense metals density. Whereas Nikola Tesla's description differs in that he believed and said he had a way to prove that the instability of dense matter was a result of the external cosmic rays from our sun and the billions of stars, passing through it, and that if sufficiently shielded (presumably by some electrical means) then the radioactivity of the sample is completely eliminated. An impossibility, by the conventional standard belief that the atom supposedly decays by itself and own internal mechanical perturbations . If this were the case, then indeed no external force should influence or could block the rate in which an isotope is reduced - decayed. If we were to find just one single case in scientific journals and researches where for instance the sun or implied magnetic or electrical fields were to influence radioactive isotopes on this planet or even mitigate nuclear reactions, then not only would a completely new and revolutionary science of physics be along the road, but the very nuclear science of today would be at risk. The atom may be motivated by external wireless means as yet not understood. Faster than light?

In the absolute inductive sense, were there to be one invention, such as a CRD, or geiger counter that could show that the radioactivity of a sample was altered by external means, then it would no longer be safe to presume that the variable alone of radioactive atomic density determined the observed effect of decay. Indeed, if it were as Tesla said, and decay of any element such as radium be turned off, then this would be an absolute proof that cosmic rays influenced the rate of decay, and caused by this primary external force. Radioactivity and other produced rays then being securely a secondary force.

It is my hope at least that your results with your CRD and the samples might be of the first glimmers of what we are yet to observe in terms of the relationship between the cosmic rays and other planets and their conductors. For instance, as discussed the density of a magnetic core, in the same sense alters it's ability to retain a magnetic field density (or strength) , and presumably there is some point whereby the size of a transformer core and it's density reach a point where there can be no more increase in density, and then under presumably such tremendous energetic force to increase density of an atom towards an infinite pressure, there is the case of the resulting magnetic, electrical qualities as well as alpha beta and gamma decay and maybe even other possible combinations of particle streams.

In the case of a black hole, or a collapsed star. The only difference between when it is a sun with a weak gravity, to when it is a light sucking singularity, is that the surface area to volume ratio was reduced significantly. Causing the same mass of the star to be confined within a much greater density to surface area. This as yet so far notably being the only main variable difference in the alteration of the gravity and magnetic qualities of a star, simply that the surface area to volume ratio of the sun was changed and it resulted in an exchange of some force which was determined by such a decrease in volume whilst retaining it's "mass" and "charges". That is not to say the increase in gravity may have been caused by internal means alone, it could well be that some external force begins to interact at that ratio.

Were it the case that rays determined the internal activity of dense materials, as well as suns, it would be the holy grail of determining the effect of gravity. Presently the wireless force of gravity, much like radioactivity, is considered to be solely caused by the internal forces of atomic mass, without any external causation whatsoever - were it to be shown that some external invisible force, perhaps rays - travelling multiple times the speed of light and were having some effect on black holes, stars or radioactive isotopes, then it may explain some of the longstanding and continuing existing problems with physics and electrical theories today. For instance it is considered by many engineers and electricians , as einstein said, that no velocity of any wave might exceed that of light, however in terms of the treatment of the asyet unknown and asyet fully explained gravity - it is permitted upon occasion to grant some infinite speed. In other words there is faster than light, and it is not well understood. Indeed, the question arises, as to the speed in which the effect would be felt were our moon to explode , or completely vanish from existence in an instant, and the period and rate of which the resulting waves on our earth would in turn reciprocate. This I believe could reveal propagation velocity similarly as has been suggested for the CRD. Of course there are other avenue of research, however the way in which cosmic rays may mitigate or alter the production or alpha beta and gamma rays and their reflections will be a promising avenue of research. I just blame Rutherford for `Radiations from Radioactive Substances`. As tesla would probably say the title of many nuclear forces is misleading. "From radioactive substances" , not necessarily and apparently not if Tesla has anything to say about the matter!!

Please keep going David. Sputins too, it is the least we can do for Eric.


Best Wishes,
Adam

A team of scientists from Purdue and Stanford universities has found that the decay of radioactive isotopes fluctuates in synch with the rotation of the sun's core

Read more at: Radioactive decay rates vary with the sun's rotation: research

The mystery of the varying nuclear decay - physicsworld.com

[David G Dawson]

Cosmic Ray Generator (CRD)

Cosmic Ray Detector (CRD):

An update on the CRD as it is now working about 10 hours daily in the Lab as I go about my business.
Have retuned and adjusted for best effect and now working at 145 volts dc on the Plate and 1 Kv for the Geiger Tube.
OA4G will strike at a minumum of 109 volts at turn-on but is much higher later in the day.
Getting about 20 to 25 'dongs' per minute and this is similar to the blips received on a standard Geiger Counter.
Activity at about 5:00 pm ST is slower than during the day.
Have samples of both Allenite and Urananite here from the Mary Kathleen Uranium Mine in Queensland and have two samples of each.
In both instances the large samples did not change the number of dongs but both the small did and very visibly so with a doubling or trebling of 'hits'.

Cosmic Rays are said to be 'generally protons and atomic nulclei' but are unable to penetrate our Atmosphere but do interact with it to produce secondary particles and these as we just tesed for are probably the alpha, beta and gamma rays.
Not keen on this description and would think the aether also plays a significant role here.

Smokey

[David G Dawson]

Cosmic Ray Detector CRD

Cosmic Ray Detector (CRD):
CRD now back up and running with a single 8" brass bell.
Had to do several modifications to the main board as the existing coils were only 23 ohms but had many spares here to fit the gap in the housing.
Ones used were slightly deeper and had to extend the switch contacts out but all is working well compared to my original organisation.
A second bell could be added to this at the outer side of the donger and may do this later to give a ding dong effect.
Bell is LOUD but very positive.
HT volts best at about 170v DC and EHT for the Cintel 21" Geiger Tube best at 1KV.
The old organisation was affected by my person and especially hands over the components but nothing with this as the EHT is now quite substantial as I believe I was only using about 300volts DC.
Results worthy of the effort.
Jumped a foot off the ground when I got my first 'dong'!
This would make a good demonstration unit for anybody wanting to open up another's eyes to what is really going on out there and should be a required school exercise.
This is using Eric's later modifications.
The ballast lamp can also be seen during the firing cycle.







Eric, as we now have the major problem solved with the bell ringing and you have further input, please do so as any further work here can now be easily exercised.
Thanks.

Smokey

[Deco56]

Hey Eric,


I have sent you a letter with some video screenshots about the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjz-5Lqtxow

Can you comment on if this set-up is repeatable? What are your thoughts on this other than the "Scalar" garbage, the experiment seems legitimate, regardless of his choice of words....

I highly doubt the video is fake, even given the Scalar Confusion. I also believe it is repeatable. This aspect is not talked about much and would like a clarification, Eric. I hope it is possible to recreate this...You can reply here or respond to the letter, please let me know which you choose... Seems to be a very interesting and simple set up. Also noted NO extra coil OR top load and I also doubt coils are in resonance....explanation??? Specifically comment if any modifications need to be made or what design ratio or geometry should be followed...


Dejan C.

[t-rex]

Tesla's Cosmic Ray

1) Electric Rays were an important aspect of the work of Nikola Tesla as seen in his Notes, Lectures, and Patents Book, published in 1956 by Nolit in Belgrade. This work remains an enigma to this day and is the basis for the Cosmic Ray Detector Project.

The Tesla Ray is in all probability akin to the Le Sage Particle, this is where to begin the study. The important concept here is that Gravity and Radio Activity are both due to external causes, such as Le Sage, or Tesla Particles or Rays.

2) The Electron is also an enigma so do not feel confident that current theories have any valid meaning, or you will be deluding yourself.

Three distinct heterogeneous concepts exist here:
(1) The "Cathode Ray" of Wm. Crockes
(2) The "Atomic Corpuscule" of J.J. Thompson
(3) The contemporary "Electron"

These are not to be considered equivalent.

The Corpuscule of Thompson is connected with a "Faraday Tube", or "Line of Force".

The Electron is a Beta Ray and is not considered to be attached to a Line of Force.

The Electron Tubes of Philo Farnsworth contain Anode Screens to detach the Lines of Force from the Electrons.

I was recently sent some information on some experiment in which an Electron Particle Accelerator Pumped Electrons into a Dielectric which held them in its structure. Then a Gradient Disruption was initiated upon the Dielectric giving an Avalanche Discharge and a consequent Lichtenburg pattern of Fractal Form in the Dielectric material.

(I unfortunately lost this paper)

Hence, no real definitions exist with regard to the Electron and plays no real role in Electrical Transmission other than to give rise to Resistance and a loss of Electric Energy. This is the viewpoint of Carl Steinmetz.

Moreover, Crockes and Thompson did not like the modern notion of the Electron, so why should we? After all; their experimental efforts gave birth to Atomic Science.

73 DE N6KPH

[t-rex]

Free Energy Secrets

I was asked by a private individual to comment on this video.
This is something that I am regularly asked to do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Spf5WVGgSY

In response to the above video:

1) There is no scientific varification of any energy anomaly since no Wattmeters exist in setup and no demonstration is given that the alternator cannot deliver the load energy without the transformers.

2) There is no such thing as "Cold Radiation" and moreover the guy came close to killing himself by putting hand held meter around a 14.4 thousand volt wire. The meter is good for only 600 volt.

3) All standard Utility Company configurations use two transformers between generator station and distribution station with NO energy anomaly.

4) What is not understood by these guys is that 50 plus 25 KVA (75 KVA) of transformer takes about 5 KVA of magnetizing force to charge themselves, this at harmonic frequencies of 60, 180, 300, etc cycles per second. The alternator must maintain this force but the engine cannot deal with it properly.

5) This harmonic condition can create anomalous energy conditions within the engine driven alternator configuration. This can in theory give a gain in energy over that developed by the generator.

6) To demonstrate this scientifically requires great skill, however the guys shown have no knowledge of even a basic scientific method.

7) An electric motor running the alternator in stead of an engine allows for a kilowatt hour meter to measure energy in. Another kilowatt hour meter at the load bank measures the energy out. If the energy out exceeds the energy in, then it is proven. There is no other way.


Reference this Borderland video to witness the efforts required to determine the energy transformation.
Note that the apparatus show is observed to be over 100% efficient.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HaqcuRCsEE

Actual scientific effort by people with a sound working knowledge of electricity rather than the fooling around with delusional notions by people with not a clue of the nature of electricity or even their own safety is the only way to access the comprehension of energy synthesis. I have grown thoroughly fatigued with crack-pot websites and their arrogant little punky-boys constantly debasing any scientific effort, and the attitude that accompanies it.

73 DE N6KPH

[David G Dawson]

Electron Theory

Ongoing Electron Theory:
My take on electrons is that they do exist but as a part of an Atom but they do not flow and they cannot exist alone as an electron.
They become excited under electrical stress or excitation which extends their orbital flow around the nucleus into an ellipse which brings them into contact with like Atoms and electrons undergoing the same stress.
This is how electrons pass their energy on from one to the other by contact but there is NO flow - you might like to call it a 'contact' flow but this is also where the resistance and heat comes into play as the kinetic energy imposes heat around the electron collision areas.
This is your resistance to current 'contact' flow.
This 'contact' flow only occurs around the surface of a wire or transferring component where the Aether exchange is actually happening.

An Ion is an Atom that has lost an electron due to a potential difference or stress condition but does not exist as an electron and joins back in with the general Aether mix.
This is the reason why you cannot see an Electron as the Electron Microscope is a fudge device that does not actually see the Electron at all - (Ken Wheeler - Uncovering The Missing Secrets Of Magnetism).
There is said to be 33 forms of the Aether and each one plays a significant role in all of the production of Nature.
We began this with only four Aetheric forms which grew to 7 and now 33, the more we read vintage texts, the more we will understand the true nature of the Aether.

I am responding here to the work of, in particular, Crookes and Russell in their models of the Elements and their Valency and how they differ with the number of electrons in their Valence bands.
BUT Electrons only exist in an Atom, the lost Electron reverts back into the general Aetheric mix and cannot flow as a mass and there is no such thing as 'free electrons'.
Transmutation is not an Electron exchange but is an Aetheric exchange, Electron - Aether - Electron, from one Element to the next.
'Secondary Emission' in a Vacuum Tube is the release of electrons from Atoms of the bombarded Plate or metal but back into the Aetheric state and takes on another form which could be called a plasma but other forms do exist in a corona and these are adaptations of the Aether under electrical potential or excited stress conditions.
A greater focus required in this area.

In our goal to develop a means of energy using Primary Physics, we need to look at this state of an electron where it is being reconstituted back into the Aetheric form and this is an Implosive event and runs cool and this is where we need to be.
It is an electron transistional state back into the Aetheric form that is required for 'Energy Synthesis' and can work in two directions.
I would now look at this and state that the Electron to Aether transistion is a HEAT process and the converse, Aether, back into an Electron is a COLD process and such, the two conversion states Expansive and Contracting - Male and Female.

I believe this is where the De Aquino Gravity/Electrical Conversion device and my own Implosive Steven Mark TPU (His was working at the wrong end - Expansive - overheated and should have been at the other conversion end - Implosive and runs cool) are leading me at this time.
Once we are able to see this clearly without the confusion of all the bad publicity about that electron, then and only then, will we be able to make progressions to achieve our goal.
All you really need to do to understand any of this is to watch a high voltage spark closely to see what is happening or better is to build Vacuum Tube devices and closely watch them at work - protect your eyes.
A picture is worth a thousand words and what is it that you see from a Solid State device?
Consider just how much 'dumbing down' is at work today.
You are being 'conditioned'.
As I see it.
Comments please?

Smokey

[David G Dawson]

Cosmic Ray Detector CRD

Cosmic Ray Detector CRD:
Needed time to review results.
Test # 1 shows a single 0.47 uF capacitor as the best candidate as we are looking for a minimum applied voltage and this had the best result by far and suggests an outside source of energy and probably Cosmic, that we seek.
Test # 2 shows a 2.0uF (2.2uF) capacitor is the best for use in this instance as here we had a low voltage but also had the best display and also suggesting an outside and possible cosmic influence.
The 'spot' comment column with 2.0uF showed a very large 'spot' and from memory covered the entire surface of the cathode where the others were just a 'spot'.
This is the flash of gas when the Tube first fires that we are looking at here.

Hope this helps and will be waiting for an input from Eric as we continue along this path of discovery.
Will try and get some time to implement the 8" ringer bell into the CRD circuit.
Good to see Sputins also building.
Doing these tests is a great learning tool but you need to have the bits before you can do any of this.
Perhaps we should be covering the entire spectrum with these tests from the 3000 angstroms up to the 8000 but will let Eric decide on that one and also the possibilities of using a photomultiplier Tube and would they also amplify a cosmic signal?

In my stock I have rather large and NOS EMI 9658F and 9558B and 9781B (side window) (1P28/R212) and have noted construction consists of Caesium and Antimony and having eleven (11) dynodes.
Spectral Response is at 370 to 400 nm and photocathodes are of an S20 (trialkali photocathode) type and looks as if they are used in the blue and green area of TV camera use.
I have other similar here.
Will Post some pics later as it may help in deciding what is required next.
A great deal to learn of here.

Smokey

[David G Dawson]

Cosmic Ray Detector bells

Sputins.
Excellent work!
Will be good to hear your results when you finally hook up.
Now that Eric has explained a little from my own very first question, we now have a little more theory to work on and have been doing some reviews of my stock of PE Cells and Photomultipliers.
Don't see any reason why we don't cover the full spectrum of what we have available and make notes as we go.
See here that I have 935s S5 3400 angstroms, 1P21 S4 4000 and 931-A also S4.
921 and 923 both S2 8000 and all the others are S1s at 7500.
Also have some here from other manufacturers that are not listed anywhere and a lucky dip possibilty.

As usual with Eric's Posts I do some tracking and have come up with some interesting finds as I would like to know more about the real situation an not the secondary physics corrupted one:

TACHYON PUSH-GRAVITY: BACKYARD GRAVITY SCIENCE

https://ia902502.us.archive.org/31/i...00stalrich.pdf

Am also still into reading Karl Schapeller on Primary Physics as I would dearly love to get rid of all of electrons/protons/neutrons/photons etc or at least have a better description in how they really work.

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Davson.pdf

Books from tuks.nl:

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/BooksDownload.html

Have been on a collecting spree of dinger bells and now have quite a range with one donger 200mm 8" in diameter but this one is for the CRD as it has the make/break contacts that the others didn't and is a better option than the earlier donger on bell contacts:





This is the first in many years where I was able to obtain the relay contact type.
Have a problem in music in that, to me, it appears discordant and the ringing of any of these bells is pristine in nature and somehow appeals to me.
Vacuum Tubes also have this same quality.

Smokey

[David G Dawson]

EPD CRD Tests 1 & 2

EPD CRD Tests 1 & 2:
CRD - 'Cosmic Ray Detector'
Did send this data forward but looks as though Eric never received it.
Original request for Test to be carried out from Page 20 of this Forum back at 29th November 2012:



This is the setup used.
A special double forked switch was made for easy switching between the two states.
The 'receptor' used was a Cetron 868 which has a Spectral Response of the Cathode as type 'S1' which is specifically targetted towards microphonics or sound.

http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/Atwoo...Phototubes.pdf

In the background is the Cetron 21" Geiger Tube which was being used for the CRD at that time.



Results for Test # 1:



Results for Test # 2:



My apologies for not getting this data to Eric earlier but not an easy communicating network in place where we are attempting data exchange.
Good that Eric was able to explain his background on this device as it now means something different that we can now delve deeper into the understanding bit.
Think I asked this question back in those days as I wanted to know more and why the specific interest.
CRD not working at this time as I still need to develop a better switching method as the donger on the bell was too weak a contact and difficult to maintain operating.
All the best.

Smokey