Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[vrand]

Hi Folks,

Form the last couple of posts it occured to me years ago somewhere I saw a reference to a Borderland Research Journal article in which James Murray wrote about new concepts in power generation (I do not know its content) and searched for it, see here:
Journals & Newsletters - Journal of Borderland Research - Vol. 46, No. 02 | Borderland Sciences Research Catalog (Powered by CubeCart)

If someone happens to have that copy of that journal, he could have a look at it.

Also, Murray has a British patent (in 1979) on a rotary transformer setup, it is GB2013043, Transforming generator, maybe you are not yet aware of.
You can see it here:
espacenet — Bibliographic data

rgds, Gyula

Thank you for the info

If Jim Murray is still alive maybe someone can joint venture with him to develop his technology.

Developing/reproducing any technology is a hit or miss venture. If one of the 100's of parts of the invention is incorrect the total experiment can be a failure. A researcher can even have most of the parts and pieces, made from the original inventor, and it still does not guarantee that someone will be able to put it all together to make a working unit.

Stan Meyer left tons of parts and notes, but 15 years later researchers can not make a working unit. EV Gray also left parts, some destined for the dump, 20 years later researchers can not make a working unit.

Having a "live" inventor that is willing to share and develop his invention is a good start for success. If the inventor does not have a working prototype then one will need to be built. Just building the prototype can take years and $millions and most of the time ends in failure.

The best way for a successful reproduction of an invention is if the inventor already has "a working prototype" then its much more easier for other researchers to reproduce the inventors claims.

Tesla, the inventor of the radio, our AC electrical system, invented hundreds of other applications, made it possible for thousands of other researchers to reproduce his inventions.

Regards

[gyula]

Maybe in Borderland Research Journal?

Hi Folks,

Form the last couple of posts it occured to me years ago somewhere I saw a reference to a Borderland Research Journal article in which James Murray wrote about new concepts in power generation (I do not know its content) and searched for it, see here:
Journals & Newsletters - Journal of Borderland Research - Vol. 46, No. 02 | Borderland Sciences Research Catalog (Powered by CubeCart)

If someone happens to have that copy of that journal, he could have a look at it.

Also, Murray has a British patent (in 1979) on a rotary transformer setup, it is GB2013043, Transforming generator, maybe you are not yet aware of.
You can see it here:
espacenet — Bibliographic data

rgds, Gyula

[vrand]

I do not...but certainly wish I did.

Economy? Lemme see...free energy for as long as the device operates * your power bill every month. I think that it would be plenty economical even if it costs thousands of dollars to manufacture...which it wouldn't. The only part that is troublesome is the rotor, and purchased in volume I can't imagine that costing more than a couple hundred bucks.

Yeah, that Report was to explain how the device worked in over unity, as his patent does not mention free energy output.

Is there any description out on the Internet on how his alternator worked?

Any photos of a working unit? Power in vs Power out?

[LtBolo]

I could not find Jim Murray's 1987 Report? Do you have the url?

Maybe its economical to build 23 years later?

I do not...but certainly wish I did.

Economy? Lemme see...free energy for as long as the device operates * your power bill every month. I think that it would be plenty economical even if it costs thousands of dollars to manufacture...which it wouldn't. The only part that is troublesome is the rotor, and purchased in volume I can't imagine that costing more than a couple hundred bucks.

[vrand]

I have a pretty good idea what may be going on. We'll see.




It may be the same guy, buy not the same invention.

Here is the patent for his alternator. The patent itself talks about efficiencies approaching 100%, but he has said in other places that it was well beyond 100%. I suspect that the patent was written to get past the patent office, who is highly resistant to overunity claims.

Alternator having improved efficiency - Google Patent Search

Thank you for the patent info

Here is some Googled info on Jim Murray:
A SCIENTIFIC KEY

Device #4: Another gentleman by the name of James F. Murray, released in his patent # 4,780,632 entitled "Alternator Having Improved Efficiency" in 1987, a device of his invention which looks a little strange and leads one to wonder why someone would go to the trouble of designing just another alternator. Just how many ways can one design an alternator? The patent is of course interesting from an engineering point of view, and while inclusive of all claims, leaves the reader with the feeling of waiting for the second shoe to drop.

The most important document is a report that Jim Murray wrote in 1987 that explains the patent in terms of functionality.

In order to patent his device and to distance himself from any ideas of over-unity, Jim Murray simply patented the design of the alternator without so much as a hint of over-unity. His paper of course does discuss this at length. The paper that Jim Murray wrote is essential to the full understanding of the device.

The only drawback of his device is that it is expensive to build with a good deal of CNC machine effort and much Dollars. However, from the study of this paper, it is an excellent exercise is looking for the key. It is hard to see and requires much insight and thought. It is there and it is very interesting.

I could not find Jim Murray's 1987 Report? Do you have the url?

Maybe its economical to build 23 years later?

Regards

[LtBolo]

It is great that you might be able to figure it out and confirm this wonderful technology. I would be interested in your findings

I have a pretty good idea what may be going on. We'll see.

I miss read your writing. The only thing I could find on Google on Jim Murray was a Gravity Torque Amplifier. Is that the correct man?
Regards

It may be the same guy, buy not the same invention.

Here is the patent for his alternator. The patent itself talks about efficiencies approaching 100%, but he has said in other places that it was well beyond 100%. I suspect that the patent was written to get past the patent office, who is highly resistant to overunity claims.

Alternator having improved efficiency - Google Patent Search

[vrand]

I wouldn't be too quick to judge others, sir. I have had conversations with their spokesman, and they have a decades long history of being abused by those that don't want the tech out. I might be a bit skittish too, if I were them.

Great to hear that you communicated with them. Lets hope they will allow others to reproduce there wonderful inventions!

Which is beside the point. The point I was making is that I think their large generator is a variation on this same theme. It was first developed in the late 80s, right around the same time that Dollard published much of his relevant work, and around the same time that Murray's patent was granted.

It is great that you might be able to figure it out and confirm this wonderful technology. I would be interested in your findings

Why do you say that he didn't?

I miss read your writing. The only thing I could find on Google on Jim Murray was a Gravity Torque Amplifier. Is that the correct man?

Directory:Inventors - PESWiki
[Murray, Jim] - Torque amplifier Gravitational apparatus

Does he have photos or a video of his invention? Patent #?

Actually the entire subject of the Russian paper is exactly that....a discussion of several devices that worked and the theory behind them. Complete with pictures and descriptions of the devices, as well as discussions about performance. Given that this is the paper that Dollard mentioned that described the same math that he used, and given that PHI1.62 has graciously posted a link to an English translation of a later version of the same data, you might consider studying it. I found it quite enlightening.

Thank you for the info

I will study it further.

Regards

[Xenomorph]

SuperCaviTationIstic has a point there.
Eric pointed that out himself :

It uses the same theory of operation as Chris’s device but involves a different mechanical implementation utilizing a vibrator, several capacitors and 12V and 24V batteries that are connected in parallel through the device, rendering them as one.

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

why not use a little buzzer/vibrator to flutter a capacitor plate, or move a core in and out of a coil?

anyone ever heard of an Electrostatic Wurlizer Organ? it flutters a variable capacitor with air to the frequency of the notes, which then synthesizes current for a speaker at the right frequency

Wurlizer Electrostatic Organs By Eric Larson

[LtBolo]

It seems to me that making a rotating variable capacitance device such as Chris Carson's design might prove to be easier and provide a more extreme variation in Farads with respect to time thus a bigger window of reactance with respect to time. But that is all just speculation on my part.

I'm not so sure. A mechanical cap is likely to have capacitance in the picofarad range...I saw mention that Chris Carson's was 1000pf. With that small of a capacitance to vary, the voltages to get meaningful power will have to be very high, probably on the order of 10s of kilovolts.

Inductance can be varied in whole henries without too much trouble. At that level you could produce meaningful power with single digit amps.

That said, I think the Russian paper talked about doing it both ways.

[LtBolo]

These guys are a joke. Claiming to want to save the planet by "keeping it a secret," all their inventions, that could save the planet.

I wouldn't be too quick to judge others, sir. I have had conversations with their spokesman, and they have a decades long history of being abused by those that don't want the tech out. I might be a bit skittish too, if I were them.

Which is beside the point. The point I was making is that I think their large generator is a variation on this same theme. It was first developed in the late 80s, right around the same time that Dollard published much of his relevant work, and around the same time that Murray's patent was granted.

If the inventor doesn't even build a demo unit why should anyone else?

Why do you say that he didn't?

Could be, we will never know as Chris is dead and so is the Russian, and no one, besides Dollard, claims to have built a unit that works.

Actually the entire subject of the Russian paper is exactly that....a discussion of several devices that worked and the theory behind them. Complete with pictures and descriptions of the devices, as well as discussions about performance. Given that this is the paper that Dollard mentioned that described the same math that he used, and given that PHI1.62 has graciously posted a link to an English translation of a later version of the same data, you might consider studying it. I found it quite enlightening.

[LtBolo]

Ok, do you have a link or could you post a copy of the translated Russian paper? (I used a link posted somewhere previously on this thread and it just sent me around in circles, & was unable to download it)..

PHI1.62 already posted this to this thread. It isn't the exact same paper, but does appear to be the same guys and same effort, and has lots of good info...in English.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...1970002202.pdf

Another quote from the original paper, for which I haven't yet found the translation, is on Naudin's site. I wouldn't pay as much attention to the commentary, but read the quote.
PARAMETRIC POWER CONVERSION

I myself may experiment soon with the capacitance variation over time concept.. I think Eric Dollard said in a previous post here, that changing inductance in relation to time destroyed energy, while changing capacitance in relation to time, created energy..?

I think you can use inductance or capacitance. The keys are phase and the direction of change.

[Web000x]

I think Eric Dollard said in a previous post here, that changing inductance in relation to time destroyed energy, while changing capacitance in relation to time, created energy..?

There was also the Rotary Electromagnetic Converter, constructed by Michael Knots and Peter Lindemann with the help of Chris Carson. This unit exhibited the property of materializing and dematerializing electric energy without regard for the Law of Conservation of Energy. This is another example of synchronous parameter variation. In this case inductance (L in Henrys) time (T in seconds) gave rise to positive resistance (R in Ohms), hence the unaccounted for destruction of electric energy. It must be just as illegal to destroy energy as it is to create it – don’t you think? E is NOT equal to MC squared. There is no Matter to Energy equivalency – this is: The Great White Lie…

The parametric transformer built by Michael Knots and Peter Lindemann exhibited an efficiency of 108% which can be seen in Borderland Science Research Foundation's DVD titled "Free Energy". Although, I do not think it is posted for sale under their catalog but may be requested for purchase thru contacting them at Contact | Journal of Borderland Research

Another thought: If you haven't seen the WITTS generator, take a look at it. I am increasingly convinced that it is nothing more than synchronous parameter variation. If you put two large coils in opposition, and rotated a section of core material to make and break a central magnetic path, when the path is broken, the inductors in direct opposition behave like air cores, but when the path is made, they no longer oppose and behave like iron core inductors. With a coil as big as what is there, the inductance could easily be swinging whole henries.

It seems to me that making a rotating variable capacitance device such as Chris Carson's design might prove to be easier and provide a more extreme variation in Farads with respect to time thus a bigger window of reactance with respect to time. But that is all just speculation on my part.


Dave

[vrand]

Can't say about Don Smith. He's so random it's hard to tell what he's really saying half the time.

As for Dollard, I think people have, although most of what I see appears to be wrong based on what I've been trying to explain. I think the WITTS device may be exactly this. They won't give details, however, for their own reasons.

Here is some info on WITTS:

World Improvement Through the Spirit (WITTS) Ministries, formerly World Improvement Technologies (WITs), is presently headed by Timothy Thrapp.

For many years, the ministry has been claiming to have around 100 sundry exotic energy technologies for sale (multi millions of dollars), including versions of gravity motors, engines that run on water, radiant energy devices (solid state or mechanical), inertial propulsion devices, and pollution remediation. None of those has arrived in the marketplace yet, that we know of.

They claim that numerous of these have been installed and running for a long time. Though some of the technologies have been witnesses, we know of no such installations, and have not been able to verify this assertion.

These guys are a joke. Claiming to want to save the planet by "keeping it a secret," all their inventions, that could save the planet.

Jim Murray's device is fully documented in his patent, and he seems to want someone to run with it, yet I don't see anybody doing so.

If the inventor doesn't even build a demo unit why should anyone else?

I think Chris Carson's device is precisely the same as the Russian paper, done with capacitance. The problem of capacitance is you have to get north of 10kv to get any meaningful power, given small changes in C. I think it is the harder way to do this.

Could be, we will never know as Chris is dead and so is the Russian, and no one, besides Dollard, claims to have built a unit that works.

Our next step will be to build a mechanically variable inductive device. The key will be to get high permeability core material to get the inductance high and still keep the coil resistance low. Spin the core at 2x the effective resonant frequency of the tank, and watch it go.

Please keep us informed of your progress, as we all are looking for the same thing here, how to be energy independent using the free energy of the universe.

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

A theory without proof are "a dime a dozen".

Regards

[Raui]

Great find phi and vrand! I myself have found a paper by Nicholas Minorsky on parametric oscillation. I'll upload it somewhere soon, I'm rather busy with school at the moment.

Can't say about Don Smith. He's so random it's hard to tell what he's really saying half the time.

As for Dollard, I think people have, although most of what I see appears to be wrong based on what I've been trying to explain. I think the WITTS device may be exactly this. They won't give details, however, for their own reasons.

Jim Murray's device is fully documented in his patent, and he seems to want someone to run with it, yet I don't see anybody doing so.

I think Chris Carson's device is precisely the same as the Russian paper, done with capacitance. The problem of capacitance is you have to get north of 10kv to get any meaningful power, given small changes in C. I think it is the harder way to do this.


Our next step will be to build a mechanically variable inductive device. The key will be to get high permeability core material to get the inductance high and still keep the coil resistance low. Spin the core at 2x the effective resonant frequency of the tank, and watch it go.

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

I have been looking everywhere for the translation of this paper, would you kindly point me in the direction of this translated paper or send me a PM and I can contact you via email? Thanks a bunch.

Raui