Free Energy? Critical examination?

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer


Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Fri Jul 25, 2014 8:36 am

Why do you say that? :?



http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Asym ... 0Motor.htm
The steady “input” energy is virtual state EM energy freely received from the vacuum via the broken symmetry of the magnetic dipole (opposite magnetic charges). Again we point out that quantum field theory requires a continuing interaction between the seething vacuum and the charge (including magnetic charge, which is loosely called "magnetic pole"). And quantum field theory also requires that all real, observable forces be due to the exchange of virtual particles.

The steady "output" energy of a magnetic dipole is real, observable EM energy (a steady outflow of real observable photons) that produces the so-called “static” EM fields of the magnetic dipole.

So we must correct our present understanding of the “static” EM field. Quoting Van Flandern on the question of a static field actually being made of finer parts in continuous motion:
“To retain causality, we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the term ‘static’. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that propagate. …So are … fields for a rigid, stationary source frozen, or are they continually regenerated? Causality seems to require the latter.” [Tom Van Flandern, “The speed of gravity – What the experiments say,” Physics Letters A, Vol. 250, Dec. 21, 1998, p. 8-9]

The resulting “asymmetric-field permanent magnet” is an asymmetric Maxwellian system of the type that was deliberately discarded by Lorentz when he arbitrarily symmetrized the Heaviside equations in 1892. Since then, all our electrical power engineers have been trained to only build symmetrical Maxwellian systems, and electrical power engineering as presently taught in our universities still prescribes only symmetrized power systems that destroy their own source’s broken symmetry (the source dipole inside the generator or motor) faster than they power the loads.

Since the Lorentz-symmetric systems built by electrical engineers in accord with the standard crippled electrical engineering theory self-enforce symmetry and thus COP<1.0, the first requirement for building asymmetric EM systems permitted to exhibit COP>1.0 is that something primary in the system must violate standard electrical engineering. One way to violate it is to produce and use permanent magnets each of which already has an asymmetric field.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:05 am

http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Fina ... %20CIRCUIT
There are many alternative and well-known permissible free energy systems that operate at overunity operational efficiency: solar cells, windmills, hydraulic turbines, heat pumps, and water wheels, to name a few. All of these are open systems, receiving an influx of free energy from a natural energy flow, and collecting and gating some of that energy to be dissipated in a load to do useful work. All of them are permissible overunity devices, since (1) they are open systems, (2) they constantly receive a free energy influx from an external source, (3) they extract and collect some of this energy without dissipation, (4) they dissipate this collected energy in a load, and (5) the discharge process is totally separated and isolated from the "collection-from-the-source" process.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:55 am

http://www.qveng.com/generators.html
Based on compelling evidence drawn from Quantum field theory dealing with the energetic nature of space, and foundational aspects of the Hydreno atomic model, it has become quite obvious that the magnetic field energy flowing continuously through any permanent magnet can be utilized to provide continuous rotation of permanent magnet motors. Magnet fields can also be manipulated using various novel means to provide far more electrical power from an induction coil than that required to oscillate the magnetic field.

Other generator concepts incorporating novel Inductive-capacitive (LC) resonance and electronic circuits, have also been developed by independent inventors around the world. Overunity generators are intended to provide economical, environmentally sound alternatives to existing generator technologies, eliminating the need for expensive conventional fuel sources and their foul emissions.

Principles of Operation:

Overunity electrical generators typically require less power for their operating cycle than they produce. The excess power is effectively drawn from a coherence of ZPE from the local energetic vacuum of space through various non-linear, asymmetric effects produced by the generator which usually employs permanent magnets. Excess power is possible based on the realization that the force produced by a magnetic field is due to a continuous, coherent flow of ZPE from the vacuum produced by the oriented magnetic fields of the electrons of the individual atoms of the magnetic material.

In effect the permanent magnet provides a "channel" through which the energy of the vacuum flows analogous to water flow in a river. The magnet itself is not the source of the energy it is only a channel through which energy flows. Indeed, all forces dynamic or otherwise are produced from a continuous flow of energy from the vacuum according to the Hydreno Atomic model.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:28 am

"From what has been observed, you're playing with the phasing angles between the motor and the generator, and when the phasing angles are out of phase, you're getting into what is called 'power factor'. When you get the power factor right, the current and voltage are out of phase, and when you get them meshed up enough, it actually self-runs and produces excess energy.

"This theory is based on magnetic flux. Permanent magnets or electromagnets such as in a generator or a motor, under certain conditions, give overunity (OU) behavior. But there's more to it than that, from what I've seen myself in overunity devices. It is all about geometry of the system. How and where a permanent magnet gets it's energy, is still a very big mystery to science. Excess energy can appear in electromagnets, as well.
It is suggested that a dipole will tap into the vacuum energy and supply OU to a device set up to do that.
Now we know of 26 individuals/groups that have come up with this independent from one another. Some of these are likely to be bogus, but not all.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory: ... _Left_Over
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Wed Jul 30, 2014 8:22 am

There is so much info about free energy and over unity devices that all of these can not be scams. We have wasted billions on fusion energy, and still no real over unity that I know of.

LENR, 3rd Party E-Cat Test: http://www.e-catworld.com/may-2013-3rd-party-test/
Emitted power was calculated as 816 Watts, and power consumption at 322 Watts per hour, giving a COP of 2.9
LENR may be transmutation with excess heat generated.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Fri Aug 01, 2014 8:12 am

by Philip Yam

Scientific American, December 1997, pp. 82-85

from TheInstituteForNewEnergy Website.

Energy fills empty space,
but is there a lot to be tapped,

as some propound?
Probably not..

Something for nothing. That's the reason for the gurgling water, ultrasonic transducers, heat-measuring calorimeters, data-plotting software and other technological trappings-some seemingly of the backyard variety--inside the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin, Tex.

One would not confuse this laboratory with the similarly named but far more renowned one in Princeton, N.J., where Albert Einstein and other physicists have probed fundamental secrets of space and time. The one in Austin is more modestly appointed, but its goals are no less revolutionary. The researchers here test machinery that, inventors assert, can extract energy from empty space.

Claims for perpetual-motion machines and other free-energy devices still persist, of course, even though they inevitably turn out to violate at least one law of thermodynamics. Energy in the vacuum, though, is very much real. According to modern physics, a vacuum isn't a pocket of nothingness. It churns with unseen activity even at absolute zero, the temperature defined as the point at which all molecular motion ceases.

Exactly how much "zero-point energy" resides in the vacuum is unknown. Some cosmologists have speculated that at the beginning of the universe, when conditions everywhere were more like those inside a black hole, vacuum energy was high and may have even triggered the big bang. Today the energy level should be lower. But to a few optimists, a rich supply still awaits if only we knew how to tap into it.

These maverick proponents have postulated that the zero-point energy could explain "cold fusion," inertia and other phenomena and might someday serve as pan of a "negative mass" system for propelling spacecraft.

In an interview taped for PBS's Scientific American Frontiers, which aired in November, Harold E. Puthoff, the director of the Institute for Advanced Studies, observed:
"For the chauvinists in the field like ourselves, we think the 21st century could be the zero-point-energy age."

That conceit is not shared by the majority of physicists; some even regard such optimism as pseudoscience that could leech funds from legitimate research. The conventional view is that the energy in the vacuum is minuscule.

In fact, were it infinite, the nature of the universe would be vastly different: you would not be able to see in a straight line beyond a few kilometers.

"The vacuum has some mystique about it," remarks Peter W. Milonni, a physicist at Los Alamos National Laboratory who wrote a text on the subject in 1994 called The Quantum Vacuum. "One has to be really careful about taking the concept too naively."

Steve K. Lamoreaux, also at Los Alamos, is harsher: "The zero-point-energy community is more successful at advertising and self-promotion than they are at carrying out bona fide scientific research."

QUANTUM FLUCTUATIONS, ripples that form the basis for energy in a vacuum, pervade the fabric of space and time.

The concept of zero-point energy derives from a well-known idea in quantum mechanics, the science that accounts for the behavior of particles near the atom's size. Specifically, zeropoint energy emerges from Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, which limits the accuracy of measurements.

The German physicist Werner Heisenberg determined in 1927 that it is impossible to learn both the position and the momentum of a particle to some high degree of accuracy: if the position is known perfectly, then the momentum is completely unknown, and vice versa.

That's why at absolute zero, a particle must still be littering about: if it were at a complete standstill, its momentum and position would both be known precisely and simultaneously, violating the uncertainty principle.

Energy and Uncertainty

Like position and momentum, energy L and time also obey Heisenberg's rule.

Residual energy must therefore exist in empty space: to be certain that the energy was zero, one would have to take energy measurements in that volume of space forever. And given the equivalence of mass and energy expressed by Einstein's E = mc2, the vacuum energy must be able to create particles. They flash briefly into existence and expire within an interval dictated by the uncertainty principle.

This zero-point energy (which comes from all the types of force fields--electromagnetic, gravitational and nuclear) makes itself felt in several ways, most of them obvious only to a physicist. One is the Lamb shift, which refers to a slight frequency alteration in the light emitted by an excited atom. Another is a particular kind of inescapable, low-level noise that registers in electronic and optical equipment.

Perhaps the most dramatic example, though, is the Casimir effect. In 1948 the Dutch physicist H.B.G. Casimir calculated that two metal plates brought sufficiently close together will attract each other very slightly. The reason is that the narrow distance between the plates allows only small, high-frequency electromagnetic "modes" of the vacuum energy to squeeze in between.

The plates block out most of the other, bigger modes. In a way, each plate acts as an airplane wing, which creates low pressure on one side and high pressure on the other. The difference in force knocks the plates toward each other.

While at the University of Washington, Lamoreaux conducted the most precise measurement of the Casimir effect. Helped by his student Dev Sen, Lamoreaux used gold-coated quartz surfaces as his plates. One plate was attached to the end of a sensitive torsion pendulum; if that plate moved toward the other, the pendulum would twist. A laser could measure the twisting of the pendulum down to O.Ol-micron accuracy.

A current applied to a stack of piezoelectric components moved one Casimir plate; an electronic feedback system countered that movement, keeping the pendulum still. Zero-point-energy effects showed up as changes in the amount of current needed to maintain the pendulum's position.

Lamoreaux found that the plates generated about 100 microdynes (one nanonewton) of force.
That "corresponds to the weight of a blood cell in the earth's gravitational field," Lamoreaux states.

The result falls within 5 percent of Casimir's prediction for that particular plate separation and geometry.

VIRTUAL PARTICLES can spontaneously flash into existence from the energy of quantum fluctuations.

The particles, which arise as matter-antimatter twins, can interact but must, in accordance with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, disappear within an interval set by Planck's constant, h.

Zero for Zero-Point Devices

Demonstrating the existence of zero-point energy is one thing; extracting useful amounts is another. Puthoff's institute, which he likens to a mini Bureau of Standards, has examined about 10 devices over the past 10 years and found nothing workable.

One contraption, whose Russian inventor claimed could produce kilowatts of excess heat, supposedly relied on sonoluminescence, the conversion of sound into light. Bombarding water with sound to create air bubbles can, under the right conditions, lead to bubbles that collapse and give off flashes of light. Conventional thinking explains sonoluminescence in terms of a shock wave launched within the collapsing bubble, which heats the interior to a flash point.

Following up on the work of the late Nobelist Julian Schwinger, a few workers cite zero-point energy as the cause. Basically, the surface of the bubble is supposed to act as the Casimir force plates; as the bubble shrinks, it starts to exclude the bigger modes of the vacuum energy, which is converted to light. That theory notwithstanding, Puthoff and his colleague Scott Little tested the device and changed the details a number of times but never found excess energy.

Puthoff believes atoms, not bubbles, offer a better approach. His idea hinges on an unproved hypothesis: that zeropoint energy is what keeps electrons in an atom orbiting the nucleus. In classical physics, circulating charges like an orbiting electron lose energy through radiation; what keeps the electron zipping around the nucleus is, to Puthoff, zero-point energy that the electron continuously absorbs. (Quantum mechanics as originally formulated simply states that an electron in an atom must have some minimum, ground-state energy.)

Physicists have demonstrated that a small enough cavity can suppress the natural inclination of a trapped, excited particle to give up some energy and drop to a lower energy state [see "Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics," by Serge Haroche and Jean-Michel Raimond; SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, April 1993]. Basically, the cavity is so small that it can exclude some of the lower-frequency vacuum fluctuations, which the excited atom needs to emit light and drop to a lower energy level. The cavity in effect controls the vacuum fluctuations.

Under the right circumstances, Puthoff reasons, one could effectively manipulate the vacuum so that a new, lower ground state appears. The electron would then drop to the lower ground state--in effect, the atom would become smaller--and give up some energy in the process. "It implies that hydrogen or deuterium injected into cavities might produce excess energy," Puthoff says. This possibility might explain cold-fusion experiments, he notes--in other words, the occasional positive results reported in cold-fusion tests might really be indicators of zero-point energy (rather than, one would assume, wishful thinking).

Work in cavity quantum electrodynamics is experimentally challenging in its own right, however, so it is not clear how practical an energy supply from "shrinking atoms" could be.

The Austin institute is testing a device that could be interpreted as manipulating the vacuum, although Puthoff declines to provide details, citing proprietary nondisclosure agreements with its designers.

How Much in Nothing?

Underlying these attempts to tap the vacuum is the assumption that empty space holds enough energy to be tapped.

Considering just the fluctuations in the electromagnetic force, the mathematics of quantum mechanics suggest that any given volume of empty space could contain an infinite number of vacuum-energy frequencies--and hence, an infinite supply of energy. (That does not even count the contributions from other forces.) This sea of energy is largely invisible to us, according to the zeropoint-energy chauvinists, because it is completely uniform, bombarding us from all directions such that the net force acting on any object is zero.

But just because equations produce an infinity does not mean that an infinity exists in any practical sense. In fact, physicists quite often "renormalize" equations to get rid of infinities, so that they can ascribe physical meaning to their numbers. An example is the calculation of the electron's mass from theoretical principles, which at face value leads to an unrealistic, infinite mass.

The same kind of mathematical sleight-of-hand might need to be done for vacuum-energy calculations.

"Somehow the notion that the energy is infinite is too naive," Milonni says.

In fact, several signs indicate that the amount of energy in the vacuum isn't worth writing home about. Lamoreaux's experiment could roughly be considered to have extracted 10^-15 joule.

That paltry quantity would seem to be damning evidence that not much can be extracted from empty space. But Puthoff counters that Casimir plates are macroscopic objects. What is needed for practical energy extraction are many plates, say, some 10^23 of them. That might be possible with systems that rely on small particles, such as atoms.
"What you lose in energy per interaction, you gain in the number of interactions;" he asserts.

Milonni replies by noting that Lamoreaux's plates themselves are made of atoms, so that effectively there were 10^23 particles involved. The low Casimir result still indicates, by his figures, that the plates would need to be kilometers long to generate even a kilogram of force. Moreover, there is a cost in extracting the energy of the plates coming together, Milonni says: "You have to pull the plates apart, too.

Another argument for a minuscule vacuum energy is that the fabric of space and time, though slightly curved near objects, is pretty much flat overall. Draw a triangle in space and the sum of its angles is 180 degrees, as it would be on a flat piece of paper. (The angles of a triangle on a sphere, conversely, sum to more than 180 degrees.) Because energy is equivalent to matter, and matter exerts a gravitational force, cosmologists expect that an energy-rich vacuum would create a strong gravity field that distorts space and time as it is seen today.

The whole universe would be evolving in a different manner.

CASIMIR EFFECT is the motion of two parallel plates because of quantum fluctuations in a vacuum. The plates are so dose together that only small fluctuations fit in between; the bigger modes are excluded (above).

They exert a total force greater than that by the smaller modes and hence push the plates together. The effect was observed by Steve K. Lamoreaux, now at Los Alamos National Laboratory, who relied on a torsion pendulum (left). A current applied to the piezoelectric stack tried to move the Casimir plate on the pendulum; the compensator plates held the pendulum still.
The voltage needed to prevent any twisting served as a measure of the Casimir effect.

ZERO-POINT ENERGY was purportedly tapped with a machine that made use of ultrasonically generated bubbles (right). Such devices are tested by Harold E. Puthoff (below), director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin, Tex. So far no apparatus has been found to produce a net gain in energy.

That argument ties into the cosmological constant, a concept that Einstein first developed, then discarded. In the equations that describe the state of the universe, the cosmological constant--which incorporates zeropoint energy--is in a sense a term that can counteract gravity. Astronomical observations suggest the constant must be nearly zero. Consequently, if the vacuum energy really is large, then some other force that contributes to the constant must offset it.

And as physicist Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas notes in his 1992 book Dreams of a Final Theory, that offset feels unnatural: calculations that sidestep the infinity terms produce a vacuum energy 120 orders of magnitude greater than the nearly zero value of the cosmological constant, so that other force must be opposite but identical in magnitude to the vacuum energy out to 120 decimal places.

Puthoff replies that the connection between the cosmological constant and zero-point energy is more complex than is often realized. "Obviously, the zeropoint-energy problem and the cosmological constant, though related, are really different problems," Puthoff argues, noting that predictions of quantum mechanics have proved correct time and again and that instead something is still missing from cosmologists' thinking.

Such disagreements in science are not unusual, especially considering how little is really known about zero-point energy. But those would-be utility moguls who think tapping zero-point energy is a worthwhile pursuit irritate some mainstream scientists.

"I was rather dismayed at the attention from what I consider a kook community," Lamoreaux says of his celebrity status among zero-point aficionados after publishing his Casimir effect result. "It trivializes and abuses my work."

More galling, though, is that these "pseudoscientists secure funding, perhaps governmental, to carry on with their research," he charges.

Puthoff's institute receives a little government money but gets most of its funds from contracts with private firms.

Others are backed more explicitly by public money. This past August the National Aeronautics and Space Administration sponsored a meeting called the "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop." According to participants, zero-point energy became a high priority among those trying to figure out which "breakthroughs" should be pursued.

The propulsion application depends on a speculation put forth in 1994 by Puthoff, Bernhard Haisch of Lockheed Pale Alto Research Laboratory and Alfonso Rueda of California State University at Long Beach. They suggested that inertia--the resistance that objects put up when they are accelerated--stems from the drag effects of moving through the zero-point field.

Because the zeropoint field can be manipulated in quantum experiments, Puthoff reasons, it should be possible to lessen an object's inertia and hence, for a rocket, reduce the fuel burden. Puthoff and his colleagues have been trying to prove this inertia-origin hypothesis--a sensitive pendulum should be able to detect a zero-point-energy "wake" left by a moving object--but Puthoff says they have not managed to isolate their system well enough to do so.

More conventional scientists decried the channeling of NASA funds to a meeting where real science was lacking.

"We hardly talked about the physics" of the proposals, complained Milonni, adding that during one of the breakout sessions "there was a guy talking about astral projection."

Certainly, there should be room for far-out, potentially revolutionary ideas, but not at the expense of solid science.

"One has to keep an open mind, but the concepts I've seen so far would violate energy conservation," Milonni concludes.

In sizing up zero-point-energy schemes, it may be best to keep in mind the old caveat emptor: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Mon Aug 04, 2014 1:28 pm

Thomas Henry MORAY

Radiant Energy Receiver

The Sea of Energy [ Excerpts ]
He assumed at first that this energy was electromagnetic in origin; however, he never claimed that it was electromagnetic in nature. He assumed at first that this energy came from the earth. But later he believed it was from the universe. Finally he began to believe that it was present throughout all space, intermolecular space as well as terrestrial and celestial space. He did not necessarily understand how his detectors operated, only that if he very carefully built the device according to his calculations, it worked. He was able to demonstrate the existence of an energy that today, though it has not been identified or proven, has been theorized by many researchers...
http://www.rexresearch.com/moray2/morayrer.htm#ch10
Once the machine is in operation and delivering power, it does not require any continuance of the excitation forces necessary to start it. The oscillations are sustained as long as it remains properly tuned and the external circuit is completed through a suitable load.

The special tubes which appear to be the key to the success of this device are ionic cold cathode tubes which require no external power sources..

[p. 244] The following guidelines delineate what one must do to duplicate Dr Moray's Radiant Energy Device:

(1) When the primary side of the device is disconnected, a spark equivalent to 225,000 volts must be drawn between the two disconnected terminals.

(2) By disconnecting the antenna and re-connecting immediately, the lights must stay on. If the lights are allowed to die, however, re-connecting the antenna will not reestablish the connection and the unit becomes completely electrically dead.

(3) The energy produced must be high frequency.

(4) The device must be operable at a distance of more than 50 miles from power lines or radio stations.

(5) The light of a 100 watt lamp must be whiter and brighter than the ordinary 100 watt lamp without burning out after 157 hours of operation.

(6) When a heavy load is connected to the device while in operation, after already draining as much as 4 kilowatts, the present load must not decrease nor the lights flicker.

(7) A duplicate shunt test, like that made by Lovesy, with number 50 wire must be successful.

(8) Small number 30 wire should be used for all circuits.

(9) At least 10,000 watts and up to 50,000 watts of power must be produced in a box not weighing more than 60 pounds.

(10) As the ground wire is driven deeper, the amount of power must increase.

(11) None of the components of the device must heat.

(12) No moving parts may be included.

(13) The device must be absolutely silent.

(14) By tuning the circuit by the use of variable capacitors, the lights must come on.

(15) A resistive load of 600 watts must be brought to full heat in less than 2-1/2 minutes.

(16) After 158 hours of operation, the unit must still be running and no parts of the device be heated.

(17) The test performed by Dr Knudson must be duplicated.

(18) Smell of zone should be present during the operation.

(19) No heated cathodes or bias power supply must appear.

(20) All of the above must be present at the same time.

The fact remains that Henry Moray demonstrated under the above conditions on numerous occasions, up to 50,000 watts of power. The device always sat on a table where it was easily examined by anyone coming into the room, so that it could be seen that the only wires entering the device were the antenna and the ground...
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Wed Aug 06, 2014 7:48 am

International Tesla Electric Company and Dennis Lee are out of the game. Is the Technology real though?

Science Fiction Or Science In Development?


The technology is untested, at least for investors. At this time the FTC has seized the assets of the President of ITEC and have forced him to sign a Non-Compete into alternative energies. In the meantime the Website does appear to be up and capable of taking registrations. We highly recommend not doing that as the company is being taken apart by the FTC. Any and all associated webpages or sites connected to the highlighted site below are in violation of the FTC ruling for Dennis Lee to cease all work in this field because of the thousands of people he supposedly took advantage of.
http://www.freelectricity.com/

One of our sponsors admits to having several account representatives try and meet with the parent company who owns the patents and discuss selling them or regrouping into a new company. At this point we can say to anyone who subscribed to the ITEC’s services and bought a voucher, we’re sorry you were ripped off. That is why the FTC has seized Dennis Lee’s companies’ assets. He does appear to be a criminal prosecuted by the Gov. He used religion and network marketing to position this product which was never delivered. I should have some more information soon but I can tell you the patents are real. What happens next may take years to play out.

Quote from an inside source:

“the UCSA dealerships are effectively dead at this point. This came about by the FTC seizing the company assets and then suing the president of the company. This drained all the funds and too a few years to resolve which resulted in a settlement agreement that precluded the president from being involved in any free energy technologies. As I said it is a very long story that I don’t have time to tell.
I still believe there are technologies that can be brought to the market with sufficient funding. We are currently waiting for funding which we believe will be available in the relative near term.”
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

User avatar
MrAmsterdam
Posts: 596
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:59 am

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by MrAmsterdam » Thu Sep 11, 2014 1:26 pm

Sparky wrote:
MrAmsterdam wrote:Sparky! Empiricism! Peswiki.com !
:D
ummmmm, I don't read shorthand, sorry. :oops:

What are your thoughts on Empiricism and Peswiki, regarding the study of zpe? ;)
There have been many experiments and inventions that created a surplus of energy. Just study it yourself and put emphasis on the replicated experiments. It took a while for me to accept it, since it is not something you learn in your schoolbooks.

Something completely different, did anyone read this article on Peswiki?

http://pesn.com/2014/08/13/9602527_Elec ... ee-energy/

I think its rather exiting to see these guys taking a look at the EUT.
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. -Nikola Tesla -1934

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:39 am

Mr.A--- thanks for the link w/audio link...I agree with you about excess energy, and believe that Tom Beardin's experience and understanding is a good starting point.
Not that I understand it, but the vacuum energy hypothesis seems to explain many things that I wonder about..
thank you!
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:12 am

http://realitysandwich.com/39824/time_c ... isclosure/
Dr. David Lewis Anderson has entered the public arena to widely disclose the existence of nothing less than time control and related technologies (including a time reactor that taps into the “free” energy created by the earth’s frame-dragging through space time). This may be the most powerful technological development humanity has so far constructed. He and other groups around the world have been perfecting these technologies for some years now.----------------------It’s being used in Japan, in India, there are efforts in China.------------------Dr. Anderson has exposed human beings to retarded and accelerated rates of time.
http://www.andersoninstitute.com/
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Thu Sep 18, 2014 10:52 am

Patent:
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Par ... IN/Zawodny
The geometry of the structure supports propagation of surface plasmon polaritons at a selected frequency that is approximately equal to the resonant frequency of the material system. As a result, heavy electrons are produced at the electrically-conductive material as the surface plasmon polaritons propagate along the structure.
Article:
http://www.wanttoknow.info/newenergyinv ... es-0-10000
Search page: Dr Zawodny
Senior Resarch Scientist Dr Zawodny: This other form of nuclear power releases energy by adding neutrons. Eventually [the nuclei] gain a sufficient number of neutrons that they spontaneously decay into something of the same mass but a different element. It has the demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy, cleanly, without hazardous ionizing radiation, without producing nasty waste.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

Sparky
Posts: 3517
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by Sparky » Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:53 am

In support of time dilation : http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -verified/

If there is frame dragging and time dilation, then does that support the work of

Dr. David Lewis Anderson : http://www.andersoninstitute.com/
Dr. David Lewis Anderson has entered the public arena to widely disclose the existence of nothing less than time control and related technologies (including a time reactor that taps into the “free” energy created by the earth’s frame-dragging through space time). This may be the most powerful technological development humanity has so far constructed. He and other groups around the world have been perfecting these technologies for some years now.----------------------It’s being used in Japan, in India, there are efforts in China.------------------Dr. Anderson has exposed human beings to retarded and accelerated rates of time.
"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
"Doubt is not an agreeable condition, but certainty is an absurd one."
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire

User avatar
MrAmsterdam
Posts: 596
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:59 am

Re: Free Energy? Critical examination?

Unread post by MrAmsterdam » Thu Oct 16, 2014 12:58 am

Independent Researchers Test Rossi's Alleged Cold Fusion Device For 32 Days

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/10/12 ... =popbyskid

The observers understandably hedge a bit, though:
The researchers are very careful about not actually saying that cold fusion/LENR is the source of the E-Cat’s energy, instead merely saying that an “unknown reaction” is at work. In serious scientific circles, LENR is still a bit of a joke/taboo topic. The paper is actually somewhat comical in this regard: The researchers really try to work out how the E-Cat produces so much darn energy — and they conclude that fusion is the only answer — but then they reel it all back in by adding: “The reaction speculation above should only be considered as an example of reasoning and not a serious conjecture.”
versus
http://aviationweek.com/technology/skun ... or-details

Lockheed Martin aims to develop compact reactor prototype in five years, production unit in 10

Ever since the 1920s, when it was postulated that fusion powers the stars, scientists have struggled to develop a truly practical means of harnessing this form of energy. Other research institutions, laboratories and companies around the world are also pursuing ideas for fusion power, but none have gone beyond the experimental stage.
And the weird thing is, the device what will work somewhere in the future is 'socially acceptable' by mainstream science...

BTW Don't these journalists at Avationweek have access to the internet or something? Don't they read about these controversial experiments?
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. -Nikola Tesla -1934

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests