Hi Lighty,

<My personal opinion is that the battery together with its electrodes, electrolyte is not the source of energy, but merely the medium. Such as the atmosphere on our planet or the globe itself – this also merely is a medium for aether or vacuum energy, in which energy can materialize and manifest. If you put the right media together a lot of energy can, for free, accrue. A nice example here is exotic matter, such as mono-atomic gold, also called ORMUS, which you can find googling. This material seems to be a great mystery for science, but one scientific fact is that it is very closely connected to gravity and zero point energy. The laws of thermo-dynamics here do not seem to have any influence on this exotic matter.

Back to the battery: I think that the biggest problem is that while taping power from it the electrodes are degenerated by the electro-plating effect, whereby electricity has to be invested to again regenerate them.

But what will happen if besides the ‘normal’ electrodes, one additionally inserts neutral electrodes that do not produce any charges, but would be able to tap the surrounding charges in the electrolyte of the battery? The electrodes that generate the charges would thereby not degenerate, because there is no electro-plating. If we tap electricity directly from the electrode that generates the charge, we do destroy the source of energy. The battery generates the charge for free by the right combination of materials.

However, we destroy this process with the electro-plating effect which occurs when electricity runs through the electrodes. If two electrodes of same materials are put into the electrolyte such as non-magnetic stainless steel, these electrodes will not generate any charge, but are able to absorb the charge.
The electrodes hereby do not decay by electro-plating, but every time they would be shortened out hydrogen would be generated, as electricity would flow through the electrodes. This one should be no problem, as long as water is for free available, the electrolyte either wouldn’t be used up, from time to time it would need to be refilled and the original electrodes that generate the charge remain intact, without degenerating.

Maybe I am wrong - but I think the same would happen, such as in ordinary charging, if a radiant event occurs in the battery. This means the electrodes recover. The problem merely would be that if there was no electrolyte be present, after recovering the electrodes very little electricity would be generated, as the electrolyte as the medium, is missing.

The recovery of the electrodes can also happen without electrolyte, as for this merely is the bombardment of radiant spikes is needed.

But I could be wrong… I guess John Bedini is the only one that could say what is right or wrong, as he is the inventor of such battery charging system with radiant energy.

You are absolutely right here – Schauberger in his way charged water for healing purposes. He was even able to make water-diesel with fluid dynamics. The water was that much charged with dielectricity that it combusted better than diesel, gasoline or kerosene, even better than hydrogen/oxygen from electrolysis. The made real detailed measurements and report on this work during WWII.

So, if we understood dielectricity better, we could make a handful of miracles 

Thanks to pioneers like Tesla, Keely, Schauberger, today’s people like Tom Bearden, John Bedini, Edwin Gray, and those who share their knowledge here, as Dr. Peter Lindemann it is much more easy for us to understand as they have done the spadework! If they would not have done it, today we would be quiet ignorant about radiant energy, zpe, or however we might want to call it.

Best regards,
Shad