Thanks hazmat rules are extremely important for health and safety.
It should be the "why" that should reinforce safety disciplines but
the direct method DO NOT is really misunderstood, it is a good thing.

Go Beyound JJ thompson for understanding:
Since gravity waves are proven fact look at the balance point inside capacitor
see what can be learned with miliken drop experiment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnO3mkCLYsI

With the right safety setup and procedures and care the experiment is
tolerable which falls into category of ionization dielectric xrays and particles
being studied in very precise controlled conditions. Much of the subject of
resonance and transmutation is just not talked about because
hacker jack experimenters insist on doing nuclear boy scout projects.

I don't need to polarize to be motivated to experiment but safety
comes first, school became very expensive ticket so should you stop ?
Go beyond but be careful. Believe the gieger counter.

Theory and False Theory

I hope you are able to absorb and understand what these two posts are saying. I've been on this forum for close to 5 years and just about every point in these videos has been both supported and contradicted. In other words, some people are on one side and some are on another side. And, take it at face value, there are more than two sides or positions. You will be entertained when you read all sides of a thing, but a lot of these views are incompatible. They cannot all be true. Some are right and some are wrong. Be careful whom you put your faith and trust in because you could be entirely deceived. I am skeptical, but I think free energy is possible. I am simply waiting for experimental proof that I can replicate at a reasonable cost. Don't post links for my benefit. I've seen them "all" already. Of course, it is impossible for me to say I have seen them all, but I have seen enough. The inexpensive experiments have all turned out to be useless or obvious hoaxes. Still, if you don't understand your opposition's point of view, how can you present a reasonable objection? You can't. You are wasting your time and everybody else that has to read it.

Bottom line? Make it an enjoyable journey and think deeply before you open your position to ridicule.

The animation is milliken experiment with respect to gravity
Wayne's insertion shows lack of reading compreshension.
An assalt on my charecter imputing wrong motives.
Disrespect for my entire life's work in alternative energy.

Wayne make your tin foil hat position clear but don't imply I am an agent of
disinformation or the opposition or wasting others time.
A better place for you is instructables.
You are in the hot seat for not comprehending and making the above claims.
The finite adjustment in the milliken is very important and the concept
is for those who can use it, no time for extremist arguments.

I'm done ignoring Wayne's trouble maker comments.
His discrediting individuals is obvious and intent very questionable.
who cares Jack we need people who want to Go Beyond who
can comprehend concepts and do things safely.

Excellent video. Many thanks. It pretty much confirms my conclusions about what radiant energy is after four years of research. Tesla often spoke of harnessing nature's power to do work so the next logical step is to move from artificial man made radiant energy to harnessing the natural production of radiant energy which is radioactive materials.

What initially took me down this road were the stories about the 1931 Pierce Arrow electric car Nikola Tesla produced that could power a home when not in use as a vehicle. After all that research I believe the Pierce Arrow used a nuclear battery somewhat like those in use today to power space probes like the Voyager spacecraft that were launched back in the 70's that are still functioning and sending back data today. They are far beyond any possible use of solar panels to obtain their power much less 1970's solar panel use.

The attached document is a shortened summary of my four years of research. It points out the need to understand the science of the day to understand what Tesla was working toward at the time.

You may find some of it useful.

I enjoyed reading your summary. You did a wonderful job of summarizing your extensive research. Thanks for sharing!
The current nuclear batteries are extremely inefficient. Have you found any sound evidence from the past on how radioactivity of weak sources can be dramatically increased? I have seen patents where a simple capacitor is made in vacuum with Po210. Although many KV are generated, the coulumbs from the Po are far too low to charge the plates rapidly enough for the sort of power we would need.

So this experiment was dangerous?




Ernst.

Great work, thx1138! But please check and double check your sources. Especially when you see the name G. Vassilatos. I have reasons to believe that the Pierce Arrow story is fabricated, and probably by this man.

I have developed a "Tesla ray detector" (TRD) by using a green tritium light which is being monitored by a photo-transistor.
Everything is of course shielded so no other light can reach the photo-transistor.
The idea was that, according to Tesla, these rays induce radioactive decay, so it may increase the rate of decay in tritium and thus the tube might produce a little more light when exposed to these rays.
The detector clearly responds when the Tesla-coil powers the vacuum tube, but unfortunately, if I remove the vacuum tube the detector responds in much the same way.
So it appears as if my coil produces some effect in my TRD.
there could be a direct effect on the photo-transistor ?
or some rays that illuminate the fluorescent coating of the tritium light ?
or, as Tesla said, the tritium decay is sped up a bit ?

I'm afraid I will not heed Pomodoro's well meant advice.
Too many interesting things to be found.


Ernst.

The ones in use in the space probes are Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG) and it is that conversion of heat to electricity via the Seebeck Effect that is inefficient part - typically <10%. But the space probes actually need the heat for their circuits so it's an acceptable trade off in that case.

There have been other attempts to increase the efficiency through direct conversion but nothing I've seen so far produces what we would need to power a home economically enough to be feasible.
Radioisotope Batteries for MEMS

There was some talk about a Thorium plasma device that used the thorium to power a laser (or maser?) to heat water to spin a turbine but as far as I know it's not come to anything as yet.

I've seen articles about Thorium fluoride increasing the energy density of the Thorium but that gets into industrial scale devices.

The USSR used RTG's to power lighthouses around the Arctic circle that are in darkness for extended periods and inaccessible to a large degree that ran for decades but I don't have any idea how much power that required for each lighthouse.

There are quite a few methods of direct conversion being researched but most of the ones I've seen are about power for micro scale electronics projects.

Energy density is the real problem with almost all alternative energy projects that attempt to extract energy from the environment whether it is telluric, magnetic, atmospheric, cosmic rays, etc. As the energy density goes down the scale of the project must go up to accumulate usable quantities of power.

It appears, however, that Lockheed Martin may be on to something that can be built as small as a tractor trailer trailer (40' float?) that could power "a small city". It's supposed to be demonstrable next year.
Compact Fusion

That doesn't do us much good, though.

I built a radiant energy collector as outlined in Tesla's original patent which sort of worked, the power being minuscule but present none the less. I've been considering coating the insulated elevated plate with some form of very low level radioactive material like pitchblende to see if it increased the output but haven't done that yet.

Please post here anything you find. I'm still interested in this avenue but into other projects at the moment.

I'm with you 100% on the veracity of Vassilatos' work. I don't use him for a source other than the mis-directions he sends people off into that can be explained with conventional thinking once the history of discovery is understood. He states things as fact that can't be known unless he was actually there and they happened before he was born. That and the fact that he has absolutely no references make his work, in my eyes, pure fiction.

If I remember correctly the Tesla Pierce Arrow story was around long before Vassilatos' work. Maybe the 1950's or 60's. That said, the info is still dubious because Peter Salvo, who was supposedly the source of the info, wasn't all that convincing either.

Arthur Matthews, Tesla's last assistant, referenced an electric car by Tesla but he is not very believable either.

Still, most myths have a grain of truth in them somewhere.

All I have to say about the Xray accusations is maybe someone should ask Dollard before accusing. That would be the scholarly and correct thing to do. Or maybe you could just proof some film or an exposure badge or something to prove it.

Not to stray on the subject to far but it was brought up, why did the car have to have a nuclear battery?

Apply Occam's razor, "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one" to that story and it does not hold up. A Nuclear battery anyway. When did he ever build a nuclear battery or something to the like before.

A simple yet elegant answer to the cars power source is, Tesla was broadcasting the energy to run the car at a remote location the black box with big antenna was broadcasting radio location. He knew how to broadcast energy and even focus and aim it through the earth. This was the entire course of research leading up to his demise as a builder.

So ask again Why was there a nuclear battery? How does this result come into play when there are 3 articles discussing the car and account of the nephew when none of them have any technical premise to them.
I have heard so many explanations for what was under the hood and I have been laughed at for asking the same question of everyone about all the over complicated stories around that and still no one can give an answer that fits Occam's razor,given what we know he did.

Just curious, not wanting to have fight or anything.

Matt

That's the real problem. We don't really know anything about the car. We've got 2nd and 3rd and 4th had reports from reportedly unreliable sources.

I've heard the theory about transmitted energy. Here's my problem with that: all of his transmission patents have earth grounds. How do you earth ground a moving vehicle? We could speculate about "virtual" grounds but it's still speculation. Is there any proof that he had a functional power transmission system other than in Colorado Springs? I've seen the rumors of a station built in Canada but no photographs or legal documents proving it existed. I think most of that story came from Matthews as well. It seems to me that there would be photographs of any working power transmission system in Canada had it been built because Tesla surely would have used the occasion to promote the system. And how would the transmitter track a moving car? It could be done through his teleautomatics I suppose but that again adds more complexity. As far as I know his transmission system relied on nodes at fixed locations but I guess the frequency could be changed to to move the nodes along with the car but, again, more complexity.

In fact all of the info on the car, even the nuclear battery, is just speculation based on unreliable reports from Salvo and Matthews.

But why was Tesla interested in the price of radium around the same time frame as the 1931 Pierce Arrow story? That interest in radium is documented in magazine articles. IMO, the antenna was a red herring intentionally added to the car, if it existed, to misdirect the inquisitive. It's said he was very secretive about the car but again it's speculation.

Thinking about the box with vacuum tubes reportedly used in the car also reminds me of Dr. T. Henry Moray's device in that it has been said Moray used valves (vacuum tubes) with radioactive materials inside them. But that's just more speculation.

That leads back to pomodoro's question in an earlier post, "Have you found any sound evidence from the past on how radioactivity of weak sources can be dramatically increased?" I didn't think of that in my earlier post although I don't know if one could call that "sound evidence".
The Sea of Energy - T. Henry Moray

We have to keep in mind that all of this happened before radioactive materials were controlled by governments so although novel at the time, they wouldn't come under the scrutiny they would today.

Thinking of Occam's razor, which would be simpler in the 1930's, the self contained nuclear battery or the vehicle tracking, node moving power transmitter?

But in the end it's still all speculation until someone builds and documents it.

Incredible discussion !
OK go easy on Dollard, his latest video he is under 1 watt. Because wayne has a point
that some transforms are soft xray but handled as an exception rather than conspiracy.
Some of you are batting 70 -80 % that is excellant so lets not beat somebody
for some xray sins of 1973 because the problem is big we are doing the best we can.

Along with the THX comment the NASA isotopic vanadium and cesium diodes.
Lets catagorize these as regulatory run labs, What is the chance of portable thorium
fusion getting DOE funding ? What is the right way to appeal to get some of those
into regulatory like joint desaliationr program ?

If you can say something nice about Tom Bearden I don't like that
anyone getting bad rap, I think he is a good guy and it's disclosure issues
the same marginalizing when some people just cannot go there?

Take your time keep the focus. Tnx

Call it what you like ,
A coil induced by a magnetic field that is in motion, changes every micro second , even faster than that, the speed of light I suppose.
I read and re-read Tesla over and over , Tesla found the secret speed ,I believe he kept that to himself , He gave hints , We have to figure it out.
I believe it is in the collapsing field, It causes no drag on the generator ,if timed right.
artv

Mmm, I started out on that post because I wanted to say something. Then in the excitement of writing I forgot what I wanted to say.... And now I remember again....

There is (is there) a chance that, just like my TRD a geigen müller tube responds to a number of different things.
A geigen müller tube is basically a vacuum tube in which a gas gets excited by high energy radiation. But we know that a luminous tube lights up in the vicinity of a Tesla coil because the low pressure gas inside gets excited. That looks very similar to me, so could it be that a geigen müller tube also responds in the vicinity of a Tesla coil?

The experiment shown in the video at 1:45 (or thereabout) does actually indicate that this may not be the case. Alpha radiation will probably not reach the tube over that distance, beta radiation would have been blocked by the aluminium, so that leaves EM radiation or particle radiation (of a not yet recognized type).
EM radiation comes in 3 types of which only 1 (transverse EM radiation) is recognized. Tesla mentions particles of some type that travel faster than light, which are obviously also not recognized. So this alone gives you 3 alternatives besides the possibly dangerous TEM radiation.

So, if these radiations are TEM, could these be harmful?
Looking up the BD10A Tesla coil, we learn that it produces 10,000 to 50,000 V @ 500 kHz.
That is less than 1/3 of the voltage in a dentist x-ray machine (150 KV).
Since the energy of the radiation is reason for it being harmful to living tissue and this energy depends on the voltage, I would think that the experiment in this video does not pose any threat to anyone. Or at least not through TEM radiation.

In my experiment with Tesla's single terminal vacuum tube (high vacuum, described in his patents 685,957 and 685,958) at roughly 1.2 MV I have until now not found much evidence of TEM radiation. There could be some, but certainly not much.

I am not saying that everyone should now ignore pomodoro's advice. One should always use as much common sense as one has available, and in may cases more.


Ernst.