Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[RAMSET]

I absolutely believe David always have
and then you add Carroll's experience ??



David had a load run for Weeks ...all kinds of loads
Carroll witnessed the same "anomaly" but to a lesser extent.

and Matt ...well he's had similar experiences .

nothing to do with the storage characteristics of Lead acid batteries creeping up while resting.

just way more power than could ever be explained.

an urban Legend with a happy ending ??

I hope so

sorry for the intrusion ,But this ricards speaks a very interesting language
and one which needs more "learning".

respectfully
Chet K

[bistander]

Originally Posted by ricards

...
3BGS to supply household?.. no solar is much economical considering allocation of space for batteries required.

Finally. I've been waiting for that observation. A statement I understand, and agree with.

On your other post, no, I don't understand. But I don't want to discuss battery systems, or pulse motors; just Turion's 1800W/300W generator. He claims it stands on its own, no special battery system or special motor needed.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Thanks for chiming in. I've had motors run continuously from a battery for years. But as I mentioned, I don't want to discuss battery systems. Such is a no-win however I approach it.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Originally Posted by ricards

The poison in your mind is that "The Energy" must come from somewhere..

To ricards and all,

Here is a good article about the definition of energy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...hat-is-energy/

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

Originally Posted by bistander

To ricards and all,

Here is a good article about the definition of energy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...hat-is-energy/

Regards,

bi

Bi, thanks a good read yes.

but the author clearly stated this..

..But a fundamental, universal definition? That's an accomplishment that's still beyond our reach.

now I'm wondering if you really read this or not.

and I'm not a big fan of "Dark Energy"

[aljhoa]

Originally Posted by bistander

To ricards and all,

Here is a good article about the definition of energy.

What is energy? As best as we know it, energy cannot exist independently of particles or systems of particles.
(Even gravitational waves are made of theoretical particles known as gravitons, just as electromagnetic waves are made of photons.)
Energy comes in a variety of forms: some fundamental and some derived.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...hat-is-energy/

Gyroscopic Primer by Prof Eric Laithwaite Full Video @ 44:37

Al

[bistander]

Originally Posted by ricards

...

now I'm wondering if you really read this or not.
...

Why do you say that?

I did read it. First briefly, then again more thoroughly as I was posting the link. In fact, I printed it.

But just because I post an article for information, does not mean I believe or agree with every word. Such as dark energy.

Regards,

bi

[ricards]

Originally Posted by bistander

Why do you say that?

I did read it. First briefly, then again more thoroughly as I was posting the link. In fact, I printed it.

But just because I post an article for information, does not mean I believe or agree with every word. Such as dark energy.

Regards,

bi

oh ok my bad.. thought you wanted to "lecture".. just sharing stuff.. thanks.

[Ufopolitics]

Originally Posted by bistander

To ricards and all,

Here is a good article about the definition of energy.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...hat-is-energy/

Regards,

bi

Hi Bistander,

You are right!! an excellent article, thanks..

I ...basically love this statement below...not about "dark energy" though...:

1-When particles interact in an unchanging spacetime, energy must be conserved. When the spacetime they’re in changes, that conservation law no longer holds.

Do you agree with it?


Regards


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Originally Posted by Ufopolitics

Hi Bistander,

You are right!! an excellent article, thanks..

I ...basically love this statement below...not about "dark energy" though...:

Do you agree with it?


Regards


Ufopolitics

Hi Ufo,

Do you agree with it?

No, but I don't disagree either. I don't know. Never have I claimed to know all. Just somethings. Glad you liked the article.

Regards,

bi

[Iamnuts]

What exists at any one point in this 4D matrix does change though, the matrix itself remains unchangeable.
To an observer it changes, but when the whole of spacetime is considered it
doesn't.
Comments most welcome,

John.

[Iamnuts]

One way of getting an idea?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat...f_the_universe

[bistander]

Originally Posted by Iamnuts

One way of getting an idea?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat...f_the_universe

heat death of the universe

One more thing to worry about.

[ricards]

heat death.. black hole.. bigbang.. wormholes.. spacetime..

now more recently

dark matter.. dark energy.. energy creating space..

all of which are concepts without actual observational basis.
all based on conjectures and assumptions.

I wonder what is the next chapter of science is about.

[Iamnuts]

Entropy is conserved for a reversible process. A reversible process is one that does not deviate from thermodynamic equilibrium, while producing the maximum work. Any process which happens quickly enough to deviate from thermal equilibrium cannot be reversible. In these cases energy is lost to heat, total entropy increases, and the potential for maximum work to be done in the transition is also lost. More specifically, total entropy is conserved in a reversible process and not conserved in an irreversible process.[6] For example, in the Carnot cycle, while the heat flow from the hot reservoir to the cold reservoir represents an increase in entropy, the work output, if reversibly and perfectly stored in some energy storage mechanism, represents a decrease in entropy that could be used to operate the heat engine in reverse and return to the previous state, thus the total entropy change is still zero at all times if the entire process is reversible. An irreversible process increases entropy.[7]

[Iamnuts]

By the way, the idea of negative potential energy is fundamental to how the universe works, not just batteries. Some scientists believe that it could be the answer the time old question - “if energy is always conserved, then where did all the energy come from in the first place?” The hypothesis is that all the positive energy, kinetic (including heat and electromagnetic), positive potential energy (like charge repulsion) and mass itself (through mass energy equivalence) has been borrowed from attractive fields, leaving lots of negative potential energy behind.

So yes, you really can get energy from nothing, just as long as you leave behind negative potential energy. The catch is that you have to supply the components of whatever is going to be storing that negative energy, and you can only recover those components by putting the energy back in.

[Ufopolitics]

Originally Posted by Iamnuts

What exists at any one point in this 4D matrix does change though, the matrix itself remains unchangeable.
To an observer it changes, but when the whole of spacetime is considered it
doesn't.
Comments most welcome,

John.

Hi,

Spacetime could be changed in only specific areas, determined by the scope/range of the source doing it.
When we alter spacetime in specific ways we have access to ALL things Science says are not possible.
Frequency, resonant points, magnetic and electric fields plus the "shape" utilized, could change our surrounding spacetime.

Space, our space is full of all kind of molecules-atoms...which have electrons, protons, neutrons, nucleus...etc,etc...which are randomly dispersed, so, when we align them, following a pattern/shape, say a Spiral/Vortex, we are altering those particles plus its "enveloped space" which influence inside or nearby matter in different ways.

Direction of rotations of those spirals, plus the velocity/speed of chosen "shape(s)", alter time.

And...all together conforming a frequency reaching resonance with surrounding matter causes different effects/results...

Briefly resuming it...Particle acceleration into a spiral at great velocity, within electric-magnetic fields will alter spacetime.

However, Geometry of the Spiral is the essence to affect specifit matter surrounding it.


Regards



Ufopolitics

[aljhoa]

Originally Posted by Ufopolitics

Hi,

Spacetime could be changed in only specific areas, determined by the scope/range of the source doing it.
When we alter spacetime in specific ways we have access to ALL things Science says are not possible.
Frequency, resonant points, magnetic and electric fields plus the "shape" utilized, could change our surrounding spacetime.

Space, our space is full of all kind of molecules-atoms...which have electrons, protons, neutrons, nucleus...etc,etc...which are randomly dispersed, so, when we align them, following a pattern/shape, say a Spiral/Vortex, we are altering those particles plus its "enveloped space" which influence inside or nearby matter in different ways.

Direction of rotations of those spirals, plus the velocity/speed of chosen "shape(s)", alter time.

And...all together conforming a frequency reaching resonance with surrounding matter causes different effects/results...

Briefly resuming it...Particle acceleration into a spiral at great velocity, within electric-magnetic fields will alter spacetime.

However, Geometry of the Spiral is the essence to affect specifit matter surrounding it.

EPAR Technology Group: Project Lagiewka Bumper small test

Lucjan LAGIEWKA, et al. EPAR Shock Absorber


Al

[Iamnuts]

Magnetic poles are always in pairs. However, magnetic flux does not actually flow from the north to the south pole or flow anywhere for that matter as magnetic flux is a static region around a magnet in which the magnetic force exists.
For a vortex to operate it necessarily requires a flow????
John.

[Ufopolitics]

Originally Posted by Iamnuts

Magnetic poles are always in pairs. However, magnetic flux does not actually flow from the north to the south pole or flow anywhere for that matter as magnetic flux is a static region around a magnet in which the magnetic force exists.

Hello John,

I completely agree with the above...no N>S flow of flux...not anywhere else.
Now, the way Flux is geometrically disbursed ( in 3d space)...could only be observed clearly with a FERROCELL, and the geometry is not simple, there are like circular rings like (curvilinear) which are NOT Straight, meaning NOT parallel to magnet axis, but have an inclined angle...this geometric "shape" allows to generate a spiral/vortex of Induced Energy in the nearby conductors....but then again, a spacetime movement is required from either one: magnet or induced in order to get the spiral-vortex effect on induced.

Originally Posted by Iamnuts

For a vortex to operate it necessarily requires a flow????
John.

The full Vortex flow is ONLY generated in the conductors (the induced) through a spacetime movement from either one.

Magnetic Field provides PARTIAL SEGMENTS (Angular) of the whole Vortex Flow in the conductor.
Only a Spacetime MOVEMENT Completes the FULL SPIRAL CYCLE to generate the Induced Energy Flow.

On his book, Spacetime, H. Minkowski relates to this effect as similar to a "corkscrew" movement.

Understand?


Ufopolitics

[bistander]

Originally Posted by Aaron

I already asked you to leave this thread due to your disruptions. You came back in and Turion continued the conversation with you so feel free to post until you are asked to leave by him.

I have seen you have not done what Turion has recommended. That's up to you, but if you don't replicate exactly without putting your own spin on things, then what do you expect? You don't have to answer - I'm just saying.

You're always free to start your own thread to critique the work here without getting in the way of progress of filling up the thread with a bunch of posts that people have to filter out in order to get to the message.

Aaron,

I did replicate a system to Turion's specifications, tested it and presented the data. I got a similar response as just seen to member axxelxavier. After the data has been posted and it is obvious that it doesn't support Turion's contentions, he finds fault with the experimenter's method. In both cases, with my test and with that of axxelxavier, Turion's objections are not supported by fact, reason or logic. In neither case is Turion able to display his test data.

I chime into his thread when he goes on a rant and seemingly invites me. Or when I have a on-topic question or comment. Almost always he is the one who drags it off-topic and disruptive often discussing me. I just want to see the science and discuss that. I'm looking for facts, truth and proof. What's wrong with that?

Respectfully,

bi

[bistander]

Originally Posted by Turion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzd40i8TfA

Link is vid of Jack saying:

You can't handle the truth.

Not true, but irrelevant to what you post.

Anyway, interesting to see your approach to axxelxavier's issue.

I've got a few batteries and a couple boost modules. Might set that circuit up and look for some truth.

Regards,

bi

[Iamnuts]

Hi Bistander,
you ought to be able to achieve 300 in and 1800 out.
Looking forward to seeing your results.
Don’t worry if you completely drain your battery a few times, it won’t hurt
it, honest, good luck,
John.

[Turion]

Shouldn't be up long or i may get in trouble

[citfta]

A video of a project I have been working on at another forum. I thought some of you might find it interesting.

https://youtu.be/68ChN24x_HU


Carroll

[citfta]

https://youtu.be/YhCYlUru6JQ