REGISTER NOW*** 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***

 Energetic Forum Donald Smith Devices too good to be true
 Register FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 Eric Dollard Magnetizer Products Tesla Chargers 2017 Energy Conference Energy Science Forum Donate Energy Times Advertising

 Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

05-14-2017, 04:32 PM
 radioionics Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 60
I agree with you based on the claims of the patents. However, the description in my patent was entered into the "public domain" once my patent was published. Only the "claims" in a granted patent have legal protection. However, US9564268 is null and void because it doesn't contain new and novel intellectual property. It's "claims" were already in the public domain. My patent description predates US Patent No. 9,564,268... which is based on information at the time my patent was placed into the public domain. This clearly shows that I'm the original inventor. My intention when I filed my patent was to put the technology into the public domain. I also intentionally allowed my patent to expire when I didn't pay its first maintenance fee. This effectively also put my patent claims into the public domain.

Have some due respect man!

-Bruce P.

Quote:
__________________

Last edited by radioionics; 05-14-2017 at 04:37 PM.
 Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets
05-15-2017, 02:35 AM
 ricards Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 145
Quote:
 Originally Posted by radioionics I agree with you based on the claims of the patents. However, the description in my patent was entered into the "public domain" once my patent was published. Only the "claims" in a granted patent have legal protection. However, US9564268 is null and void because it doesn't contain new and novel intellectual property. It's "claims" were already in the public domain. My patent description predates US Patent No. 9,564,268... which is based on information at the time my patent was placed into the public domain. This clearly shows that I'm the original inventor. My intention when I filed my patent was to put the technology into the public domain. I also intentionally allowed my patent to expire when I didn't pay its first maintenance fee. This effectively also put my patent claims into the public domain. Have some due respect man! -Bruce P.
Bruce, I don't think its worth the fight.. if your intention was really to put your work into the public domain as you stated so that people can learn and appreciate.. I suggest you should contact the administrator of this forum.. tell him about your work.. he might find some like minded folk that you can share your work with.. or maybe can be part of the group...

I don't know if your aware but If you didn't know.. the people of these forums [The administrators] held an annual "Energy Conference" where-in there are people that presents their work, based on "Energy".

I haven't been into an actual conference personally but by checking on these forums for few years, and watching their conferences videos. I think your somewhat in the same situation their in... I think these people already have a "working device" just like you and just not telling outright and public the actual device and just try to dwell on the science of things by holding a conference every now and then and by selling informative materials like books/ebooks, videos etc. why?.. I think because they also tried to fight...

What I think is.. if people Don't appreciate your work.. It means one thing, they are not ready for it..

The field in which you are working with relates with POWER GENERATION.. sure it will help our current state of living.. sure it will make our lives easier.. but there also exist people with malice.. and If they get their hands on this type of things what do you think will happen??..

I don't think It's worth pushing your work to people.. or arguing who's first or whatever.. I suggest you STOP.. not all people can appreciate your work..

let me just add my reason for posting another off-topic to this thread:
It just Irks me when you post more arguments topics on other forums than post directive/informative post on your own forum to your replicators.
__________________

Last edited by ricards; 05-15-2017 at 02:46 AM. Reason: let me just add my reason for posting another off-topic.
05-15-2017, 06:15 AM
 soundiceuk Gold Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,001
Personally I don't really care how we move forward.

Just As long As we do move forward.

None of us are getting any younger.

Neither are our children or grandchildren.

Whilst the internet remains somewhat free and less censored we have a chance to seize the moment.

For years I've been trying to convince Bruce that open sourcing his technology completely will see him right financially.

In the last few years my opinion changed that it wouldn't work that way.

Once that button has been pressed there is no going back and someone with a lot of money will profit and leave the inventor behind without ever having the funds to develop the other life changing technologies they have been working on.

Yes this is off topic but this thread is one of those threads that does that all the time.

It always finds its way back to Don Smith.

I just wish it would find its way to the answers that we all seek one way or another.
__________________

05-15-2017, 09:52 AM
 ricards Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 145
Quote:
 Originally Posted by soundiceuk Once that button has been pressed there is no going back and someone with a lot of money will profit and leave the inventor behind without ever having the funds to develop the other life changing technologies they have been working on.
That's just one of the saddest thing in this cruel world.

"Did you know who Invented the first spaceship that landed on the moon?... yet we all knew Neil Armstrong.." -Victor Von Doom

but what if.. just what if.. this is not the case..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...le_discoveries

there has been a lot multiple discoveries in recorded history... this scenario might just be one of them..

this is another one...
https://ionpowergroup.com/#/?playlistId=0&videoId=0

does this group also plagiarizes Bruce's work?.. If that group isn't in anyway connected to the people in that other patent.. and bruce would state that these are also the people that plagiarizes his work.. that would really make Bruce look bad..

what I'm trying to say is, If the "Reward" is not meant for Bruce, its never going to be..
I have high respect for the man that is why I decided to follow him. but seeing the way he acts now is really disappointing.
__________________

05-15-2017, 11:13 AM
 soundiceuk Gold Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,001
Ion Power Group have joined forces with various US military personnel and NASA.

They are on a completely different path and their method is different.

The energy source is the same just like Wardenclyffe was the same.

Bruce is just acting out of frustration.

We havn't been communicating so much lately but out of all of us I feel I know him best.

It's a collosal burden having the answer we all seek. Wanting a reward but not wanting to be enslaved by your discoveries and hard work.

It's a double edged sword.

Whilst we all will have an opinion on best way to move forward, ultimately it's Bruce that needs to be convinced he is making the best decision.

Inventors are not business men and that's for a good reason.

At least this time we have the hindsight to not make the mistakes of Stanley Meyer and various others.
__________________

05-15-2017, 09:28 PM
 soundiceuk Gold Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,001
None of us are rich and can afford to sink large amounts of money into any particular technology without a guaranteed result.

We all want the same result.

Cheap, abundant, clean energy.

My way of achieving this is giving Bruce the platform he needs.

So he does a few crazy, wild things, doesn't know how to communicate with folks properly.

The man has aspergers for @#*$sake!!! Give him a break! Who else is constantly banging the Tesla, Moray, Plausen drum on and on and on like a man with serious radiant energy OCD! You may not understand Bruce and he may not understand you. But I'm telling you straight he has the goods... If he wants$10,000,000 for complete open source then we ain't going to get another visionary make us this sort of offer in our lifetimes!

Tesla didn't have the internet but paved the way and foresaw its existence.

Let's make this happen and you will see I speak solid truth!

10,000,000 people 1 dollar each.

Let's go!

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/s...t/x/15072650#/
__________________

05-16-2017, 12:30 AM
 j dove Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 49
Lay off yhe bong man

Soundieuk

I don't know Bruce ,but if he wishes to put his work in the public domain then that is what he should do . But if he wishes a 10,000,000 U.S. Dollars pay off the go sell it to some corporation as did Mr. Smith.

To feel you could move forward with this by getting 10,000,000 people to give you a dollar is beyond ridiculous.
It ain't going happen , I mean look at the last few pages of this thread and you can see that Bruce could not even get along with the few that were here to replicate his device .

Come back to reality !!

LAY OFF THE BONG MAN!!!

I have no issue with Bruce to seek money for his work . He put forth the effort and thought to produce it and is his to do with what he wishes. He owes us nothing , but then we owe him nothing either . No one here has anything that even resembles a working device from what was disclosed . So no surprise that there are those that doubt it .

There will always be those that will seek to profit from the work of others . Has always been and will always be , do not cry about how the world is . We are all adults here and know how things work . You can not change others, only yourself and then affect others outlook by viewing your life . What choice will I make ?

Take a look at others that have had the choice and see how it worked out for them . One need only look at the past to see what maybe of the future .

So as you said , life is short . What will you leave to those that inherit this world from us ? Will you keep your knowledge to yourself if you can not profit ? Or will you share with the future for someone's benefit that you will never meet ? What matters to you in your heart ? Do you seek fame and fortune, to be credited with great a invention ?
I am not an advocate of either for is not my choice and I will interject my beliefs into his decision .But you can not have it both ways .

If he wishes to be taken seriously about helping humanity then I suggest either put up or shut up about it .

If it's money you seek then by all means proceed that route and don't look back . It's a fork in the road !!
Make a choice in direction , as even no choice is a choice with an outcome . You can control the outcome of the future . The choice is yours.

Best wishes ,

Jeff
__________________

05-16-2017, 01:31 AM
 ricards Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 145
Quote:
 Originally Posted by soundiceuk 10,000,000 people 1 dollar each. Let's go! https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/s...t/x/15072650#/
If you are promoting bruce, How come he was only mentioned as "...the inventor..." most of the campaign visuals and description relates to tesla?.. and the campaign.. well.. to be honest it looks like one of those scams and frauds about free energy the promises and claims its just too good to be true...

it sounds so much of a politician on election campaign.. sorry but the whole Idea is ridiculous..
__________________

05-16-2017, 06:51 AM
 soundiceuk Gold Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,001
Thanks for the feedback guys....
__________________

05-16-2017, 09:48 PM
 radioionics Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 60
You are correct... people aren't ready for the tech. They are already ripping each other to shreds with what they already have. I will keep what I have to myself. I now completely understand why the Moray's are so bitter, and their tech is going to be buried along with them.

Humanity is on the path to self destruction, have your fun people while you still can... we are close to the midnight hour.

-Bruce P.

Quote:
__________________

05-16-2017, 10:27 PM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62

F.Y.I

Again, one suggestion to further your project is to submit an entry to the 2017

NASA TECH BRIEFS, Create the Future contest. I believe the entry deadline is
the end of June this year.

https://contest.techbriefs.com/

See the post below for further details.

http://www.energeticforum.com/298556-post11608.html

Good luck and I think we all look forward to your contribution. Note; I have used this method
in the past and it can/does work quite well in a variety of aspects!

FIN
__________________

05-17-2017, 02:25 AM
 ricards Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 145
Quote:
 Originally Posted by radioionics You are correct... people aren't ready for the tech. They are already ripping each other to shreds with what they already have. I will keep what I have to myself. I now completely understand why the Moray's are so bitter, and their tech is going to be buried along with them. Humanity is on the path to self destruction, have your fun people while you still can... we are close to the midnight hour. -Bruce P.
now you sounded more like Tom Bearden now, acting like your some part of higher human causes! like its the end of the world if we don't do what you told us to! oh come on!.. for me you just want to be at the center of things..

It doesn't mean If you solve one problem you've solved it all! If you have a device that generates POWER but doesn't want to use that POWER, your no different than those that does not have it.

I don't know bruce.. If I have something like what you have.. I won't be sulking around my own space because of people that Looked away at what I have.. instead I would look for people that is interested with what I have.. I wont use the Internet like Paul did.. I would use my god given body parts and do some work!.. start by Identifying people that wants it! start with small people! start with a small device!.. start small! If your so into the credit.. I suggest you work for it! It doesn't mean that if you discover it your going to get a reward right away. its not like you've been asked to discover it anyway..

Start with a small manufacturing company.. or an internet cafe... of maybe just some random establishment that runs on electricity.. offer them what you have.. and offer them at a reasonable price.. you don't get rich overnight!..
and If you will tell me You've tried this.. I say TRY AGAIN!..

Don Smith Device and many other didn't make it in because of many factors, and one of it is like the scenario now.
"If you offer me 50 million dollar cash right now I wouldn't take it.. because I'm not Interested in peanuts."
your 10million dollar price.. Its a lot cheaper than Don but still...

you know what bruce.. what I'm trying to say is Ordinary People Like Us CANNOT appreciate what you have worked for 30+ years in a short amount of time.. you cant just slam it into our faces and expect us to appreciate it right away.. they don't teach algebra, calculus, chemistry etc in elementary.. because it is not something a child can Appreciate.. If you really are sincere when you wrote this..

[IMG]bruce.jpg[/IMG]

If you really are a part of higher human causes.. then act like one.. but be realistic... take the manner in your own hands. be responsible! KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.. and POWER COMES WITH GREAT RESPONSIBILITY!...

these phrases are everywhere you know.. stupid people just don't know what it means.. and I know your not stupid.

sorry for another off-topic.
__________________

Last edited by ricards; 05-17-2017 at 02:30 AM. Reason: bigger image.. dumb me just click the image
05-17-2017, 05:51 AM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
Engineering and Physics - Approach (b)?

F.Y.I.

In the real world progressing from a great idea to a viable product, believe it or not, can be
relatively easy, a lot of fun and quite interesting. Developing a "new type of fuel-less generator"
has an added bonus in that it can be done semi-professionally at relative low cost.

Briefly, an example scenario:

There are two development roads one can follow. Either the (a) iterative "cut and try" method, or,
what I'll term, (b) the mathematical engineering physics route; or preferably a healthy slice of both
(a) plus (b).

Following only the (a) road, in my opinion, is quite valuable but quickly leads to a brick wall dead
end. Youtube is littered with videos of coils and light bulbs including, in some rare cases,
researchers attempting to educate other "seekers-of-knowledge" using a variety of primitive "aids" and
"self derived" gibberish. Out of the many thousands of videos and comment pages there are but a hand
full of "useful" demonstrations; and, more often than not, when their goal is reached the presenter moves
on to further (usually very quiet retirement) development. Without the (b) route there is generally not much in the
way of "value" to be had. We have all observed this over the years. I will address (b) further in a bit.

Physical Hardware and T&M Equipment:

Device hardware; that is, for wire, electronic components, brass-board, enclosure, and so forth the expenditures
are minimal; likely less than a dining out for two with desert and drinks!

Fundamental design Test Equipment; an old laptop, (isolated) USB PC Oscilloscope, digital meter,
and battery again can be procured now days at very low cost. High voltage probes and other exotic
measurement devices can be easily fabricated with a little ingenuity.

Engineering Physics Tools (mathematics - multiphysics Computer Aided Engineering [CAE]):

Much, if not all, of the "alternate" energy theory, in my opinion, can be uncovered and disclosed
using conventional science with the assistance of modern engineering and physics tools that
are just now becoming available to us; the (b) route . Here are a few of the many examples:

Simulation Software: A Price and Performance for Everyone

Multiphysics for the masses. COMSOL wants to democratize simulation in the design processâ€“ TV-report > ENGINEERING.com

https://www.comsol.com/products

Gaining access to these tools can be cost effective as well - take a course at your local educational
institute; invest in an "off lease or surplus" HP Z820 Workstation; obtain demo or student versions
of CAE software; put a business plan together and run it by your banker or rich uncle... A maybe "unseen
additional bonus" involves developing a valuable "skill set" that can be applied in many other disciplines.

There is enough valid evidence of viable alternate energy devices but to make it actually happen
we need to do something besides light bulbs on Youtube, bicker about who's theory is correct or
what "method or technique" is the best.

With minimal expense and a little diligent effort, I firmly believe following the (b) route will bring
success for all and, if not right away, it will be fun and very educational at worst.

Plus; I see enough intelligence out here, I'm optimistic we can do it... we do however need a
forum board where you can publish formulas and other science material in a usable fashion.

PS - My new 32 core servers arrive tomorrow so I too will now also "move to a very quiet retirement" [development].

FIN
__________________

Last edited by Solarlab; 05-23-2017 at 11:36 AM.
05-17-2017, 03:08 PM
 tswift Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 323
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab F.Y.I. Another approach that you may find of value is found in Vasiliev's "Electricity and Unusual Features" book of 2015 (attached in a translated .pdf format). He attributes the anomalies you mention to the Positron [+], it might be considered the opposite, or conjugate, or antiparticle to the Electron [-] and he provides some interesting evidence and observations. Anyway, have a look... FIN
This book is dynamite! The translation from Russian is a bit difficult to follow in places, but I find Vasiliev's understanding is so close to my own that it's not hard for me to fill in the details and get what he means. As usual, every researcher has their own set of language and terminology for talking about what seem to be similar concepts. What I am calling time-reversed or phase-conjugate electricity, he is calling positrons. Either of the two (or neither) could be correct, but it sure seems like we're both talking about the same thing. There is this distinctly different form of electricity that still flows through normal wires and circuits and yet behaves very differently.

There are also some very interesting schematics (although without component values or details) that build on what I already knew or suspected. I look forward to building some new test configurations soon. From the text, it sounds like Vasiliev has had positive results in generating measurable overunity up to hundreds of watts output from some of his configurations. Thanks so much for posting this!
__________________

05-17-2017, 03:33 PM
 dragon Silver Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 913
I will second that... it is an excellent read. (translation difficulties aside). I've built a couple of the projects shown long ago and can confirm their significance.

I've been re-reading the materials chapter, I seem to be lost there... I really wish the inserts were translated as well as some of the charts.

Thanks for sharing that Solarlab !
__________________

05-17-2017, 03:45 PM
 Wistiti Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 456
I will give a deept look at it.
Thank you!
__________________

05-24-2017, 02:41 AM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
Attn: tswift

F.Y.I.

In an attempt to amplify my previous statement: "There are two development roads one can follow. Either the (a) iterative "cut and try" method, or, what I'll term, (b) the mathematical engineering physics route; or preferably a healthy slice of both (a) plus (b)," consider:

Taken, in part, from Jim Branson 2013-04-22, Quantum Physics 130, University of California San Diego [UCSD];

Preface

Extracts:

Electron Self Energy

Electron Self Energy

Even in classical electromagnetism, if one can calculates the energy needed to assemble an electron, the result is infinite, yet electrons exist. The quantum self energy correction is also infinite although it can be rendered finite if we accept the fact that out theories are not valid up to infinite energies.

The quantum self energy correction has important, measurable effects. It causes observable energy shifts in Hydrogen and it helps us solve the problem of infinities due to energy denominators from intermediate states.

The Dirac Equation (part 1)

The Dirac Equation

Our goal is to find the analog of the Schrödinger equation for relativistic spin one-half particles, however, we should note that even in the Schrödinger equation, the interaction of the field with spin was rather ad hoc. There was no explanation of the gyromagnetic ratio of 2. One can incorporate spin into the non-relativistic equation by using the Schrödinger-Pauli Hamiltonian which contains the dot product of the Pauli matrices with the momentum operator. ...

These \bgroup\color{black}$\pm$\egroup sign in the exponential is not very surprising from the point of view of possible solutions to a differential equation. The problem now is that for solutions 3 and 4 the momentum and energy operators must have a minus sign added to them and the phase of the wave function at a fixed position behaves in the opposite way as a function of time than what we expect and from solutions 1 and 2. It is as if solutions 3 and 4 are moving backward in time.

If we change the charge on the electron from \bgroup\color{black}$-e$\egroup to \bgroup\color{black}$+e$\egroup and change the sign of the exponent, the Dirac equation remains the invariant. Thus, we can turn the negative exponent solution (going backward in time) into the conventional positive exponent solution if we change the charge to \bgroup\color{black}$+e$\egroup. We can interpret solutions 3 and 4 as positrons. We will make this switch more carefully when we study the charge conjugation operator.
...

NOTE: Difficult to quote science formulas, etc. on this forum - too primitive to handle expressions, sorry - too messy and quite clumsy to fool with.

The first and third have spin up while the second and fourth have spin down. The first and second are positive energy solutions while the third and fourth are negative energy solutions'', which we still need to understand. ...

The Dirac equation naturally conserves total angular momentum but not the orbital or spin parts of it. The solutions are not in general eigenstates of any component of spin but are eigenstates of helicity, the component of spin along the direction of the momentum. ...

A calculation of Thomson scattering shows that even simple low energy photon scattering relies on the negative energy'' or positron states to get a non-zero answer. If the calculation is done with the two diagrams in which a photon is absorbed then emitted by an electron (and vice-versa) the result is zero at low energy because the interaction Hamiltonian connects the first and second plane wave states with the third and fourth at zero momentum. This is in contradiction to the classical and non-relativistic calculations as well as measurement. There are additional diagrams if we consider the possibility that the photon can create and electron positron pair which annihilates with the initial electron emitting a photon (or with the initial and final photons swapped). These two terms give the right answer. The calculation of Thomson scattering makes it clear that we cannot ignore the new negative energy'' or positron states. ...

The Dirac Equation (part 2)

The Dirac Equation

To proceed toward a field theory for electrons and quantization of the Dirac field we wish to find a scalar Lagrangian that yields the Dirac equation. ...

The Dirac field and Hamiltonian can now be rewritten in terms of electron and positron fields for which the energy is always positive by replacing the operator to annihilate a negative energy state'' with an operator to create a positron state with the right momentum and spin. ...

There is an (infinite) constant energy, similar but of opposite sign to the one for the quantized EM field, which we must add to make the vacuum state have zero energy. Note that, had we used commuting operators (Bose-Einstein) instead of anti-commuting, there would have been no lowest energy ground state so this Energy subtraction would not have been possible. Fermi-Dirac statistics are required for particles satisfying the Dirac equation. ...

Lots of math and a bit of reading, I know, but this is where the (b) route part starts to shine, especially when combined with the (a) part!

It all might be out there already? Maybe we just haven't connected all the dots yet!

FIN
__________________

Last edited by Solarlab; 05-24-2017 at 03:23 AM.
05-24-2017, 08:52 PM
 tswift Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 323
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab F.Y.I. Lots of math and a bit of reading, I know, but this is where the (b) route part starts to shine, especially when combined with the (a) part! It all might be out there already? Maybe we just haven't connected all the dots yet! FIN
Wow, this is AWESOME! I think you may have found exactly what I'm talking about. As in, there is truly a "time-reversed" solution and "negative" energy is completely real but so easy to miss because it looks and acts almost just like regular electricity. My college physics days are a few years behind me but I can brush up, the information is out there. I have been reviewing relativity recently through Yale's Open CourseWare, but I see a goodly chunk of Physics 201 deals with quantum mechanics. It'll take me a few weeks but I will work on getting up to speed so I can formulate my theories in those terms. Although, at a first glance it appears that a lot of the hard work has already been done! Wouldn't that be terribly ironic for mainstream physics, to have the solution already at hand for decades and yet completely ignored and unknown....

Yale Open Courses - Fundamentals of Physics II
Open Yale Courses | Fundamentals of Physics II
__________________

05-25-2017, 03:02 AM
 Wistiti Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 456
Aluminum screen

Hi guys!
Im curious if some of you have already play with aluminum as a screen or mirror
Like say in the PDF ? And if so if you whant to share your experiment..?

Thank you!
__________________

06-03-2017, 05:35 AM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
more Dirac ...

F.Y.I.

Paul Dirac was awarded a Nobel Prize for his work in discovering the Positron. This area of discovery may also have considerable significance in helping explain and characterize FE/CE.

Discovering the positron
[timeline by CERN]

https://timeline.web.cern.ch/timelin...g-the-positron

Quantised Singularities in the Electromagnetic Field
by P. A. M. Dirac
Published 1 September 1931.DOI: 10.1098/rspa.1931.0130

http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.o...21/60.full.pdf

Of interest: ss 3. Nodal Singularities. {page 66 of the journal}

... "as a result of which our theory becomes mathematically equivalent to the usual one for the motion of an electron in an electromagnetic field and gives us nothing new. There is, however, one further fact which must now be taken into account, namely, that a phase is always undetermined to the extent of an arbitrary integral multiple of 2 pi. This requires a reconsideration of the connection between the k's and the potentials and leads to a new physical phenomenon."
"The condition for an unambiguous physical interpretation of the theory was that the change in phase around a closed curve should be the same for all wave functions. ..."

ss 5. Conclusion {all}

Also, consider:

"The Dirac equation naturally conserves total angular momentum but not the orbital or spin parts of it. The solutions are not in general eigenstates of any component of spin but are eigenstates of helicity, the component of spin along the direction of the momentum." {a small closed curve}

From: The Dirac Equation

The Dirac Equation

Dirac's Prediction of the Positron: A Case Study for the Current Realism Debate

MIT Press Journals

" ... He (Dirac) found that if Vo < E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave decays exponentially in Region II, with some proportion reflected back,—just as one would expect if it obeyed the Schrodinger equation. However, if Vo > E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave is a plane wave in Region II which, normalized to respect the continuity condition, is directed toward Region I, so that the total reflected current appeared to be greater than the total incident current. This result seemed to be pure nonsense, and was deeply troubling from the point of view of contemporary atomic theory which (prior to the discovery of the neutron) explained the neutral charge of the nucleus by the hypothesis of electronic nuclear confinement. ..."

"Bohr wrote to Dirac in late 1929 posing this difficulty and expressed his concerns that a wide scale conceptual revolution would be required to resolve it. Dirac confronted the problem in his reply by proposing his ‘hole’ theory, which interprets the transmitted wave as the current of a positive particle moving right. His reasoning appeared as follows:

• Electrons may transition to negative energy states by spontaneous emission of radiation. However, low (negative) energy states will be stable against further descent since to jump back up requires incident high energy radiation.

• Since electrons are fermions they obey the Pauli exclusion principle so a state can be occupied by at most one electron. Suppose that (nearly) all of the stable low (negative) energy states are occupied. This forces positive energy electrons to remain in positive energy states.

• The negative energy electrons will have uniform (infinite) density so the net electromagnetic field is zero. Only deviations from uniformity will be observable.
• ‘Holes’ in the negative energy state distribution will act like they have positive energy, but with opposite (positive) charge. These are protons, which are annihilated when an electron drops into the corresponding negative energy state.
..."

As well, when considering the above, bare in mind the physical "Grenade (a.k.a. Telescope) Coil."

Misc:

http://physics.gu.se/~tfkhj/TOPO/DiracEquation.pdf

5.9 Spin and Helicity
6.3 Maxwell’s Equations
6.6 High energy e−μ− → e−μ− scattering
7.5 Charged Currents

NOTE: Since this chat board is near impossible to use for anything more than short text submissions; I will likely curtail further posting.

FIN
__________________

Last edited by Solarlab; 06-03-2017 at 05:50 AM.
06-03-2017, 01:53 PM
 tswift Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 323
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wistiti Hi guys! Im curious if some of you have already play with aluminum as a screen or mirror Like say in the PDF ? And if so if you whant to share your experiment..? Thank you!
No, I haven't tried anything with the aluminum screening idea yet. I have read the Vasiliev PDF again more closely this time, it's kind of like a cookbook. There are some partial recipes and whole bunch of building block components, but not a completely detailed plan to follow. I agree with Vasiliev's approach that developing an understanding of the physics at work is absolutely crucial, because otherwise all one can do is follow someone else's recipe without understanding why. To paraphrase an old credit card commercial, "Plans to build a working Don Smith device.... incredibly valuable. Knowing what Don Smith knew? Priceless!" Still, it would be nice if Vasiliev gave more details.

So far all I've done with replication is to wind an asymmetric transformer of the kind referred to in the text. On page 99, figure 35 gives an illustration of a Kacher oscillator (basically the same as a slayer exciter, a low power CW solid state Tesla coil), combined with a C-shaped aluminum sleeve to pull energy up from the ground, with an output transformer in the ground line as I have referred to before. Many folks around this thread will probably recognize this as the same as Zilano's "radiant harvesting without diodes". I have tried this arrangement before without success, but in the text Vasiliev goes on to say (poorly translated from the Russian) "As soon as the ground rule of the circuit or use a standard transformer (not using a longitudinal winding), the construction stops working." So there is something important about using an asymmetric transformer, Zilano just described a 1-turn toroidal transformer by using two metal strips with a stack of ferrite cores, one inside and one outside. Vasiliev doesn't give any design information for the asymmetric transformer but he does give a picture, so I tried to emulate this. I had a 3-inch powdered iron core handy from previous experiments, so I built a small wooden jig to hold the turns while winding and rewound it Vasiliev's way. The core is a micrometals T300-52 core, 3"x0.5"x0.5" toroid, with 52 mix (about 75 permeability).

Once I have some more experimenting time I will rig this up to my slayer exciter and see what happens. If there is any hint of positive results it will probably be a useful exercise to play around with the number of turns in the circumferential/longitudinal winding to see how much of a difference that makes. I took a picture of the toroid as wound, note that there are only two contiguous wires that make up three windings. One wire wraps all the way around the circumference of the toroid for 8 turns, then makes a 90 degree bend (visible in the picture) and becomes a regular toroidal winding with 13 turns. The other winding is a completely standard toroidal winding with 13 turns.
Attached Images
 IMG_1684.JPG (50.4 KB, 11 views)
__________________

06-03-2017, 02:11 PM
 tswift Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 323
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab Paul Dirac was awarded a Nobel Prize for his work in discovering the Positron. This area of discovery may also have considerable significance in helping explain and characterize FE/CE.
Yes, I agree! I think we have hit some real pay dirt here, this is a lever whereby establishment folks schooled and indoctrinated into conventional concepts, can begin to get a handle on our research here at forums like this. I think you struck gold with this discovery about the Dirac equation, it seems to directly confirm that "electrons", as we usually think of them, can have both a normal and a phase-conjugate character. There are four terms in the Dirac equation, the two "electron" terms and the two "positron" terms and they are all related. It's not too big a stretch even for physicists to admit that conventional electricity, carried through conductive metal wires by "electrons", can change character and be essentially a "positron" current, or some blend of the two characters at the same time. This isn't a positron in the conventional sense of an antiparticle to the electron, it's a positron in the sense Vasiliev uses the term and that it seems to appear in the Dirac equation. We essentially have this Janus electron, with two faces, two completely different sides to its character. Under the right conditions it will show you the other face.
__________________

06-04-2017, 12:48 AM
 Wistiti Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 456
Hi twsift!
Glad to see you are still working on it after all..... ;-)
Just let you know I am also slowly on it.( with the poor free time I have for now)
Lets us share our finding for the benefit of all......!!!

Sincerly
Wistiti
__________________

06-04-2017, 04:56 AM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
Dots Connected...!!!

F.Y.I

So as not to leave this approach hanging - - -

With a very good degree of confidence I believe we now have a viable link between
the "practical application" and the "engineering science" underlying Ruslan's FE/CE
generator. Furthermore, there appears to be an accurate, usable, method of tying the
hardware and theory together using recent computer aided engineering (CAE).

Although not completely polished and vetted yet; a combination of Maxwell's equations
and slightly modified Dirac equations are providing good answers that correlate to
physical apparatus bench and insitu testing with the design parameters indicating some
very good development. This is still a work-in-progress but so far is very encouraging!

Briefly:

Analysis of Ruslan's device by physically modelling it in CAD - Solidworks - and
using EM analysis programs like CST, Ansys Electronics, FEKO, etc. they all came up
somewhat short. Under the (undisclosed) skin of these packages it appears, for the
most part, that they rely primarily on Maxwell's equations in one form or another and
can not be modified at the equation level. Note that since I do not have a working
model of Don Smith's device; it has not yet been a target for analysis.

Also, owing to the extremely long simulation times and huge meshing requirements
(e.g. meshing a telescope coil) even analyzing a scaled, symmetrically reduced, version
on a multi-core network took what felt like a lifetime and yielded little of any technical
or scientific value.

Another Approach:

Looking for a better analysis and integrated design approach, a colleague introduced COMSOL.
Offering a broader, more scientific oriented CAE suite this package allows complex "equation
modifications" as well as insitu inter-dicipline integration both internally and parametricly with,
for example, the physical Solidworks model. By modifying the Dirac equations and invoking
Maxwell's equations where needed,
preliminary analysis and design results so far look great!!!!

Conclusion:

In short - these results, and this approach, are of great value - and appears (so far at least) to
allow the "connecting-of-the-dots."

I will not attempt to provide any further details in this forum - too equation orientated
and far too expansive.

A great deal of related information and the long development approach is outlined to a large
extent in my previous posts (spanning several years) both on this forum and the OU forum,
as well as several foreign forums, should there be further interest. Much work still left to be done...

FIN
__________________

06-04-2017, 12:06 PM
 tswift Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 323
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab With a very good degree of confidence I believe we now have a viable link between the "practical application" and the "engineering science" underlying Ruslan's FE/CE generator. Furthermore, there appears to be an accurate, usable, method of tying the hardware and theory together using recent computer aided engineering (CAE).
Wow, you have really done a lot of work on this! I wasn't previously aware of the COMSOL software, if there is a way to make off-the-shelf software model overunity devices then THIS IS HUGE. I assumed it would be necessary to write new software from the ground up, which would be an unbelievably massive undertaking. In a former career a long time ago now, I was a computational modeling engineer with a Silicon Graphics Indigo workstation on my desk. I am quite familiar with finite element modeling software, is there any way you can write a white paper or at least a short "how to" describing what to do within COMSOL to achieve the results you're getting?

Unfortunately the COMSOL package appears to be high-dollar commercial software, any idea how much they want for a license?
__________________

06-04-2017, 12:16 PM
 boguslaw Gold Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,414
I like this approach. Shooting fly with a rocket science.
__________________

06-04-2017, 04:55 PM
 bistander Silver Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 953
Infinite density

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab ... • The negative energy electrons will have uniform (infinite) density so the net electromagnetic field is zero. ...
Does not infinite density end the universe?
__________________

06-04-2017, 11:23 PM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
No White Paper - however...

F.Y.I.

No White Paper at this time but here is an example of using Dirac equations in COMSOL:

Relativistic Quantum Mechanics Applications Using The Time Independent Dirac Equation In COMSOL
A. J. Kalinowski *1 1 Consultant *Corresponding author: East Lyme CT 06333, kalinoaj@aol.com

https://www.comsol.com/paper/downloa...wski_paper.pdf

Consider 5.1 Model Parameters - in particular particle velocity (plane or cylindrical wave) where E [sub} p is particle energy (set up by HV - so called antenna of TT). This paper seeks steady state [SS] - I do not believe the telescope coil (the FE/CE system) peak performance operates at SS - TBD.

* recall briefly:

- {from previous post} "However, if Vo > E+mc^2 then the transmitted wave is a plane wave in Region II which, normalized to respect the continuity condition, is directed toward Region I, so that the total reflected current appeared to be greater than the total incident current."
- Tesla Transformer sets up HV pulses [particle {e} velocity/energy;
- Telescope coil {slow wave - long wire equivelant} operates in Standing Wave [SW] mode;
+ see Vyacheslav Gorchillin's site for FE/CE related details:
Calculations - Standing Waves in Long Lines - Google Translate

Again; analysis of SW using Maxwell only does not appear to yield equivalent measured results.

- Asymmetric system design in general; for a detailed discussion refer to

- There is lots more that I'm sure I have left out or do not yet know...

NOTE: My FYI's are meant to only provide some possible assistance in understanding and discovering the theory behind FE/CE. The information is not intended nor meant to be an "FE/CE Cook Book."

Sorry to disappoint the many "lurkers, lamers and nay-Sayers" here... but with a little work and perseverance I'm convinced you CAN figure it all out for yourself one way or the other!

Anyway; I must move on... Have a great day and good luck to you all.

FIN
__________________

Last edited by Solarlab; 06-04-2017 at 11:56 PM.
06-04-2017, 11:45 PM
 Solarlab Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 62
Bogaslaw and Bistander:

Attention: boguslaw and bistander

Your comments, or quotes, or whatever they are; do not seem to make any sense - in context that is.... ???

If they were just meant to be the "typical stupid stuff" then that would explain it!

? waste ?
__________________

06-05-2017, 01:57 AM
 bistander Silver Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 953
Infinite density

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Solarlab Attention: boguslaw and bistander Your comments, or quotes, or whatever they are; do not seem to make any sense - in context that is.... ??? If they were just meant to be the "typical stupid stuff" then that would explain it! ? waste ?
Hi Mr. Solarlab,

I've looked over the link to Dirac equation which you supplied. I cannot follow the math. Either I never had the prerequisites or it's been too long ago. However, infinite density, regardless of context, is something which I do understand. And it's not going to happen.

Anyway, thanks for some interesting posts.

bi
__________________

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules

Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

 Choose your voluntary subscription $5 :$5.00 USD - monthly $7 :$7.00 USD - monthly $10 :$10.00 USD - monthly $25 :$25.00 USD - monthly $50 :$50.00 USD - monthly $75 :$75.00 USD - monthly $100 :$100.00 USD - monthly $175 :$175.00 USD - monthly $250 :$250.00 USD - monthly

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 AM.