Non-grounded wire effect, New or Old Known?

[Vortex]

Inquorate has a energy detection wand which is basically a neon bulb with a single wire attached. (see ref link below)

In circuits being experimented with on this forum, it is known that CFL or neon will light via single wire.

The effect in question:
The CFL or neon will become brighter if :
1) a human touches the unconnected wire of the CFL/neon.
2) a lose and non-grounded wire is connected
3) anything not an insulator touches the unconnected wire.
Like fruits and vegetables using a folded up piece of paper
to avoid indirect human touching of the wire.

Is this an old known effect dating back before 1900's and was found to happen with static electricity?
If so, does it have a name?
Is there an explanation of what is happening here and please don't
leave out the fruits and vegetables?

Ref link: Inquorate 22 the bell in the video is not required to make the detector work.

[Inquorate]

Don't forget the following experiments :-)

YouTube - Inquorate 23 detector

I'll keep quite and watch the show :-)

[Bob Smith]

I'm wondering if this thread points to the assymetry that is required to run EM systems without destroying the dipole. Here is a quote from Bearden that I posted in another forum, which illustrates what I'm saying:
RS


Maxwell's equations (Heaviside version) do indeed allow open EM systems freely receiving excess energy from their environment, and producing overunity. Such systems can (1) self-oscillate, (2) self-organize, and (3) power themselves while simultaneously powering a load.

There is no problem at all in extracting all the EM energy you wish from the
vacuum. Everything does that anyway! Our normal circuits only capture and
use about 10exp(-13) of the actual energy flow extracted from the vacuum by the source dipole. Heaviside pointed out that most of the energy was just
wasted in nondivergent form. Lorentz impatiently formulated a procedure that
just discards all that 10exp13 component, leaving only the 10exp(-13)
component. That tiny little remaining "diverged" (collected) fraction is what
drives our circuits. Lorentz also taught us the completely stupid (from a
power system viewpoint) procedure of symmetrically regauging Maxwell-Heaviside equations before we use them. In other words, he taught us to discard far more systems -- all those that asymmetrically self-regauge so as to retain a net force and be able to use that excess free energy in a load -- than he retained. Since then, all our engineers have dutifully -- like good little parrots -- applied those equations AFTER the Lorentz procedure has been invoked.

Free energy experimenters always expected a conspiracy somewhere. It actually was an innocent conspiracy originally. The old guys did it to ease the solution of the equations mathematically. It appears that one or two later realized what I speak of in this writeup. However, their controllers (the
financial end) in secret has had this kind of thing suppressed for decades.
Now you know the exact nature of the real conspiracy. It is innocent on the
part of the scientists for 99.9999% of the cases. It is not innocent at all
on the part of a very few powerful industrialists who know this and pass it
along.

Both the Russians (Moscow University) and the U.S. (Gabriel Kron for a
contractor in a Navy contract at Stanford University) made free energy devices
in the 1930s. The Russian work is fully documented in the hard Russian
physics literature and the French physics literature. The KGB/Communists
suppressed the Russian work at the beginning of WW II. I do not know what
happened in France to cause its abandonment. In the U.S., Kron's work was
never openly released on what he called his "negative resistor" which, when
connected to the Network Analyzer at Stanford, allowed the NA to be
disconnected from the generator because the negative resistor would power it.

See: http://users.navi.net/~rsc/physics/beard24.txt

[Inquorate]

My reply to vortex pm

y'know the clear plastic tubing that they make aquarium rock cleaners from? Well, go into a fish / pet store. They have clear plastic hose coming off a plastic cylinder. I had some from when I kept guppies :-)

I made one pipe as long as my aluminium pie tin, which I rolled up inside the plastic tube, and taped another piece of pie tin on the outside of the tube. Then I made the middle piece for the neons.

I got a bunch of stranded plastic coated wire from pc power box, and cut them the length of another piece of clear plastic tubing, took the plastic off 5mm off each wire, taped the wires together in groups of 5 (to keep them straight) and soldered them together. Then I soldered the groups of 5 wires into two lots, enough to fill up the plastic tube. I soldered the neons, one to each group of wires (neon legs have to be straight) and put the wires in the handle tube.
Then the tricky part, getting the unsoldered neon legs inbetween the plastic and the pie tin foil, one for inside, one for outside.

I found though, that the rolled pie tin is less effective than flat pie tin. So an arrangement where it looks like a ping pong bat would work better; you'd just have to have a piece of plastic like from chinese takeaway box with the pie tin; all glued together. I made one but it looked like a spanking device :-) as opposed to the light-saber one I ended up with.

It still works though, and directionally, the more flat surface area of pie tin the better, and there's a point where the length of wires and amount of wires in the handle stops adding to brightness of neon.

Remember to take insulation off the back end of a few wires if you want to measure voltage in the detector. That's the bit that gave me a shock.

I never did take measurements though... Must remember to do that.

Cheers, and thanks for the interest :-)

// pics of this 'wand' here;
Deep thoughts

[Bodkins]

I hope you really watch this video, carefully. In it I light the bulbs up with one wire from the coil, this is with no ground and no human contract its the diodes that let me do it,
I think its a so-called static charge that enters the system for the eviroment because I get dusk buildup everywhere.
Also I think the static kick back only works with a energy field generator or Holder. Kirlian Photograpy

if I use a energy detection with the setup to 2 diode I dont detection energy because I have controlled its movement.

YouTube - Singlewire lightbulb Singlewire charging

[Vortex]

I hope you really watch this video, carefully. In it I light the bulbs up with one wire from the coil, this is with no ground and no human contract its the diodes that let me do it,
I think its a so-called static charge that enters the system for the eviroment because I get dusk buildup everywhere.
Also I think the static kick back only works with a energy field generator or Holder. Kirlian Photograpy

if I use a energy detection with the setup to 2 diode I dont detection energy because I have controlled its movement.

YouTube - Singlewire lightbulb Singlewire charging

What you have Bodkins is very very strange yes.
I'm glad you reposted this video which brings up more questions.
Static sounds ok, but "energy detection" means what? A Inquorate detector?

The original question of brighter bulbs via non-grounding could be related to
what your video shows. What you have shown can't be said to not be related until we know more about the original question.
In that, both times you grounded the CLFs and powered them from a single diode you had to touch the bubs to "kick start" them and get them to light up. I noticed that the first time I saw this video when you originally posted it. Pumping more input voltage into your circuit might remove the need to
Kick-Start the bulbs, but clouds / masks the effect making it not observable.

I'll try to expand upon unknown in question for everyone encase it is unclear
what I'm trying to point a finger at and asking .. What's that?

"Fluorescent lamps are negative differential resistance devices, so as more current flows through them, the electrical resistance of the fluorescent lamp drops, allowing even more current to flow."

If ONLY increasing the voltage makes a CFL brighter, then how does the non-grounding increase the voltage within the CFL?
If ONLY lower resistance makes the CFL brighter, then how does the non-grounding lower the resistance within the CLF?

Also, did you know:
"When operated from DC, the starting switch is often arranged to reverse the polarity of the supply to the lamp each time it is started; otherwise, the mercury accumulates at one end of the tube."

There are Fluorescent lights with a single pin at each end of the tube, which required higher voltages to start.
A CFL/Fluorescent will get brighter by increasing the voltage.

Something is happening that I've not hear anyone explain the why of which
fits all 3 ways to make the bulb brighter without grounding it.

Note it is easier to observe the brightening of a bulb by using lower input source voltage which causes the bulb to not be full brightness or to be partly lit before evaluating the effects I've listed in starting this topic.
The effect is easy to see using 6 volt source.

Whatever is happening, does it have a name and how does it function?

just
Randy

[Bodkins]

I use a safefy screw driver with a light in it for detecting energy movement and the 2 diodes where connect to grounds.

[Inquorate]

Does 'it' have a name?

Yeah, it's aether currents that are somewhat affected by electromagnetic fields. sometimes called chi, prana, aura, life force, mana, etc. It is the fifth element from which arises the other four. It has negative entropy and is the seat of consciousness. it is the underlying order behind chaos. It is released in death, and sustains life.

[Bodkins]

Yeah, it's aether currents that are somewhat affected by electromagnetic fields. sometimes called chi, prana, aura, life force, mana, etc. It is the fifth element from which arises the other four. It has negative entropy and is the seat of consciousness. it is the underlying order behind chaos. It is released in death, and sustains life.

I Second That