Radiant Energy

[Shad]

Thank you, Peter, for your detailed reply!

I am not a blind believer, but prefer to really understand things. Allow me to analyze some more this point.

I disagree with you, but this does not necessarily mean that I am right. It's not about my opinion, nor your opinion, but merely about the truth and scientific facts. Discussing with you, is meant to get there, to see the truth from the right angle. If I am wrong, please correct me!

[QUOTE=Peter Lindemann;2397]Shad,

It creates a "staccato of electrostatic bursts." Don't make this mysterious, because it is not. It is no more difficult to understand than the output of a 555 timer chip. Its just that we are talking about very high voltage DC, and very high pulse repetition rates. What is difficult is finding the circuit components that allow you to create these conditions without self-destructing!

Peter

[lighty]

@Shad

I must concur with you about the fundamental difference between dielectric field transfer impulse and the electrons current impulse. The most obvious difference is that an dielectric impulse should not produce a movement of electrons in any way or at least reduce them to a minimum. The moment the arc is formed the electron current flow starts and the dielectric field consisting of monopoles is transformed or rather the monopoles are recombined into a dipole electrons thus all the energy is dissipated in the form of heat and light.

The thyratron is but a triggered switch and while it's suitable for transfer of high currents hydrogen's conductivity is allowing the electrons current to form thus effectively transforming and dissipating dielectric impulse into light and heat.

The analogy about DC square wave with short duty cycle is rather awkward because in the case of what Tesla called "discharge crack" (or rather the spark instead of arc) the duty cycle duration should be much shorter than 10%. Ideally the duty cycle duration should be infinitesimally short in order to facilitate the potential transfer before the monopoles recombination and electron current flow starts.

One of the ways is to prevent any form of arc forming while allowing the spark to discharge. As Tesla said, any kind of pre-discharge corona or glow forming is a good sign that the arc is going to form and basically it makes it a bad sign. So, one of the solutions was to use some form of magnetic spark disruptor which original purpose was to allow the spark to jump over but as soon as any arc would start to form a strong magnetic field between electrodes would simply disrupt it. In that way a strong electron flow would get significantly reduced and most of the discharge waveform ringing would be prevented as well as the potential and current backlash back to the condenser. We're of course talking about ideal circumstances and however well constructed the magnetic disruptor will not yield ideal results. In fact the results are far from ideal but much better than those obtained with the ordinary sparkgap both stationary and rotating.

Another, simpler way to prevent forming of arc and allowing the spark to jump is the use of the oil filled sparkgap in which the oil is serving the purpose of the dielectric which disallow the forming of strong arc (if the distance between electrodes is set correctly) and which closes the ionized path behind spark. The disadvantage of using this form of sparkgap is the fact that it can be used only at lower frequency range and with limited success compared with the magnetic disruptor. The advantage of using oil as an dielectric is the fact that in specific circumstances and configuration the dielectric discharge is being magnified with the dielectric itself. It can be than observed that a spark can then jump at much further distance and it's color is changed from blue to white while there are no temperature changes present whatsoever.

Let me be clear on this one- the magnetic disruptor sparkgap is far from ideal and it requires a heavy dose of tweaking with several parameters before it works correctly but it's certainly a definite improvement over the ordinary sparkgap. Tesla talked about infinitesimally (ideally) short impulses where no electron current is made possible. That's certainly cannot be achieved with a thyratron no matter how short the duty cycle is. Of course some effects will be noticed but that's far from the things Tesla described in his lectures.

That's my educated guess and opinion based on reading of Tesla and some practical experiments. Of course that doesn't mean I'm correct in all of my assertions and conclusions.

[Peter Lindemann]

To Shad and Lighty

Gentlemen,

I agree with both of you completely. Perhaps the simplicity of my example was too extreme. I was trying to create an image to convey an idea. A DC square-wave was what Tesla was trying to create. But you are both correct, a simple chopped DC electron current was not Tesla's goal. The intermittent timed release of packets of electrostatic charge was the goal. We all agree on this.

We all understand the situation quite well. That you are both able to get into a detailed description of these circuit functions and describe them in your own words is EXCELLENT. That you are both so clear and confident in your knowledge that you feel free to challenge me, a person you believe to be an expert, is even more IMPRESSIVE.

Tesla was the real expert. I do not consider myself an expert in this field. We are all just trying to understand what Tesla discovered. I am honored to be able to help you clarify your growing understanding. And that is the point. In the end, it will be YOUR UNDERSTANDING that you have. It is, in fact, impossible for me to convey my understanding to you. The real MEANING of things arises from within your own mind. It is not possible to transfer MEANING from person to person. There is no such thing as "teaching". There is only "learning" and the opportunity for it.

Personally, I do not believe that total agreement in these discussions is or should be the goal. Honest, intelligent men rarely agree on every detail of a scientific discussion. The goal is the free exchange of ideas and the ability to disagree in a civil manner, with mutual respect. In this regard, I am honored to share my thoughts with you.

Peter

[Shad]

[lighty]

Dielectric materials have some kind of permeability for dielectricity, as I see. This would also explain the moving of oil in my experiments.

While a strong whirling motion of liquid dielectric as well as it's movement in upward direction (against gravity) was interesting enough, even more impressive was the spark discharge magnification effect which proved that polarized and over-saturated dielectric produce a strong dielectric field in it's own vicinity which can significantly elongate the spark discharge in it's vicinity up to several hundred percent. The effect of such magnified discharge could be felt a meter and half away directly on the skin and hair as the sudden change of pressure of the surrounding media. The same device spark discharge without the dielectric magnification effect produced an effect that could hardly be felt even as close as several centimeters from the point of discharge.

The other effect that I observed only once was in the vicinity of such discharges when an ordinary incandescent lightbulb (with resistive filament and no high vacuum) started to grow it's intensity of light to a significant degree. Even a few days later and after the lightbulb was moved to another location it showed that same stronger light volume which had a different nature of it's visible spectrum much more like a neon or xenon lamp. Regrettably I was clumsy enough to break the bulb after only but a short measurement of it's resistive values (which was within the normal tolerances). To my great disappointment we were never able to reproduce that effect again.


Anyway- I agree with both of you that a scientific discussion must be civilized and often people can only agree to disagree. In fact in science the worst enemy of the further advancement is superego of the scientists who neglect to see beyond their own theories while basking in it's own self-importance. The other enemy is the complacency and worshiping of such people by followers who accept everything the "authority" says without rationally questioning rationale behind their statements. I for one can accept somebody's point of view only if that person backs it up with well explained arguments. Anything other than that is a blind leap of faith.

That being said I think we should continue our discussion of radiant energy in hope that something constructive might come out of it.

[Peter Lindemann]

Shad and Lighty

Gentlemen,

Thank you both for volunteering some of your original experimental findings. Most interesting! I had not heard of any of these effects before, and would like to learn more.

Shad, please tell us more about your "neutrino-egg" device. What is it? How do you run it? What is its primary purpose, since extinguishing light bulbs at a distance was an unexpected side-effect? Have you come to a deeper understanding of the effect at this point?

Lighty, have you discovered or theorized a reason for the light bulbs unusual behavior yet?

These are both important discoveries, only experimentation could uncover. No amount of brilliant logic could have predicted these events.

I salute you both!

Peter

[Shad]

Hi Peter et all

Please see my answers below.

Shad, please tell us more about your "neutrino-egg" device. What is it?

It is a device in which a neutrino-diffusion-process occurs.
I gave it the name according to the theory of Prof. DDr. Meyl (www.k-meyl.dewww.overunity.com), after he viewed and published video-material of my experiment.
The first Neutrino-diffuser (ND) was egg-shaped.

In simple words, the dielectric charges in this device are converted to mechanical energy.

What is its primary purpose, since extinguishing light bulbs at a distance was an unexpected side-effect?

The main purpose if my ND is to convert liquids from their liquid state of aggregation to gaseous.
You can see a very simple description on my (purposely simple) website:

http://www.geocities.com/waterpowers/FuelCracker.html

I cannot give any further technical data to this device as I am bound by contract I have with industry. But the physics I can reveal is much more important than the technical data.

How do you run it?

With a pump. My toy model was run a windscreen-water-pump for cars, ca. 12V/10W.
Gasoline, kerosene, diesel or even water are converted to gas - the process is cold, no heating/warming effects. This process is highly efficient; to achieve the same results with heat or mechanical energy one would have to invest ca. 5x more energy.
Gas can be produce on demand.

Have you come to a deeper understanding of the effect at this point?

]Lord Kelvin’s Water Drop Experiment Demonstrator - Science Kit

[lighty]

Lighty, have you discovered or theorized a reason for the light bulbs unusual behavior yet?

As I said I have ran into a bit of a problem while trying to replicate the effect. I know that several conditions seems to be significant.

1. Lightbulb was turned on while exposed to the strong changing dielectric field. I tried exposing lightbulbs with no power supply connected but no luck so there.
2. The electrostatic machine and the lightbulb were connected to the same wall outlet so they shared mutual phase and ground.
3. The lightbulb was exposed to the strong changing dielectic field for prolonged length of time (15-20 minutes).
4. Since the lighbulb had an isolated metal shield around it (like in the normal table lamps) there could be that some kind of capacitive coupling occurred during the exposure to the strong changing dielectric field.

As I said previously- we had several similar lightbulbs to compare it with, no visible changes appeared on the glass and the resistance of the filament remained within normal tolerance compared to the other similar lightbulbs available to me.

The nature of light emitted was very much like the xenon lamps and the intensity of light was almost 50% stronger. In fact it was a 100W lightbulb that gave light as a 150W type.

The effect stayed consistent even when the lightbulb was moved to another location and even after a few days. The effect was so noticeable that a colleague of mine who didn't know the whole story asked me why did I replaced my table lamp lightbulb with such a bright and more powerful one.

Before I managed to accidentally break the lamp I haven't had time to measure it's temperature (I think it was as hot as a normal 100W lamp but I cannot be sure now) or spectrum of emitted light. What a shame!



It seems that as with the Shad's Neutrino Diffusor's resonator a several precise and very particular demands must be met before the effect can be reproduced. Shad spent years of his life perfecting the construction of ND and to be honest after the lightbulb broke I simply didn't spend much more time reconstructing the proper conditions needed to reproduce the lightbulb effect. My point is that as opposed to the ND which is fully understood and reproducible if one observe several seemingly unimportant and precise details in order to get it to work the lightbulb effect was a fluke yet to be understood. In fact at that time so many more interesting dielectricity effects presented themselves that the lightbulb incident was of minor interest to me.


However, my theory is that the vacuum dielectric in the lightbulb was excited with the heat and EM radiation from the AC current in a way that allowed for the strong changing dielectric field to polarize dielectric (vacuum or even glass although my bet lies with the former one) permanently in a way that would allow the heat or EM radiation from AC current to excite it even further. In fact I suspect that to a certain point the lightbulb started to behave like a discharge tube of low pressure but with a heat and EM radiation of AC current as the exciting agents.

That's all of course a wild speculation. Further experiments should be done in order to be able to reproduce the effect and the one could measure temperature, light spectrum, power consumption, EM field as well as dielectric field in order to determine what is really going on.

[Shad]

one more though...

Dear Peter, Lighty, and all

I would like to add something to my last message and am curious to hear your opinion.
In my understanding the universe also is a universe of frequencies (broad band of frequencies). Each element is a frequency occupying a band width of space. Groups or combinations of elements can, as a unit, cover a broader band width of space.

The atom is a manifestation and is both positive and negative in character; therefore, space also has two basic properties that is, positive and negative.

Atom energy, or any other energy derived from changing the form or state of physical material, is energy taken from atomic structure.

With the right theory it is possible to tap energy in abundance from the driver of the atom (space energy) without taking it from atomic structure.

Atomic power with its penalty of contamination is not necessary, as the basic atomic energy can be tapped before it is material substance. Then there are no contaminations or harmful side effects, because nothing is destroyed and because the energy is only used, even as the wind is used by the windmill.

Radiant energy in my opinion is a result of distorted and nonlinear space and energy in common is a result of distorted space.

As example:
Magnetism is a distortion of space, a distortion within the atomic structure of the magnet material or copper coil which extends into the space surrounding it.

As an illustration, we consider an undistorted area of space before us. We move an activated magnet into this area of space and the result is that this previously undistorted and linear space is now. That is, two poles exist in relation to the magnet; an N pole and an S pole.

At the N pole we have a lack of S pole and at the S pole we have a lack of N pole. Or, at each end of the magnet, we have a lack of balanced space. In other words, distorted space, (a low pressure area) now exists at each pole.

Any non-polarized material within the band width of magnetism and electricity
(a paramagnetic material) will migrate to the low pressure area at either pole, while a polarized object (another magnet) will demonstrate the law of opposites attracting and similars repelling each other. The above theory of expansion and/or contraction holds true as cause of magnetism in all types of permanent magnets or electromagnets.

An inductive collapse of a coil, the so-called collapsing field could now be described as space returning back to linearity with a slap. That is the positive and the negative closing in from opposite directions and filling a rapidly diminishing area and then suddenly coming together; perhaps even bringing about a slight crossing of bands, or a short circuit of electric space which would be like a miniature bolt of lightning.
The collapsing field of an electromagnet is a distortion of ether/vacuum space which is elastic in his property and cause of the resulting mono-polar electrostatic charge.

In this way it is possible to tap energy in abundance from the driver of the atom (space energy) without taking it from atomic structure. This is why I like to describe the atom like a cosmic energy windmill.

Best of greetings,
Shad

[DandDMan]

high voltage transient

I was not sure if this should be posted as its own topic. However, my question deals with the topic discussed.

I want to power a miniature tesla coil using the short duration, high voltage transient created when the current powering an inductor is shut off. I'm hoping to get the a voltage high enough to jump a spark gap or perhaps a high voltage diode; to make the pulse unidirectional.

So my question is how can I generate the highest possible potential spike?

A very rapid shut off. Device suggestions?

Now the coil. Iron or air core? Higher or lower inductance? I would think a very long air inductor would be best. Is this correct? Is a single layer or multi-layer coil best? Is a flat coil better for higher voltages spikes?

I would love to hear any suggestions you can offer.

Thanks!

[amigo]

Hi Shad, et al,

I just read your post above about ND process and it made me think of something I read in the past, though it might not be what you are doing here with scalar waves, but it refers to a paper from Dr. Andrija Puharic in which he is using vibrations to split molecules, basically creating a more efficient electrolysis process to create fuel:

http://www.keelynet.com/keely/puha1.txt

Oh and I'd be interested to hear more about your ideas and findings on Schauberger and the levitation experiments (hehe I'm obsessed with propulsion)...

Regards.

[FEstudent]

dande man reply

I did construct a small tesla coil once. I powered it with a twelve volt lead-acid battery and used a vibrating aquarium air pump to make and break
the battery power going to the automotive coil primary. They call it a kicker coil arrangement. This charged the capacitor of the primary circuit. Sparks off the secondary were like half an inch long, but a good 2 inch plasma when a clear light bulb was connected. When my ignition burner transformer arrived
in the mail, it was so powerful that I never looked back to the kicker setup.
Never heard of radiant energy back then.

[FEstudent]

neutral aether

More on topic:
While watching the dvd Tesla Radiant energy, the term Neutral Aether
popped up a few times. How can the aether be neutral if it makes these
voltages? I suppose it does seem like a neutral particle of air, if it can be blown on the top of oil to cause a 2 inch depression. This is stated in the paper: On the Dissipation of the Electrical Energy of the Hertz resonator.
google this paper. Tesla insists its like air.

Does anyone know where to get the Prof. Bjerknes article mentioned by Tesla in this paper. Seems like this air caused by a sudden discharge moved these diaphrams. Think the article is in 1893 issue of Telephone Magazine. Can't find anywhere, but I see a snipet on google books.

[FEstudent]

Tesla coil run on DC compared to AC

Notice the huge difference in the quality of the spark.
Notice the multiple spark gap: Tesla said you could use this instead of the
magnet disrupter type. Doesn't seem to improve AC operation. Must be
used with DC. Notice the giant 10 to 20 henry choke to power the primary cap. I think this is to simulate using an actual DC generator. Notice the giant resisters. I think this is to slow down the charging of the primary capacitor. Tesla said it shouldn't be charged too fast or an arc will form instead of a pulse. Roger said the unit won't work without the big choke
and the resisters. Both are needed. Comments?

YouTube - Small DC Tesla Coil 1

Compare to cover of Secrets of Cold Electricity. White flimmering but I don't see the blue dartlets. Is there radiant energy at work here?

[LutherG]

Hello,

I'm relatively new to the group - I joined back when this forum was just getting going but got off into other things for awhile... I just want to say that this forum is about the best I've seen anywhere. Dr. Lindemann, your explanations are superb! FINALLY - there is a place where real discussions take place and I've not seen one person reprimanded for asking a question... and the answers are indeed clear and concise! What a joy it is to read these posts!

Further, I'd just like to say that the DVD's on Understanding Tesla and Electric Motor Secrets are outstanding and I've learned a great deal from them.

I'll definately be spending more time here!

Many thanks and best regards to all,

Luther