Donald Smith Devices too good to be true

[Farmhand]

I seriously doubt that any intelligent person would need a concept as simple as that to be demonstrated.

Patrick

Oh I get the concept, i just want to see it done in practice by someone who says it is possible.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Farmhad, you have to understand two things. One is High frequency alternating current and second is Radiant energy. Two totally different topic ! Tesla was involved in High frequency alternating current research until 1892, and his is lecture what you are referring to is about that.

Another lecture given on Xmass 1892 : Dissipation of electricity is lecture discussing Radiant waves and after that Tesla completely abandoned High freq. alternating current and started serious Radiant Energy research.

All devices with excess of energy are RADIANT EVENT based devices. You can't get OU without Radiant Energy. So your "The energy available in radiations will always be less than the input" is not true. Unless you have mixed terms....

As ZZZ asked long time ago : "What is radiant event...." and this is exactly what we are up to. To get radiant event ! Gray, Tesla, Smith, Bedini, Baumann ant tons of others are harvesting Radiant Energy Flow caused by Radiant Event !

As Tesla stated : " Once radiant energy (aether) is moved, it has tendency to sustain that flow for a while..... Its like inertia. Imagine you in car, traveling 70km/h and suddenly start braking.. What happen ? You are pushed forward.....

So goal is to make radiant event (DC pulse), limit current flow and magnify that, Then you can harvest excess energy as only radiant energy is involved....See Tesla's pancake coil. Exactly geometry for event to happen...

See also Meyl shows Tesla longitudinal waves for wireless energy transmission - YouTube. Meyl is showing difference between electromagnetic and scalar interactions...

As stated before, each coil has TWO resonant frequencies separated by 1.52 . And that is also very important info.


cheers Cinan

I'm tired of people regurgitating the same old rhetoric, show it if you know it is possible. Don't just say it.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

And so in rough terms It is quite clear for all to see that this machine of Tks for example TARIEL KAPANADZE EVERYTHING .. WE KNOW FOR NOW..swf - YouTube which uses one 9v battery for 1 second is generating far more power than could possibly be applied, Here's Mr Clean demonstrating much the same thing on this thread .Don Smith Device Project Part 20b: Revised Schematic, Increased Output, and Capacitor Discharge - YouTubeCoil Resonance Tutorial 1 - YouTube

2nd .. Holding that resonant condition on the first coil . Two more coils are introduced (In our case one coil with a centre tap) The coils are moved around carefully until with the resonance being maintained (minimum power consumption ) this exponential (trumpet like) gain is discovered here's Mr Clean showing it to you Don Smith Device Project Part 20c: Transient Spikes Powering Load From TOP, down - YouTubeopposite coils - YouTube

How do you know for sure 100% what the total input is to Tariel's device ?

Can you say for sure he is not tuning his device to receive ground waves from the local radio transmitter or even the power plant ? Or even his own transmitter.

Can you show me Mr Cleans OU demonstration ?

Cheers

[Farmhand]

I don't understand you. Seems that you are going to discourage us ??! I hope not!

T-1000 posted very important tip, almost solution I think. Yes, it must work that way ; always max power circulating, it is clearly visible in tariel presentation (clear box video) : there is NO DIMINUITION OF OUTPUT VOLTAGE with one bulb or 4.5kW set of bulbs connected to the system. The only problem is that the safety device clicked faster or slower and then failed at the end (because it was hand made spark gap). Unfortunately the same thing we see in Don Smith devices with varactor ,varistors and other elements to dump excess power to ground , but here everything is wisely computed and exces power is eliminated by choosing proper output power per load.


Here is how it MUST work.I connected all "dots" here
1. Resonant circuit with OUTPUT POWER circulating.How ? Simple - using Tesla methods to charge capacitor and discharge into oscillating coil.In simplest case : you charge capacitor (condenser) via inverter, disconnect inverter and oscillate capacitor energy to coil (coil with own capacitance or shunted with capacitor ) in LCR circuit using low resistance mosfets. Vide Ghazanfar Ali thread in overunity.com for details of ultimate circuit (Kapanadze uses probably less eficient because it is hard to get mosfets for 230V of high power and low resistance). Tesla was master and just used high voltage capacitors with proper make&break constroller : the same big power but less current..

2. Point two is secret part : special coil without lenz law influence on primary. Various embodiments possible I think, for the best I would ask Alfred Hubbard but he is unavailable like Don Smith too maybe T-1000 would be willing to answer, I can only discuss theoretically

3. The output part. Various ways ; AC, DC pulsed with ferrite core or iron core or maybe not but you should get the idea.

4. Possibiliy of amlification : there is slight chance based on Tesla Pierce Arrow history that iron transmutation is additional source of energy on output stage .

But idea is simple : get resonance and keep it copied into secondary place where you cen load it down. Unfortunately it require somekind of clever energy limiter.
It is entirely possible.

I'm not trying to discourage anyone, T1000's opinion goes against Tesla's own
words In my opinion. If that was the best way why would Tesla design a
system to idle with no load ? I have an opinion too.

To bring in energy it must be harvested it cannot be created from nothing.
Any gains into the system are coming from somewhere else "the environment
or otherwise".

Radio Transmitters are not OU devices, unless they bring in energy from
somewhere else the combined power intercepted and used by all the receivers
must be less than the output.

It is my opinion that the kapanadze device is tuned to receive energy not originating from his input.

Cheers

P.S. It is not my intention to distract people from their projects. Just to provoke thought.

..

[T-1000]

So, you wanted some real experiment, here it is

The simplest circuit we just chopped down to single transformer:

Lithuania Experiment 2012 NYW group Video #1 (Aidas 3W in 100W out) - YouTube

Enjoy!

[soundiceuk]

Its going to be interesting who holds the record for the smallest and largest devices!

That circuits well smart!

Two questions I would like to ask everyones opinion on please.

1. Is Cold Electricity pure (infinite) voltage and zero current?

2. If coils produce inductive 1.57 harmonic resonance, does the hairpin circuit produce capacitive resonance?

[Farmhand]

Ok I will watch the video, I have an open mind. But I refuse to just believe,
there will need to be some hard evidence to convince me of anything.

One of the main reasons the world is in such a mess is because far too many
people just believe what they are told and won't question things. Too many
people fall victim to coercive persuasion. People feel pressured to conform to
popular beliefs for fear of being outcast. I don't hold that fear.

Coercive Persuasion is very, very common.

Mind control - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But rather than argue with everyone which I really don't want to do,
(because I think we are all on the same side here). I'll ask some more questions instead.

How could the device below actually demonstrate OU ? How much power do
the loads use and what is the input power ? I think the loads are one NE2 bulb
per output ? How much power do they consume in the situation depicted in
the photo ?



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This below is some of Don's text which I believe he relates to the device. That's a
big statement that I don't think is entirely justified.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

All the radio sets tuned to a 50 Kw transmitter certainly do not duplicate the
output of the transmitter do they ?

Do each of the receivers in Don's device actually duplicate the power of the
transmitter or do they intercept some of the radiations ?

Cheers

P.S. All three receivers may be able to duplicate the activity of the transmitter.
But can they, all three at once output the same power through a load as the
transmitter is using from the source ?
..

[boguslaw]

Farmhand

Yes, they can IF they work in resonance AND they are made to do so from ether.
No magic here , or simply resonance magic. Think that way :
transmitter is sending very small energy in EM wave which acts on antenna and is send to RLC oscillating circuit adjusted to catch that wave. Here that wave cannot escape and adds a bit of energy. Because waves are catched continously energy accumulate in tank circuit. no OU so far. But here we have after a few seconds quite amount of energy and IF the power received is larger then losses in tank circuit it acts like a dipole IF energy is not consumed in load. So far no OU. BUT , huge BUT. Now we set clever second tank circuit magnetically coupled for example and nature is creating antidipole of the same energy like in if flowing in our tank connected to antenna. This may happen only in special situations ,special clever devices because we don't see this commonly. We however have a few examples from nature and one of them is old known electrostatic induction. Second is response of iron (or ferromagnetic) to magnetic field with creating opposite pole.

The main question is : do we agree that in resonant circuit an ideal load (load which do not change parameters) can be powered with much less power then in normal closed loop circuit without resonance ? And that the only reason we do not use that is because there is no ideal loads (but fluorescent bulbs and LEDs are close to it) ?

[a.king21]

[QUOTE=soundiceuk;179503]Its going to be interesting who holds the record for the smallest and largest devices!

That circuits well smart!

Two questions I would like to ask everyones opinion on please.

1. Is Cold Electricity pure (infinite) voltage and zero current?

I don't have an opinion I have experimental facts. I originally experimented with cold electricity and was puzzled by the results because none of my electrically trained contemporaries had a clue. Then I found the only pdf on the planet that tells the truth. It is the Bedini/Bearden book on free energy. I know it tells the truth because I had already done most of the experiments prior to reading it. I'm sorry I don't have the link but it is on the net.
To answer your question: cold electricity is pulsed dc. I've had it from 80 volts up. I've charged up a 240 volt capacitor bank by accident and received a mains shock. Then I ran a 20 watt cfl bulb for about 4 seconds on full to discharge the cap bank. Cold electricity may also be pulsed ac if you earth your build and intercept it with a fwbr. Zero current? Well I've destroyed three mains battery chargers and 3 or 4 smaller chargers plus other equipment. I think you need some current to do that. I've also tripped the house mains circuit breaker on three occasions simply by earthing my build to a mains ground. So judge for yourself. As to measuring it? I've destroyed 5 or 6 meters. I now measure using a neon bulb. It's cheaper. It takes current to light a neon complete with resistor.

No 2? Sorry. No experience.

[Farmhand]

100 watts is claimed but no measurement is possible because the bulb is held in the hand.

Here's some observations.

The input power was not shown to be measured, only current and on a digital meter. I seen no input voltage measured.
There was no output power measurement.
The room is darkened.
The 100 watt bulb if lit to full brightness should be a lot brighter than that, it's
only glowing.
It's a neat effect but it won't be practical to hold a bulb to the device to get light.
The input power is not traced back to the source and there is no source voltage
shown, why not ?

This is how it is for me. I don't expect anyone to prove anything to me. I
can't and won't demand anything from anybody.

But I will say it as I see it.

There is nothing in that video to convince me there is more power taken out than is put in by the operators actions.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Farmhand

Yes, they can IF they work in resonance AND they are made to do so from ether.
No magic here , or simply resonance magic. Think that way :
transmitter is sending very small energy in EM wave which acts on antenna and is send to RLC oscillating circuit adjusted to catch that wave. Here that wave cannot escape and adds a bit of energy. Because waves are catched continously energy accumulate in tank circuit. no OU so far. But here we have after a few seconds quite amount of energy and IF the power received is larger then losses in tank circuit it acts like a dipole IF energy is not consumed in load. So far no OU. BUT , huge BUT. Now we set clever second tank circuit magnetically coupled for example and nature is creating antidipole of the same energy like in if flowing in our tank connected to antenna. This may happen only in special situations ,special clever devices because we don't see this commonly. We however have a few examples from nature and one of them is old known electrostatic induction. Second is response of iron (or ferromagnetic) to magnetic field with creating opposite pole.

The main question is : do we agree that in resonant circuit an ideal load (load which do not change parameters) can be powered with much less power then in normal closed loop circuit without resonance ? And that the only reason we do not use that is because there is no ideal loads (but fluorescent bulbs and LEDs are close to it) ?

Yes I do agree, with resonance much more work "useful" work can be done
with a given amount of energy.

My annoyance is that devices are shown to power loads with little effect on
the source, and then it is insinuated that these devices can deliver unlimited
power. When it is clearly not true, there is a limit, Why not show the limit.

I can partially light quite a few fluro's with the one wire method from 10 watts
with no apparent change to the input, but if I just keep adding them a point is
reached where they start to get dimmer or no more will light.

There is a limit. And in actual power out of the system it is almost the same
as the input. I can tell by intuition. But if someone were to accurately
measure otherwise I am willing change my mind. So far I haven't seen
anything to convince me that any device in which the input is not affected by
the output actually outputs more than is input by the operators actions.

For instance in the video T1000 linked what happens when three 100 watt
bulbs are attempted to be lighted ? Or what happens when the 100 watt bulb
is lighted for 6 hours straight ? Does the device burst into flames ?

Also the input of the device in the video is clearly affected by the output
anyway, so it is far more useful than a device where the input is not affected
by the output.

These are my opinions, I change my opinions when new superior evidence
comes to light. It is delusional not to do that.

I encourage people to have their own opinions based on their own
experimental results and observations or confirmed by them, rather than just
repeating the opinions of others and claiming them to be fact.

I have done countless experiments, I have experimental results from quite a
few different devices. While I am not qualified to argue much on a purely
technical level, I can see things happening.

But each to their own, it's a free world, and I am exercising my right to
freedom of speech. No one should be afraid to do that for fear of group
persecution.

I don't think I have said anything that should offend anyone.



Cheers

[kalena555]

@ Peter

So if we use one "transmitter" so to speak and then couple multiple "reciever" circuits that due to resonance pick up most of the energy transmitted while not having any effect on the transmitting circuit we have CoP > 1? Say input of 100watts to the circuit for resonance and have 2 or more accumulation circuits we could get a cop of greater than 1. Seems pretty logical the way you explain it. Or am i way off base here?

[Farmhand]

Farmhand,
where did you source this image and quote from?.

Hi Haan, The PDF's can be downloaded here as a Zip file it's the zip labeled Don Smith it's the third file from the top.

https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91e5c9dcce17f#cid=32A91E5C9DCCE17F&id=32A91E5C9DCCE17F%21649

The text was taken from PDF # 4 Which is in the Zip file "REM_electrical energy system", Page 7, Numbered paragraph 3.

The photo was taken from the PDF # 1 Also in the Zip file, "REM_Photo's"

Feel free to download any of the PDF files there.

Cheers

[bboj]

I am very much in line with Frmhand-s thinking.

Using resonance is about efficiency. Even Don Smith claimed he collected charges frmom the ambient - resonance etc beeing just the means to achieve the goal.

HE was pointing to particles vibration reaching and going through and deflecting from earth.

This is supposed to be collected.

Hi Haan, The PDF's can be downloaded here as a Zip file it's the zip labeled Don Smith it's the third file from the top.

https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91e5c9dcce17f#cid=32A91E5C9DCCE17F&id=32A91E5C9DCCE17F%21649

The text was taken from PDF # 4 Which is in the Zip file "REM_electrical energy system", Page 7, Numbered paragraph 3.

The photo was taken from the PDF # 1 Also in the Zip file, "REM_Photo's"

Feel free to download any of the PDF files there.

Cheers

[Patrick Kelly]

Quick comment

Hi Patrick,
Multiple thanks!!!!
Such knowledge is vital for understanding and targeted experiment.

Just for clarification:
1.
I assume that the part "exitation spark" is meant as exitation spark with few primary windings and not being related to wave length.

2.
In left schematic: the capacitor marked with "resonance" could work as shunt as well? I measured at a coil being shunted or not shunted the same (unexpected for me) natural resonant frequency. In case the capcitor is too small in value for performing as shunt, it will very probably deviate the coil from it's natural frequency to a lower one performing as resonant LC circuit conforming textbooks.

3.
I feel with Utkin with his aversion against forums. He seems to be an individual with vast knowlege outside textbooks. But how to express? All our electrical terms are occupied with imaginations out of standard textbooks. As Tesla experienced - there are no terms in order to precisely transport own imaginations without being distorted. Nevertheless I appreciate Utkin's notions and give him warm thanks for his effort.

rgds John

Hi John,

I eventually persuaded Vladimir to comment by persuading him that his answering did not oblige him to answer a string of other questions. His comment was:

This is an instance of 'Case 1' and nothing more. Here, the output coil was removed and some of the turns from the short-circuited coil were used instead.

Patrick