The ultimate secret of free energy: Split the postive AND the negative

[gyula]

...
But if you take that solar cell and see 24v at the leads, you can take that
and connect it to a cap to get the full 24v potential without shorting
the cell. Putting that potential to something with ultra low impedance
allows us to get the full potential without "killing the source dipole". That
is another practical application and it works. Of course the sun is free,
but the point is that all that 24v potential can be used if taken properly
but if put to a load with any real impedance, we lose the 24v potential
and have maybe half that. So on a solar cell, we can utilize the full
potential without killing the dipole of it's full potential.

We can do similar things with batteries, etc...

Hi Aaron,

Unfortunately, charging up an empty capacitor needs energy that is taken out from a battery, a solar cell etc. And slowly you source dipole is killed in case of a battery if you do not take care of recharging it but then it needs outside energy. (Of course when using a solar cell you do not have to care about recharging.)

There is one more problem: when you charge up a cap from a source dipole the amount of energy you take out is mainly governed by the capacitor value. If you use a very 'big' capacitor like say a supercap so that you do have a decent energy source to supply a load, then the source dipole also "suffers" (loses energy) while charges up the supercap (or a very big value cap).

I understand you can charge up a cap many times from a battery but all that happens is you slow down the "killing process" because you do the discharging intermittently.

I also understand that you can have a higher energy output from a cap than what is stored in it if you discharge it in a very short time. Tesla nicely described it. (Say you store 10 Joule in a cap and you discharge it in half a second you can have 20 Joule for that half second.)
BUT unless you can gain some extra energy from the very quick discharge, all you do is consuming the cap's energy by your load in a faster way. So you have to charge it up more frequently from the source dipol, this involves consuming more and more energy from the source dipole: you have to recharge it if it is a battery. If it is a solar cell you load it more frequently by charging up the cap but if you think it over you cannot utilize as much energy from the cell (if you choose the charge / disharge process) as in a continuos operation without using the cap (switching losses).

I would yet like to see a practical setup where a source dipole can trigger a process that involves energy gain, preferably without using rechargable batteries anywhere in the process, except for a startup.

rgds, Gyula

[Slovenia]

Lamare's PESWiki File in PDF Format

Here is Lamare's PESWiki file in pdf format. I'm in the process of editing it.

[Aaron]

not "killing the dipole"

If all the broadcasters of don't destroy the dipole understood it, then why not apply it?

I have many times. With batteries and regular capacitors as power sources
and capacitors that I altered to become electrets. The electret cap for
example can be used to "charge" another cap to a certain voltage potential,
disconnect that regular cap from the electret cap and then use that to
power a led, dump to a battery, etc... then reconnect to the electret cap
and repeat. That is getting work from nothing more than potential supplied
initially by an electret cap.

That is just one example and is a practical application of understanding
what to do with the potential once I have it while not having the source
dipole decrease in its own potential difference.

Anyway, connecting that electret cap potential to another cap brings up
another point - it works because the impedance of the cap I'm connecting
it to is ultra low and it doesn't short it out so to speak.

The same applies to a solar cell. Open voltage may be 24v for example on
a 12v 1amp solar cell like one that I have. As soon as you connect anything
with any kind of impedance, it shorts the cell 24v down to 12v or whatever.

But if you take that solar cell and see 24v at the leads, you can take that
and connect it to a cap to get the full 24v potential without shorting
the cell. Putting that potential to something with ultra low impedance
allows us to get the full potential without "killing the source dipole". That
is another practical application and it works. Of course the sun is free,
but the point is that all that 24v potential can be used if taken properly
but if put to a load with any real impedance, we lose the 24v potential
and have maybe half that. So on a solar cell, we can utilize the full
potential without killing the dipole of it's full potential.

We can do similar things with batteries, etc...

[Aaron]

maintaining the dipole

Dr. Stiffler,

The mention of not destroying the dipole is just a reference to not needing
to have the battery or other input source in a continuous power mode
or 100% duty cycle, which closes the loop permanently, which of course
will kill the dipole.

It is also a reference to having a potential difference established where
the potential itself is used for charging a battery for example and where
the connection itself is broke before real current starts to flow. By real
current I mean the normal amount of current that would be associated with
whatever particular voltage from whatever particular battery and whatever
particular load - Using the dipole in impulses sort of where the normal ratio
of voltage and current is changed so that there is less current per voltage
than normal and this helps to maintain the dipole without killing it and
still be able to get the same amount of work. This is the concept anyway.

Theoretically, the dipole can be maintained permanently. But usually
even with more efficient non-permanent closed loop methods of drawing
from the source dipole, the potential difference at the terminals will still
reduce. What I mean by dipole can be maintained permanently is that
the potential difference doesn't drop.

And also the concept that the amount of Heaviside flow from the positive to
negative over the wires - only 1/11 trillionth I believe is what is used by
the circuit to attract the "electrons" in the opposite direction (current)
so virtually everything that is there isn't being put to use. So it isn't a
matter of getting enough potential - there is enough there and if we can
utilize what is not normally being put to use, then we have all we need
without having to kill the dipole (IF we can put it all to use). That is
why in concept, a AA battery supplies enough potential to power a
battleship - we just haven't been able to make use of all the flow, just a
sliver.

[Slovenia]

I understand how you feel.

I understand how you must feel. I was a moderator researcher for several alternate fuel sites for several years and got mostly grief from the whole affair. So, I'm not as laid back as I used to be either.

I don't like the this PestWicked site as they have yet to say anything good about my direction or work so I can not bring myself to offer them anything worth value either.

[DrStiffler]

Don't Destroy the Dipole

Well I have time for one more post, so guess I will tick off a bunch of people.

Just what is 'Do Not Destroy the Dipole' anyway? Isn't that a cop out, common sense. Okay a battery can be considered a dipole and so can a permanent magnet, so saying we want a circuit that does not destroy it is saying what?
Well my take is it is saying we need a form of energy conversion in order to do our work and not use up the source (dipole). Really the statement is meaningless and says nothing about the approach.

If all the broadcasters of don't destroy the dipole understood it, then why not apply it? Many are very good mathematicians and granted may not be able to solder, but really, there are those that can and can follow instruction.

I get blasted from all sides and care less because it all comes back to energy conversion. Forget the dipole, convert form to different form.

I don't like the this PestWicked site as they have yet to say anything good about my direction or work so I can not bring myself to offer them anything worth value either.

[Slovenia]

Dr Stiffler

Dr.Stiffler,

Your help has been much appreciated!!

Best Regards,
Slovenia

[DrStiffler]

Hi Lamare,

I've been studying that article at PESWiki and editing it. Except for a very few persons, most guys are not helping out on this project and I'm starting to lose interest in helping some of them. Thank you for all your input and hard work on this!!! You have shared a lot.

Best Regards,
Slovenia

@lamare

The circuit you show (dated 9/9/10) will not work the way you envision and in fact will not do much at all.

Remember the AM modulation concept, you have say a 100W carrier. To obtain in an ideal circuit 100% modulation of the carrier you need a modulator of 100W. You therefore in ideal circuit, obtain a carrier that just about approaches (0) (otherwise distortion) signal carrier valley, to a 200W carrier peak.

In the receiver the carrier is discarded (filtered out) and only the modulation component is processed and amplified for recovery. Now in your circuit where is the detection portion? In other-words you will via skin effect swamp you output (load with a combination of both the modulation and the RF, n nothing is present to separate it from the load. Indeed any lower frequency action on the load side would be reduced in reflection back to the driver (depending on the caps and coils in series), yet this will not work as shown, at least not what you want from it.

Here is a thought to process. In AM modulation, just how did the old crystal radio develop enough audio recovery from a uV RF signal? No it was not because the user had miles of antenna.

Anyway just my two cents for the day. Good Luck with the venture.

[Jbignes5]

I am confused.

That is also what Turtur is saying, eventually. He calculates that the electric field looses energy during propagation. Of course that is not dissapearing, it is converted to some other form of energy. And since charge carriers emit static electric field energy, that energy must come from somewhere.

So, in essence: the propagating field looses energy to the dielectric, the charge carriers take energy from the dielectric and emit that in the form of an electric field. So, it's a zero sum game eventually.

However, to me the most important conclusion is: the electric field *is* an energy source one can utilize.

First you say that I am correct then establish that Turtur is saying the same thing.

Lets look at figure 4 again but this time go in the opposite direction (inwards). Based from the constricting of the fields going from the outside radius inwards what would the results be? A massive gain of charge? Yes. Why would I come to that conclusion well it is all perspective and surface area of the radius of each circle. When one emits outward the field disperses over time because the radius is getting bigger and bigger. When we focus the field inwards it in fact gains potential and consequently energy. Now how could this be? This is Tesla's secret. Same mass but different surface area based on it's radius in relation to the inner surface. This only works with potential and it's carrier, the dielectric medium. The other component of real charges, that flow much like oil and water, are attracted to the potential and ride the wakes of the dielectric medium twords the center gaining in force because they have to compress into thicker bands of force to maintain the geometric structure of the self organizing energy field. This field has structure that mirrors high voltage electrical emissions but on a lower scale. Meaning that in it's natural state it would want to expand and return to a balance of space or the environment. This expansion could be thought of as a spider like web. When a potential is supplied those radial connections are attracted more to each other and they form separations that band together. Although I am simplifying this process to a large extent, meaning it is finer then I could describe, the process is the key here. One would also have to understand we are really looking at a slice of the whole in mine or Turtur's descriptions. Think of it as a pom pom.
A complex interaction based on geometry, fractals and static laws.

In the case of electricity I really am starting to understand about polarity and how it works with our systems. Especially when they describe flow or the current. Now it is thought that the flow in from the + positive to the - negative. Thats because the negative doesn't exist. It is a flow from a more positive to a less positive on a sliding scale based on the back ground charge level. I have not made my mind up as to what does this but I am trying to remember that if the dielectric medium itself have a geometry behind it, real form, then that form would carry through on all that is based on that medium that created division in our universe. Lets say thats a Sierpinski triangle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in form. Look at section "Analogues in higher dimensions" One might see that the forms are the same but the flow would be quite different if the surfaces were charged statically. This might be a good spot to look for polarity in charges. With one being the positive or the other being negative. It is the organization of that structure that is giving the appearance of a positive and negative based on the direction of flow through that structure. Like I said I'm still on the fence about that.
There is a lot that I have not touched on yet and can not give a qualified answer to. But I am slowly working it out and to tell you the truth it seems to be fitting together like a puzzle. The whole picture is getting more and more defined as I go and it gets easier to fit the next piece from that clearer vision.

In our traditional electronics it is always thought that the energy is supplied by us. Well what if all we were supplying is the ability to maintain the potential to draw real charges into our circuit. It can be proofed by the fact that we need to have shielding on our units to make the charges more quiet and not contain background noise. We do not need to worry about lack of charges because I believe that they are not in short supply given the dimensions of our current reality. This has to deal with resolution of the network even at our current capability to view those dimensions. This resolution is quiet finite even at our furthest capability to see. A mere millimeter of space cubed would have more then enough charges to facilitate any circuitry we could devise, just to give you an example. The dimensions of the dielectric is so fine that it acts like a fluid as well. It flows from higher ground to lowest.
Now in our circuits we use metals to conduct the energy into our circuits. These metals are much like iron in the reaction to a magnetic source and can be substituted with the electrical equivalent. At one point (the source) it's potential energizes the whole route and we can change that flow by merely putting things into the way of that flow where we want a restriction of that flow or reflection of the flow. Those are just two examples of all our components we currently have. The charges enter the wires or pathways being attracted to the potential we are providing and get pulled into the vacuum through the components and back to the potential pump we have created (battery or source) to cause a magnetic like interaction with the material we are using to conduct through. Although these materials all have different values and effects in doing so.

Take Aluminum for example. Tesla really like Aluminum and he thought it was the most astounding metal of the time. Astounding because it does not react with magnetic fields like other metals. The reaction is much different then other non exotic metals.

I'll leave you with that to chew on...

[Slovenia]

Encouragement

Hi Lamare,

Thanks!! I needed your encouragement. You are always an inspiration to me.

Best Regards,
Slovenia

Hi Slovenia,

Don't be too hard on them. Most persons do this as a hobby, as do I, and it takes a while to get all this straight in your head, because it is really different from the way everyone is used to do electrical engineering. Everyone uses the Newtonian kind of model, which is fine for most applications, while this gets into the dirty details. The same dirty details you meet when you design HF transmitters and the like. And there are relatively not that many people that know how this works, HF stuff is usually kept away from as fas as possible by most engineers, because it is so unpredictable and challengeing.

[lamare]

Hi Lamare,

I've been studying that article at PESWiki and editing it. Except for a very few persons, most guys are not helping out on this project and I'm starting to lose interest in helping some of them. Thank you for all your input and hard work on this!!! You have shared a lot.

Best Regards,
Slovenia

Hi Slovenia,

Don't be too hard on them. Most persons do this as a hobby, as do I, and it takes a while to get all this straight in your head, because it is really different from the way everyone is used to do electrical engineering. Everyone uses the Newtonian kind of model, which is fine for most applications, while this gets into the dirty details. The same dirty details you meet when you design HF transmitters and the like. And there are relatively not that many people that know how this works, HF stuff is usually kept away from as fas as possible by most engineers, because it is so unpredictable and challengeing.

[Slovenia]

Editing

Hi Lamare,

I've been studying that article at PESWiki and editing it. Except for a very few persons, most guys are not helping out on this project and I'm starting to lose interest in helping some of them. Thank you for all your input and hard work on this!!! You have shared a lot.

Best Regards,
Slovenia

How about editing the article over at peswiki? I intended that to become the result of all our efforts...

Update: I have updated the article with some more on Puharich:
Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

[lamare]

If anyone is interested, I think we should assemble a study guide for this thread and the other two accompanying threads, Gray Replication & Stan Meyers Secret Preventing Electrolysis. Anyway, if someone wants to be part of this they will need to help with the process. There are a lot of loose ends that need to be brought together and a whole lot of material that needs to be studied and summarized in a short brief. This will be a much easier task if it is a group effort. Is anyone else interested in doing this?

How about editing the article over at peswiki? I intended that to become the result of all our efforts...

Update: I have updated the article with some more on Puharich:
Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

[Slovenia]

Gray Circuit Malfunction Thread PDF File

I am attaching a pdf file of the Gray Circuit Malfunction thread. There is some pertinent information in it that pertains to what we are talking about here.

[Slovenia]

Gray Circuit Malfunction

There is another thread entitled, "Gray Circuit Malfunction", that you also should look at because Lamare has added some important data to that thread that concerns this one. I'll make a pdf file of the important parts of that thread later.