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

[Raui]

Lamare,
It wasn't until last night that I finally a chance to read the theory properly until last night. I don't think you need to be in resonance to get energy out of this but it would definitely get you the highest energy output. A very similar theory occurred to me when thinking about how dielectric induction can work differently to magnetic induction. I thought of a motor which spun a timing type device. This timing type device was attached to the positive terminal of a charged capacitor (the higher voltage the better) on one side and on the other side it was attached to an AV plug then to a load. As the timing type device spun and connected the positive lead of the capacitor to the AV plug you'd get the appearance of electrical power between the legs of the AV plug due to the laws of dielectric induction and the mechanics of an AV Plug. I called this flux modulation as there is no exchange of electrical power between the source and load only potential. However unless this timing device is spun to a extreme rotational velocity there would be no overunity. I did know that there was a solid state solution available however at the time I wasn't very good at designing electronic circuits (I still find it quite difficult). So this idea a lot like a lot of others was forgotten as I felt my device was quite crude. I want to congratulate you on describing that solution Arend!

The non-reciprocal relationship between source and load here I think is the real key to all of this that is; the exchange of potential between systems where a change in one doesn't affect the other. We see this in properly built parametric exciters as well they are both achieving the same thing in different ways. It's just like having an RLC circuit operating at resonance and we get a lot more energy flowing in the circuit but if we add a load we are adding it to a reciprocal system where a change in one effects the other and in this case takes it out of resonance. While RLC resonance to the best of my knowledge doesn't exhibit energy cohesion from the medium the principal of reciprocal/non-reciprocal systems is still illustrated. However just saying to someone 'make a non-reciprocal system where input effects output but not the other way around' is like Beardon's 'Don't kill the dipole' which is just taking the piss.

Heres to a peaceful world

Raui

[Aaron]

@Pentarbe

Aaron you mention pendulum but pendulum is different formula from lifting a ball. Doesn't matter because same end result. Pendulums do more work than needed to start it.

I can't click on the smiley pictures. I click but nothing happens.

Lamare, you have the fire like Aaron keep up the good work brother! I have hard time following your explanation but I try.

Pentarbe is like fire too with infinite "COP". Can anyone guess what it is? Maybe I start new forum on it to help people understand.

Thank you.

Yes, the pendulum does produce more work than you put into it.
Add all the joules required to bring it from direct bottom center
up to the height of each swing in both directions and it is WAY more
than the math says is required to lift the pendulum to begin with.
The first couple swings and you already have more. You obviously
get this. And to keep it going only requires enough input to make up
for the loss on the initial swing. And obviously Velijko gets this too.

The formula is a little more complex than lifting something straight up
but in concept, the relationship of that input to the rest of the swings
as you mentioned is the same result.

In relation to the Gray circuit and the front side cap, it only has to
be charged enough to make up for what is discharged from it which is NOT
the entire cap. So keeping it charged up obviously takes a lot less power
than having it charge from 0 each and every time. There are many things
like this where something can be sustained for a small bit of input, which
is just to make up the loss. Get the merry go round going - takes a certain
amount of work and it is common sense that you can sustain that
momentum by flicking it with your pinky maybe once per revolution. You
maintain the same work over time with nothing but a fraction of what
it took to get it going.

Not sure on the smiley's - I'd just reboot.

The Brahmans showed Pentarbe to Apollonius - up in the Himalayas.
I studied it in the original side by side English/Greek Conybeare edition
printed at Harvard back in 1912 I believe.

[Jbignes5]

Lamare,

I agree with what you're saying but that doesn't apply to Jbignes5.

When I CLEARLY post something and he turns around and tries to correct
me and the correction is nothing but a paraphrase of what I just said,
that is NOT what the purpose of this forum is for, that is called being
a trouble maker and is far from sincere or authentic in any way, shape
or form.

If you posted something and said "the sun is hot" and I replied to you and
told you, "Well, Lamare... I've been trying to help you understand. You're
fooling yourself if you don't get the fact that the sun is at a high
temperature." You'd look at me like I fell off the turnip truck!

That would not only be pathetically insulting to your intelligence, it
would be self evident that you are talking to a brick wall that doesn't
have enough sense to comprehend the fact that you just said the same
flipping thing!

So again, I agree with what you're saying but Jbignes5 hasn't demonstrated
the least bit of authenticity to address anything that actually is posted.

Anyway, thanks for getting the mental juices flowing with this thread
and I'll just watch what unfolds.

Come on Aaron where did I paraphrase you at all? Explain your accusation please.

The way I see it if someone disagrees with you and can bring forth references at to why they disagree with you instead of reading my post and quoting the whole post you single out one little thing that you can turn on me. Then when I answer your tripe you throw names and insults like this is some kind of playground without directly answering a dang thing I posted but some obscure reference to an open area. When confronted with this you slam me and how my view is not authentic.
No one that I know in this field has ever considered that we have this backwards. Few professionals even questions that not only did we make mistakes in leaving out the most brilliant ideas of our forefathers we got the whole process in reverse by doing so.

If you have any credibility then show me your working tube? Your real device that works as you determined it would. I am sure it would be for sale by now right? You attack me then back away thinking you won't be held responsible for that attack. Please Aaron at least I read your posts even though you say I don't and usually quote the entire post when necessary. You don't even care to do the same. So before you label me as a troubler maker you need to look in the mirror. This is a response to you claims about me, just to make that clear.

[Aaron]

Authentic communication?

You know, it's about the content and about the principles people are trying to share here and one way or the other we all have to try to understand what people are talking about instead of trying to force our own opinions upon someone else. Your truth is not my truth and we have all been given the freedom to chose what our truth is like.

Lamare,

I agree with what you're saying but that doesn't apply to Jbignes5.

When I CLEARLY post something and he turns around and tries to correct
me and the correction is nothing but a paraphrase of what I just said,
that is NOT what the purpose of this forum is for, that is called being
a trouble maker and is far from sincere or authentic in any way, shape
or form.

If you posted something and said "the sun is hot" and I replied to you and
told you, "Well, Lamare... I've been trying to help you understand. You're
fooling yourself if you don't get the fact that the sun is at a high
temperature." You'd look at me like I fell off the turnip truck!

That would not only be pathetically insulting to your intelligence, it
would be self evident that you are talking to a brick wall that doesn't
have enough sense to comprehend the fact that you just said the same
flipping thing!

So again, I agree with what you're saying but Jbignes5 hasn't demonstrated
the least bit of authenticity to address anything that actually is posted.

Anyway, thanks for getting the mental juices flowing with this thread
and I'll just watch what unfolds.

[Jbignes5]

I did no such thing.

I did not put lamare on the spot. I asked him to let me know if he thinks I am detracting from the topic he intended and if so if he wished me to leave his topic.

That is a sign of respect to Lamare. I asked and he gave me his response.

I do have to apologize to Lamare if it was taken that way. It was not intended to put him on the spot.

[Aaron]

@Jbignes5

If lamare thinks I am being anything but sincere in what I am saying then it is his ability to ask me to leave this thread. For which I would do promptly. When we were having a discussion about the subject of this thread it was very on topic.

So Lamare it's up to you friend. What you say is my command when dealing with your thread.

First of all, it isn't even appropriate to put Lamare on the spot.

I hope it is abundantly clear your method of operation and I'll leave
you alone in this thread to continue whatever it is you think you're
doing with the hopes that nobody here is naive enough to fall for it.

[Jbignes5]

A little about corona discharges.

This topic was started and boy is it a good way to see the pathways.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5637-corona-discharge.html

With the voltage potential being the attractor of the medium and the thin blue lines are actually what I suspect is the charges flowing twords the high potential.

These are just beautiful.

[Slovenia]

Thanks for the link!

Ramset,

Thanks for sharing the link!!

Best Regards,
Slovenia

Lamare
Seeing as how you have a duke aroo goin on.
something came up today that you [and all]should see

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets-48.html

Post 1435

Chet

[Jbignes5]

Ok.

Really as you said my thoughts on this and where I have formed them thoughts are from what I have learned from my research and limited experimentation in this area.

Although I believe Aaron is well versed in some of the areas that I have extensive research in. Albeit most of the areas that Aaron has versed himself in ,Gray and the likes, these guys are all based off the original work of Tesla.

here is the reference:

John Bedinis' EV Gray power conversion tube - 06/05/01

I doubt they know the way that I suspect is the reason for the tube which turns out to be much different then what they come to but it is only the direction of the "electron flow".

If one puts a substantial potential on the "antenna" it would attract charges to flow into vanes(corona) or follow the formation of the dielectric medium to the source. These are the highways that get formed and originally Tesla figured out that if a potential could attract the dielectric medium to form these roads then there would be a portion of the charges that go through the grid on its way twords the source or potential and could be stripped and conducted away from the source.

I really am now understanding the method that Tesla used eventually. Seeing that in his first attempt at looking at this event he used outward pulses. Those pulses were of course unidirectional and only went out. Well if one could affect the medium in an outward method then why not in an inward method. An inward direction would do more to focus the charges and make them more dense and better capable of higher charge collection with an increased ability to handle those charges. This means he both draws the dielectric medium and charges to become denser to better handle the increased load.

Take a good read of the responses that Peter and Bedini are referenced to and Talk about the circuit. They see the tube as being a layden jar. Hmmm... curious....

As for the flame war I'm over it already. I said my peace and now onto better topics.

[RAMSET]

Lamare
Seeing as how you have a duke aroo goin on.
something came up today that you [and all]should see

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets-48.html

Post 1435

Chet

[lamare]

If lamare thinks I am being anything but sincere in what I am saying then it is his ability to ask me to leave this thread. For which I would do promptly. When we were having a discussion about the subject of this thread it was very on topic.

So Lamare it's up to you friend. What you say is my command when dealing with your thread.

What can I say? I have seen so many things the last couple of years that I didn't understand at first and even thought were full of B.S. Like for example those channelings that talk about "raising the frequency" and such and so dimension or density. One of the most difficult things on this planet is that people use different words to say what they mean. What I see here, for example, in the discussion about potential is that not everyone means the same thing with the same word. And that gets into a useless yes/no discussion, which is the same kind of discussion that makes that our community is being rejected by the scientific community. Take for example Joseph Newmann. He has written a big book, which I'm sure does contain a lot of good points if only you are prepared to try to look at what he writes trough his eyes. What does he mean with his words and how does that fit in with your useage of words that describe the same things?

You know, it's about the content and about the principles people are trying to share here and one way or the other we all have to try to understand what people are talking about instead of trying to force our own opinions upon someone else. Your truth is not my truth and we have all been given the freedom to chose what our truth is like.

So, what I try to do is read trough whatever someone writes and see wether or not it makes sense to me or not. Some things I just don't get, so I just leave them for now. Maybe later I understand them, maybe not. And maybe someone else understands it and makes a point, so I can connect things and understand them later.

That way I try to learn as much as possible from what is being said here. And make no mistake: there has not been one person on this planet yet that has been right all the time. So, there's always something to learn for everyone who is willing to....

And I am very curious how this flame war turns out. I'll be just watching and see who learns what.

[Jbignes5]

It only takes one word from Lamare...

If lamare thinks I am being anything but sincere in what I am saying then it is his ability to ask me to leave this thread. For which I would do promptly. When we were having a discussion about the subject of this thread it was very on topic.

So Lamare it's up to you friend. What you say is my command when dealing with your thread.

[pentarbe]

please Aaron

Thank you Lamare for starting nice talk so I join after reading many posts!

Aaron you mention pendulum but pendulum is different formula from lifting a ball. Doesn't matter because same end result. Pendulums do more work than needed to start it. Is everyone blind? Your explanation makes me lose sleep because you make more sense than anyone else I read like in complete different category! I read Tom Bearden long time but difficult to make sense. Now make sense after reading your posts. Please keep posting more and stop wasting time with jbignes5. You know better. He has attention deficit disorder and can't focus on anything you write. He waste everyone's time and is out of his league.

I can't click on the smiley pictures. I click but nothing happens.

Lamare, you have the fire like Aaron keep up the good work brother! I have hard time following your explanation but I try.

Pentarbe is like fire too with infinite "COP". Can anyone guess what it is? Maybe I start new forum on it to help people understand.

[Jbignes5]

Saying the ball is not part of the system is exactly saying a motor is not
part of the system that a battery is supplying potential to. Battery is
our lift (input potential) and the ball is the device that does the work.
Only a mindless imbecile would believe such nonsense that you are
spewing here.

You need to go do some basic homework before you waste anyone else's
time with your childish prattle.

What connections do you have to the ball my friend? what connection do you have to the output in your case? In your case you have admitted that the input you do provide does not affect the ball in any way. Then you magically claim the output as yours.

As in the case of the potential of the battery it is connected to our motor through wires. What are you connecting to the ball? Your thoughts? The only one being childish is you. That is evident by the insults you are slinging. I provided references to my conclusions and they support my arguement not yours.

I again refer to the Doctor Fred B. Wood:

"The major barrier to overunity electromagnetic energy technologies is the perception that such
technologies are not possible physically, that one cannot get more energy out than is put into a device, and
that such technologies are akin to so-called perpetual motion machines. None of these perceptions are
scientifically valid, but serve as a barrier nonetheless. As noted, overunity only applies to traditional
sources of energy inputs and outputs. Conservation of energy is preserved, because the energy input
drawn from the active physical vacuum equals the energy output of the devices (less any small losses
within the device). Overunity electromagnetic energy devices do not get more energy out than is put in,
when including the energy drawn from the active physical vacuum, and are not perpetual motion
machines in the sense that a continuous flow of energy from the active physical vacuum is required."

[Aaron]

stop wasting people's time

Not that I didn't see that coming Aaron the post I did above is in support that you are not including all the input and are not understanding that the flow that is already there is not associated with you in the least bit. It has a lot to do with the ball which is a converter of that momentum as it hits the ground. If you somehow figured out how to include the ball in your "system", which it is not, then you might be able to claim there is a cop to that "System" COp is directly related to the system you are trying to compare it to a likewise "system"

Saying the ball is not part of the system is exactly saying a motor is not
part of the system that a battery is supplying potential to. Battery is
our lift (input potential) and the ball is the device that does the work.
Only a mindless imbecile would believe such nonsense that you are
spewing here.

You need to go do some basic homework before you waste anyone else's
time with your childish prattle.