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

[Jbignes5]

Ok..

Yes I understand. I just wanted to clarify that ok. Some do not know this stuff. I am well versed on Haramein. Although I have the same opinion of him as Aaron does. But thats not to demean what he has collected or now thinks he understands.

The problem I see with him is this. He is alone in his quest but for a select group who surrounds him. Any input to his "Talks" He wants you to pay for(literally)??? Hmm.. Weird..

That aside he has done a lot of collecting of any information he can gather. That does take talent but I think he has miss connected a few things and thats where I have picked up. It has to work as one unit. It has to include all the strange. It has to fit like a puzzle or it all looses meaning.

Please do read the pdf ok it will define the medium of the dielectric and why one can not exist without the other. It also shows you that we don't see the entire unit working. Our current system only is concerned with the working half or magnetic spectrum and this is one reason we can not attain the tap to let real movement into our systems or free energy(charges). Although some have touched on this it is very limited because they didn't see the whole picture and designed their systems not to interact with the invisible half fully.

[lamare]

There is a medium of dielectric particles. They are activated and pass static potentials to attract real charges.

The point is that the "real charges" you are talking about consist of rotating vortexes in the "medium of dielectric particles". So, the "real charges" in the bigger picture are some combination of rotating "dielectric particles" flowing around in such a way that you get these vortices. And the whole of these vortices is what would be the "real charge", a "particle". So, the balls in Harameins picture represent the "medium dielectric particles", the whole, the apple-like thing, is the bigger particle.

[Jbignes5]

Interesting stuff to think about. There's a few things we have to get straight:

1. The medium in which charges, matter, etc. occur can be described as a fluid/gas like medium trough which waves known as electromagnetic can travel. So, the corrected Maxwell equations (without the postulated charges that supposedly cause the waves) describe the properties of the medium.

2. Matter and therefore charges are nothing but localized electromagnetic waves in this medium. Since the electric component has to do with pressure-like waves trough the medium and the magnetic component has to do with rotation of the medium, matter and/or charges are nothing but rotating vortexes in the ether, as shown by Haramein:

Now that brings us to the question: what is the ether itself like? Are there charges / particles that small that we can't see them which make up the ether?

The answer to that question seems to be: Yes, since the whole thing seems to be a fractal, you can have charges/particles at any size you like. It only depends on the frequency of the waves at what scale these can occur.

And that is very strange. On the one hand we say that matter/charges are just waves propagating trough the ether, so there must be something these waves flow trough, so on the other hand we say the ether consists of very tiny pieces of matter/charges, which make up the medium, the ether.

So, when you talk about charges flowing into the core of the earth and such, which ones are you talking about? The ones we would know as matter like electrons and the like, or those much smaller ones we would call the ether?

I think you may be talking about both of them.

However, there are no attraction forces down at the lowest level. It all comes down to pressurewaves going trough the ether. Remember the cymatic stuff? It's these pressurewaves trough the ether we interpret as "attraction forces", while in reality they are standing electrostatic wave patterns. These look like attraction forces, but are nothing but pressure differences in the ether.

Given the cymatic exercises, I think the earth exists as a quiet region in a gigantic standing wave pattern, just like these:

And then the Lay-lines, pyramid locations as well as the hollow earth theory and all those "sacred geometries" makes a lot of sense.

Ok lets try to focus here. There is a medium of dielectric particles. They are activated and pass static potentials to attract real charges. Real charges in this medium are the potential that the medium is both reactive to and pass only the static potential to the outside world.
So the medium of space is like water. With the charges being the driving force and the source of all energetic exchanges.
Now I think I gave reference to the model which showed that in a magnetic field you have the lines of force but there is a cross field of the dieletric that creates shells as well. Lets say you have a point charge and you do the magnetic fields that extend from the point charge. Well there will be spherical shells around that point charge that are bunchings of the medium or dielectric, why? Because they are attracted to the smaller real charges that shell up around the bigger real charge(s) in the middle.

Let me see if I can did up the reference I showed earlier.

*edit* found it and here it is enjoy. This might complete your understanding from a source to source aspect and all the connections between.

http://ia311542.us.archive.org/3/items/dielectricphenom028893mbp/dielectricphenom028893mbp.pdf

It is quite big 17mb but give it some time and check it out. Pay close attention to the figures 1(a)-1(d) and you can see that the normal lines of force cross another line at 90 degrees from the magnetic lines. That shell is actually the division of charges or the dielectric medium. The dielectric medium is reactant to potential but is not conductive in the traditional sense. It is purely a division of space that lets potential have a force over distance but like in our search for interesting and weird happenings if one smashes a crystal you get a tremendous electrical event that happens example electric lighters. <- What happens on the biggest is what happens on the smallest scales. Since the dielectric medium I suspect is crystaline in nature then it would seem right if we looked at a coil being pulsed. The field expands and drives the dielectric medium into divisions then that force is removed and the medium rebounds back inwards and crashes the point of origin causing an electric buildup as the medium tries to retrain a balance. But we now have a coil of wire in that space and it picks up that event and it energizes the coil with the exact same type of energy that an electric lighter uses. So back emf is just this event. Total voltage and zero current.

What can this be used for then? Well it can feed a source point we choose to maintain a real charge point that can pull other charges into for which we could steer away from the source just as it is getting to that source to our load. Remember these are real charges being attracted to a higher potential so they would be real current in our load.

[gyula]

...
This is an application as you describe just to prove the point in one of
many ways.

YouTube - Self Running Bedini Oscillator

That circuit works with or without the ground rod - just better with.
I have done many variations of that circuit and they all work and the
capacitor on the front maintains it's potential difference or voltage.

Hi Aaron,

Thank you for your reply and I have read your answers you gave to Dave (Web000x) too.

Unfortunately, I am not convinced by the practical reference you showed in the above video. I think of the oscilloscope ground clip for instance that probably still gave ground potencial to your circuit, I can only hope you were aware of that back then.
And the energy levels involved in your setup shown were in the pico or nanoJoule range.
Some years ago a very good experimenter from Norway built a bipolar transistor blocking oscillator (after Naudin) and to his great surprise the oscillator "continued operating" when he disconnected the battery. The circuit included big electrolytic caps, and they maintained their voltage level somewhere between 2 - 3V DC for several hours. Then, on the following day he realised his laptop was on the table, about 50-60cm away from the circuit and the laptop generated electromagnetic energy and his circuit was a receiver: when he disconnected the battery, it did not oscillate like a blocking oscillator before but worked as an antenna: the oscillator coil worked as a pick-up coil and the transistor worked as a rectifier and all this were keeping the voltage level in the capacitors.

I do not mean this was the case in your demo setup, I only say that at such very low energy levels like picoJoules, the experimenter are facing several possible pitfalls to "choose from". And I have no problem with "outside" energy sources that can be utilized, as long as they are not man-made.

Another known phenomena in electrolytic capacitors is the so-called memory effect when the dielectric material inside tries to "rearrange itself" into a previous state when it was biased by a certain potencial level. Typical example for this the puffer caps in power supplies: they keep a few Volts for hours or even days across their pins after you switched the mains voltage off.
While the power supply in the equipment works for hours or for days, the dielectric material 'gets formed' inside the puffer capacitor, then after switch off, they try to maintain their 'formed' inside molecular structure.

Have you experienced at least some hundred milliJoules, not to mention a few Joules involved in such setups (as you showed in the above video) where no batteries are used?

Re on electrets: I fully agree, after making an electret like for instance by Mototaro Eguchi ( Electrets ) and shorting it periodically into (for instance) a battery or into a transformer etc then you surely have a working setup which gives a few Joule useful energy, "just out of nothing", for a certain period of time (for say from a few months to a few years, depending on the quality of the dielectric material), then it "depletes". Certainly, you can make several electrets to maintain the "process of generating energy" for sure.

So in such electrets "the killing the dipole" process is very very slow indeed. You have to use several scores of such electret setups to receive really useful quantity of energy for meeting even a very very moderate household's energy needs though.

I hope some day either the theory you mention or someone's else theory really really produces useful energy sources in practice that are enviroment friendly (do not use any battery or other harmful material).

rgds, Gyula

[Aromaz]

There can be no dispute about who, what, where and how of your own resources. Your resource is the person where you got the info from and it is correct in quoting that person.

There is also another point in relation; by following up and doing deeper research to verify weather your resource has the right info you should stumble accross the originator.

The person whom you learned it from is still to be honoured with your quote; however then if you have references of prior info; it is good practice to quote such. Krafft has published since early 1930's; however I will say Haramein (Not one of my favourite people; but . . .) does explain it in a manner which is understandable. Unlike Krafft et al.

[lamare]

Shown by Haramein???

Lamare, why not quote people that actually DID come up with the
vortex type models?? Carl Frederick Krafft and others. Most of these
modern day "experts" are simply regurgitating much of what has already
been known and published for a hundred years - it just never got any
attention because it went against the grain. Even Maxwell showed
vorticular models. And there is very interesting gravity research in
Nazi Germany that goes deep into vorticular models like this.

And they're practically inverse models of how the magnetic particles
"polarized aether" is moving into and out of magnets where it goes
out the ends and into the center - the positive particles at least while
the negative magnetic particles are flowing simultaneously in the
opposite direction.

I didn't know about these. I know that Meyl talks about vorticular models and says that they can explain gravity, but I didn't really get that, until I saw the pictures Haramein shows. A picture does say more than a hundred words let alone equations. So, I was just quoting where I got it from, and I like this particular picture, because it gives so many insight in one picture....

As for Nazi Germany, I know about the "flugscheiben" and that Victor Schauberger was involved into that kind of research, but I don't know the details. To me, at this moment, it suffices to have a general idea about what this is all about, since I am trying to focus on explaining the free energy principles related to the electric field.

[Aaron]

vorex models

matter and/or charges are nothing but rotating vortexes in the ether, as shown by Haramein:

Shown by Haramein???

Lamare, why not quote people that actually DID come up with the
vortex type models?? Carl Frederick Krafft and others. Most of these
modern day "experts" are simply regurgitating much of what has already
been known and published for a hundred years - it just never got any
attention because it went against the grain. Even Maxwell showed
vorticular models. And there is very interesting gravity research in
Nazi Germany that goes deep into vorticular models like this.

And they're practically inverse models of how the magnetic particles
"polarized aether" is moving into and out of magnets where it goes
out the ends and into the center - the positive particles at least while
the negative magnetic particles are flowing simultaneously in the
opposite direction.

[lamare]

As for your comment about the static nature of gravity. Man I have been saying that for quite a long time. I am glad you understand this concept. I have a question for you though. How does this process work in your concept?

Mine is very simple. Molten whatever is in the center of our planet. The churning of the molten material causes the static potential that is held inside our planet. And when you have a standing potential like that it draws charges into itself. This real charge flow is both responsible for our weather and gravity. Ever seen a tornado or any other storm you can imagine? What happens when you pull the plug on the drain in the tub? Those charges are actually going into our core and the resulting drag it has on the other charges in our planets shells get drawn down and form our weather. Ever heard of ley lines? What shape are they when viewed in Google earth (there is a plugin for that) ? Remember that our atmosphere is very fluid like. What about the peculiar shape at Saturn's north pole? Are you starting to see the direction here.

Interesting stuff to think about. There's a few things we have to get straight:

1. The medium in which charges, matter, etc. occur can be described as a fluid/gas like medium trough which waves known as electromagnetic can travel. So, the corrected Maxwell equations (without the postulated charges that supposedly cause the waves) describe the properties of the medium.

2. Matter and therefore charges are nothing but localized electromagnetic waves in this medium. Since the electric component has to do with pressure-like waves trough the medium and the magnetic component has to do with rotation of the medium, matter and/or charges are nothing but rotating vortexes in the ether, as shown by Haramein:

Now that brings us to the question: what is the ether itself like? Are there charges / particles that small that we can't see them which make up the ether?

The answer to that question seems to be: Yes, since the whole thing seems to be a fractal, you can have charges/particles at any size you like. It only depends on the frequency of the waves at what scale these can occur.

And that is very strange. On the one hand we say that matter/charges are just waves propagating trough the ether, so there must be something these waves flow trough, so on the other hand we say the ether consists of very tiny pieces of matter/charges, which make up the medium, the ether.

So, when you talk about charges flowing into the core of the earth and such, which ones are you talking about? The ones we would know as matter like electrons and the like, or those much smaller ones we would call the ether?

I think you may be talking about both of them.

However, there are no attraction forces down at the lowest level. It all comes down to pressurewaves going trough the ether. Remember the cymatic stuff? It's these pressurewaves trough the ether we interpret as "attraction forces", while in reality they are standing electrostatic wave patterns. These look like attraction forces, but are nothing but pressure differences in the ether.

Given the cymatic exercises, I think the earth exists as a quiet region in a gigantic standing wave pattern, just like these:

And then the Lay-lines, pyramid locations as well as the hollow earth theory and all those "sacred geometries" makes a lot of sense.

[Jbignes5]

Let me add that by saying just this, you are actually kicking at the foundation of the whole "general relativity" idea of Einstein. See my post here:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6270-ultimate-secret-free-energy-split-postive-negative-2.html#post109117

--::--
The Holographic Universe - Crystalinks

If you read this, you have a second reason why General Relativity should go to the trash can.



The first reason is given by Dr. Charles Kenneth Thornhill : http://www.etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf - The whole idea of a fixed speed of light basically originates in a mathematical error. Because they got the Maxwell equations wrong, they used some freak coordinate transform known as the Lorentz transform, which can only work if the speed of light is constant. Now, we *know* the speed of light is not constant in the vicinity of matter. So, really, this is a piece of junk. Sorry, Einstein, you were wrong on this one.

But, you were quite something too:

Albert Einstein quotes




So, I'm sure you'll forgive me for what I said just here.

Update 2: And of course, Tesla got it right all along:

PowerPedia:Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity - PESWiki


--::--

You see, if the fields are dynamic, propagating and contain energy, which they do, then there is no way to account for that, but by adapting the Maxwell equations the way both Bearden and Meyl are saying: You have to remove the postulation that the fields are caused by charge carriers, cause otherwise varying electrostatic fields, aka "longitudinal electric waves", cannot exist in vacuum, as "they" are saying.

And when you do that, the whole Lortentz transform idea goes with it, and with that you can kiss "general relativity" goodbye.

And beside that, we *know* it's the fields that are the cause matter exists and not the other way around. So "they" will have to make a choice. Either it's quantum mechanics and thus the fields cause the matter, or it's the current Maxwell equations with the postulation that it's the matter (charge carriers) that cause the fields. You just can't have them both at the same time!

So, really, ye can kick some **** with this stuff, but choose your battles! Fight about the content, not about what would be the best term to call the content!

Update:
One more thing. So QM says matter is just a localized electromagnetic wave. Two counter-rotating vortices in the ether. That's what it is. Nothing but an electric phenomenon. So, what on earth would gravity be, if it's not simply an electrostatic phenomenon, a longitudinal electric wave, "they" say do not exist, because they got the Maxwell equations wrong in such a ***** way that "they" contradict their own QM theory?
Yes that's what gravity is, nothing but an electrostatic phenomenon. And that's why you have this "Unexplained Mystery" known as the "Biefield-Brown Anti-Gravity Effect":

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6270-ultimate-secret-free-energy-split-postive-negative.html#post108591

--::--
Unexplained Mysteries - Biefield-Brown Anti-Gravity Effect



IceStuff.com: The electrostatic Lifter v3.0 experiment from The Encyclopedia of free energy,energy21.org,energy 21 org Geoff Egel


--::--

A few things I would to redirect you on Lamare with all due respect to you.

Firstly the laws that are written do conform to the invention of electrons and electricity. If you don't go looking beyond those laws they accurately describe both.

The second thing is this. Matter is the organizing factor of the fields. Neither can exist without the other and the only way charges(energy) flow is because of the highway they follow. Much like we can make magnets we also can make our own networks to provide any amount of flow we shall desire. But there is a distinct difference between the two networks. One is held in place by matter. ie our planet. Most of which was formed as this space cooled down and locked in the network or hardened. The second is very dynamic and that is what fields are. Fields are a combination of a dielectric medium with real charge networks that cross each other at 90 degree fashion.

Turtur does an excellent job of stating this but veers away from trying to put math to it. But thats the process that one needs to do to get a paper published I guess.

http://www.wbabin.net/physics/turtur1e.pdf

As for the connected Whatever they think is connected I suggest that they separate whatever it is and try the 1 billion mile experiment. I know they have not and this would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are correct.

As for your comment about the static nature of gravity. Man I have been saying that for quite a long time. I am glad you understand this concept. I have a question for you though. How does this process work in your concept?

Mine is very simple. Molten whatever is in the center of our planet. The churning of the molten material causes the static potential that is held inside our planet. And when you have a standing potential like that it draws charges into itself. This real charge flow is both responsible for our weather and gravity. Ever seen a tornado or any other storm you can imagine? What happens when you pull the plug on the drain in the tub? Those charges are actually going into our core and the resulting drag it has on the other charges in our planets shells get drawn down and form our weather. Ever heard of ley lines? What shape are they when viewed in Google earth (there is a plugin for that) ? Remember that our atmosphere is very fluid like. What about the peculiar shape at Saturn's north pole? Are you starting to see the direction here.

You don't need complicated math yet to connect the dots. That will be left to explain where all the geometric clues come from.

Here is a thought experiment to ponder. What happens when you don't discharge a layden jar and keep packing charges in that? Isn't our planet and atmosphere and ionosphere exactly what a layden jar is when combined all together? Refer to Tesla when he talks about exceeding the capabilities of matter to hold together when pulsed with huge amounts of static potential. BANG.
It seems to me that man knew at one point what this energy was and is. I believe that a device was built to pull charges away from our core and control how much and when to draw them. This I believe was the Great Pyramids. How it was done I have not worked that out fully but all the materials and geometric shapes are there. Including the biggest part is the shape of the most fundamental particle known ever. The dielectric shape. Crystaline pyramid but sooo small that it effortlessly passes through matter given enough inertia. What material is the Great pyramids made out of? Mostly rose granite? <<--Big hint thats a crystaline material). Those pyramids and there are more then three in that general area on the order of 6 smaller pyramids that could have been built by hand quicker and then used those drivers to get the energy to build the larger ones. Lets look at the placement of where they are next.

"The Great Pyramid (the Pyramid of Khufu, or Cheops in Greek) at Gizeh, Egypt, demonstrates the remarkable character of its placement on the face of the Earth.

The Pyramid lies in the center of gravity of the continents. It also lies in the exact center of all the land area of the world, dividing the earth's land mass into approximately equal quarters. "

That quote was from here: World Mysteries - Mystic Places - The Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt

Hmm mere coincidence? Nah...

The one thing that bothers me is that even with all that knowledge they could not survive as a race. It seems that they had the tools but not the wisdom to use those tools to do good. Is that our curse? To blindly do and not care about what is left to the future? I'm sorry but this whole issue needs to be addressed. Do we have the ability to not weaponize anything we find? Can we use it for good or will the powers that be use it pro quo?

[lamare]

Update: I mean, I really don't see why you would want to get into a collision course with the scientific community about the definition of what is what, if really all we are trying to say is: "Your force fields are dynamic, they are propagating, they are sources of energy! Take that into account!".

Let me add that by saying just this, you are actually kicking at the foundation of the whole "general relativity" idea of Einstein. See my post here:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6270-ultimate-secret-free-energy-split-postive-negative-2.html#post109117

--::--
The Holographic Universe - Crystalinks

If you read this, you have a second reason why General Relativity should go to the trash can.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart.

Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing. The problem with this feat is that it violates Einstein's long-held tenet that no communication can travel faster than the speed of light.

The first reason is given by Dr. Charles Kenneth Thornhill : http://www.etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf - The whole idea of a fixed speed of light basically originates in a mathematical error. Because they got the Maxwell equations wrong, they used some freak coordinate transform known as the Lorentz transform, which can only work if the speed of light is constant. Now, we *know* the speed of light is not constant in the vicinity of matter. So, really, this is a piece of junk. Sorry, Einstein, you were wrong on this one.

But, you were quite something too:

Albert Einstein quotes


So, I'm sure you'll forgive me for what I said just here.

Update 2: And of course, Tesla got it right all along:

PowerPedia:Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity - PESWiki

"... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena."
"My second discovery was of a physical truth of the greatest importance. As I have searched the entire scientific records in more than a half dozen languages for a long time without finding the least anticipation, I consider myself the original discoverer of this truth, which can be expressed by the statement: There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment."

--::--

You see, if the fields are dynamic, propagating and contain energy, which they do, then there is no way to account for that, but by adapting the Maxwell equations the way both Bearden and Meyl are saying: You have to remove the postulation that the fields are caused by charge carriers, cause otherwise varying electrostatic fields, aka "longitudinal electric waves", cannot exist in vacuum, as "they" are saying.

And when you do that, the whole Lortentz transform idea goes with it, and with that you can kiss "general relativity" goodbye.

And beside that, we *know* it's the fields that are the cause matter exists and not the other way around. So "they" will have to make a choice. Either it's quantum mechanics and thus the fields cause the matter, or it's the current Maxwell equations with the postulation that it's the matter (charge carriers) that cause the fields. You just can't have them both at the same time!

So, really, ye can kick some **** with this stuff, but choose your battles! Fight about the content, not about what would be the best term to call the content!

Update:
One more thing. So QM says matter is just a localized electromagnetic wave. Two counter-rotating vortices in the ether. That's what it is. Nothing but an electric phenomenon. So, what on earth would gravity be, if it's not simply an electrostatic phenomenon, a longitudinal electric wave, "they" say do not exist, because they got the Maxwell equations wrong in such a ***** way that "they" contradict their own QM theory?
Yes that's what gravity is, nothing but an electrostatic phenomenon. And that's why you have this "Unexplained Mystery" known as the "Biefield-Brown Anti-Gravity Effect":

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6270-ultimate-secret-free-energy-split-postive-negative.html#post108591

--::--
Unexplained Mysteries - Biefield-Brown Anti-Gravity Effect

While researching the effects of X-rays generated from a Coolidge tube, American physicist, T. Townsend Brown found a relationship between gravity and high voltage. Press reports state that a 2 foot diameter disc was made to fly around a central pole when tethered and excited with a potential of 50 KiloVolts. The disc circled the pole at almost 12 MPH. Later improvements using 3 foot discs driven by potentials of 150 KiloVolts and up yielded results so spectacular that the test results were classified. Working in conjunction with Dr. P.A. Biefield, Brown found that highly charged capacitors when properly suspended showed a tendency to move relative to the gravitational force. When the poles of a freely suspended charged capacitor were placed on a horizontal axis a forward thrust would be produced which would move the capacitor in the direction of the positive pole.

IceStuff.com: The electrostatic Lifter v3.0 experiment from The Encyclopedia of free energy,energy21.org,energy 21 org Geoff Egel

The Lifter v3.0 uses nine asymmetrical T.T. Brown capacitors joined ( called cells ) so as to form a triangle assembly. Each asymmetrical capacitor is built with one electrode made with a thin corona wire placed at 30 mm from the main rectangular electrode constructed "ala" Townsend Brown.

--::--

[Aaron]

Steap?

Mike,

How many ah's are each of those batteries?

I did a similar battery arrangement with a couple Gray circuit
type tests.

Is the circuit/transformer only two windings - just input and output?
Custom made or are you using some off the shelf transformer like a
centertap or something - like the original Steap?

----------

It was thought in Ancient China that only mirrors and aluminum could
reflect Qi that waas directed at someone with ill intent.

Aluminum also has reflective properties other metals don't have and
is probably the easiest non-ferrous metal to polarize the atoms by high
frequency microwave pumping - aligning the atoms - causing a weight
loss.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Tesla was convinced that tubes needed more exploration. Aluminum was another curiosity of his.

Yes, aluminium is an interesting metal

Mike

[Jbignes5]

Yes...

The schematic. A FWBR could be used but does not give the best results and is confirming that there is something in using a vacuum tube.

Mike

Tesla was convinced that tubes needed more exploration. Aluminum was another curiosity of his.

[Slovenia]

Thanks!!

Thanks for posting the schematic!!

The schematic. A FWBR could be used but does not give the best results and is confirming that there is something in using a vacuum tube.

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Diagram

Mike,

Did you post schematics? You mentioned this to me on Skype but I
didn't see it.

The schematic. A FWBR could be used but does not give the best results and is confirming that there is something in using a vacuum tube.

Mike