Walter Russell - Understanding and applying his work

[ZeropointEnergy]

Vortex/Spiral Energy

Zero, Exactly

I have indeed been thinking about the Tesla Turbine (not sure anybody mentioned it in this thread, but it is on this forum), the main problem with that from what I read, is that nobody in this modern day and age has been able to replicate it and get the efficiencies that Tesla claimed.

However in the case of Jay Harman and Viktor Schauberger's turbine, we have this shape which actually works, (If what he's saying is true, I haven't verified it myself).

I have also been following Jason Verbelli on youtube, he is digging deep into WR's work, and has also done quite a few experiments.

Hey,

The Tesla Turbine built more efficiently or correctly may yield the desired Telsa OU results. That would only be if we calculate our linear resistance measurements. IMO.
I agree that Viktor's engines before WW2 all had the concept of vortex flows of water, energy and a model that we can replicate.

History does have a habbit of repeating itself and hopefully we understand and implement it correctly this time.

Regards
Zero

[ZeropointEnergy]

Thanks

the following might interest you :

Nature by Numbers - YouTube

Hey MM,

I knew about the fibonacci sequence before and how the sum of the 2 numbers determine the next variable and this does interest me
The 137.5 degrees variable I do not know too much about and a good excuse to learn more Maybe seen it in the 3x3 square data? The post when you mentioned Vedic mathematics has me wondering

What Vtech mentioned on the thread of using cardboard sections to make a solid/accurate conical coil is the most efficient methodology I have been able to define in my searches. Thanks Vtech and I'm having fun making templates till the correct dimensions appeal to me.

Regards
Zero

[MonsieurM]

Can anyone explain the male-female and the positive negative signs in the blue and red quadrants of the Walter Russel diagram. This could be related to the motor-generators some of us are working on. thanks. Hiwater.

first of Female / Male = Negative / Positive = Blue / Red dominance or if you prefer Cathode / Anode ....it is the same ( on a first degree understanding .... there is more as you explore )

so Hiwater .... how about we inverse the process .... tell us what you see .... and I'm sure others ( myself included ) would gladly clarify it and learn as well

it is best to print it so as not to strain your eyes and make notes on the printed page

[MonsieurM]

Hey MM,

I had seen fractal patterns before and now see how it relates to phi

Regards
Zero

the following might interest you :

Nature by Numbers - YouTube

[StweenyA]

Zero, Exactly

I have indeed been thinking about the Tesla Turbine (not sure anybody mentioned it in this thread, but it is on this forum), the main problem with that from what I read, is that nobody in this modern day and age has been able to replicate it and get the efficiencies that Tesla claimed.

However in the case of Jay Harman and Viktor Schauberger's turbine, we have this shape which actually works, (If what he's saying is true, I haven't verified it myself).

I have also been following Jason Verbelli on youtube, he is digging deep into WR's work, and has also done quite a few experiments.

[ZeropointEnergy]

Is more!!

I like the way you put that, very interesting.... Not I, yet, but you may have missed my post about Jay Harman earlier, his impellers and turbines are super efficient. It makes me actually wonder if he knows Walter Russell... maybe he just hasn't publicly admitted it yet... His one video starts with "Einstein says..." but maybe that's just so that people don't immediately write him off for stupid reasons.

Hey StweenyA,

I must of missed that link and thankyou for bringing it to my attention. Jay Harmon's Lily Impeller may be like the device I heard about a few years ago that was too efficient and obtained this via modelling the device off how seaweed/plants can deflect the energy from the tidal forces.
Will update this when I can find the data later tonight since is not in digital format.

The big invention that popped to mind that nobody has mentioned was the Tesla Turbine, that is basically a multi-disk centrifugal pump and what does that remind us of

I agree that he did not mention Walter Russell for the reason he is not a household name or well know in the science textbooks.

Regards
Zero

[ZeropointEnergy]

Fractal?

ask yourself the following .... it seems that all the great minds discussed in this thread or this forum as whole are pointing towards the same concept with different terms ... barbosi was right about the use of certain terminology can be misleading as each is defined with different "perspective " in mind ... however you fill the blanks by looking at other like minded researchers who had similar thought but different way of describing it .... or at least this is how it seems to be imho

Russell used quite a bit of analogies to explain that things are fractal ( a word coined in the 80's to describe what Russell was seeing )

Hey MM,

I had seen fractal patterns before and now see how it relates to phi

Regards
Zero

[StweenyA]

Is there more other people other than, Dan Winter and Marko Rodin that has experimented with energy in spirals other than straight lines?.
For instance anyone posting here

Fist fights with Physicist PDF link asks a simple question. If water falls faster in a Tornado, Hurricane, Whirlpool than a rain drop in a straight line it only seems logical that electricity may. A Conical coil sounds like fun and was going to make it anyway.

I like the way you put that, very interesting.... Not I, yet, but you may have missed my post about Jay Harman earlier, his impellers and turbines are super efficient. It makes me actually wonder if he knows Walter Russell... maybe he just hasn't publicly admitted it yet... His one video starts with "Einstein says..." but maybe that's just so that people don't immediately write him off for stupid reasons.

[cplouffe]

Ok guys... Looking back at WR's different charts of the elements. I noticed he had changed his mind a couple of times. I know I have brought this up before in this thread but I have more to add.

I see where he lists the earlier charts going from small to bigger wave amplitudes. Even in the older 10octave chart it shows the elipsoids increasing in size. Then in the later books he says the lowest "harp string" should be the longest. I have also seen others creating a cone based period of elements.

Ok so what was bothering me was that I couldn't visualize going from radiation to gravitation/concentration to decentration and it just be one size in one direction.

I thought why wouldn't the same rules apply that is within the 8 elements of each octave. It should also apply to the whole 9 octaves themselves.

So it seems simple now but I am going to rework the chart so I can better visualize it. I hope to build my 3d model of the elements soon.

If this is duplication and I just missed it, I apologize. But it def is nested vortices within the vortices. Nice!

So now it fits for after carbon it starts the unwinding/radiating process until space wins out and motion stops. Then on to the next re-birthing or beginning just like an inert gas would switch to the next one at the inertia line.

So how would this fit into the wave lengths, speed, and density of an element? Does it work?

So you would have vortices going from 0-1-2-3-404-3-2-1-0 in each octave between inert gasses but then also having that same sequence on the larger scale of each octave.

I think people are visualizing it as coming to a point at the 9th octave but it should be the opposite. It should come to a point at 4-5 octave at carbon and then expand out as it moves.

Ok.. thoughts?

[MonsieurM]

ask yourself the following .... it seems that all the great minds discussed in this thread or this forum as whole are pointing towards the same concept with different terms ... barbosi was right about the use of certain terminology can be misleading as each is defined with different "perspective " in mind ... however you fill the blanks by looking at other like minded researchers who had similar thought but different way of describing it .... or at least this is how it seems to be imho

Russell used quite a bit of analogies to explain that things are fractal ( a word coined in the 80's to describe what Russell was seeing )

[ZeropointEnergy]

Still hard to grasp all WR concepts

a recent discussion about Walter Russell :

Russellian Science TEC - Part 1 - Defining a New Cosmology - YouTube



enjoy

Hey MM,

Great link and some of the terminology is starting to become clear, while the context of the creator in the scope of WR message about the experiments with light/energy/matter is NOT

The magnetic still light is very clear in Radiant energy experiments with inductive spikes and the outward radiating forces. Even some of the colours associated with given frequencies.

Is there more other people other than, Dan Winter and Marko Rodin that has experimented with energy in spirals other than straight lines?.
For instance anyone posting here

Fist fights with Physicist PDF link asks a simple question. If water falls faster in a Tornado, Hurricane, Whirlpool than a rain drop in a straight line it only seems logical that electricity may. A Conical coil sounds like fun and was going to make it anyway.

Regards
Zero

[MonsieurM]

a recent discussion about Walter Russell :

Russellian Science TEC - Part 1 - Defining a New Cosmology - YouTube

Published on Jun 5, 2012 by ThisFaIseReality

Produced By Robert Otey And Matt Presti

enjoy

[Hiwater]

this is very interesting as all these are used in one form or another for energy production and alchemical use .... really interesting

Can anyone explain the male-female and the positive negative signs in the blue and red quadrants of the Walter Russel diagram. This could be related to the motor-generators some of us are working on. thanks. Hiwater.

[ZeropointEnergy]

Is helping

I am humbled by the thanks. I feel the information to be a blessing, and it is an honor to be able to share it with you all. I sincerely hope that it can help everyone to express their fullest potential in whatever they do.

Hey Group,

Something here in all the data has helped me understand a fraction of how I can experiment with conical cones.

Has anyone posting here made a pair or 2 of the conical coils and tested the opposing fields?

Any more experiments other than the link here of Walter's generator coils as this is facinating, but hard to work out where the other replication failed. The second set of coil pairs was a guess of 50% less turns and WR would of used a formula maybe other than the phi ratio?

Regards
Zero

[ZeropointEnergy]

Thank you ZeropointEnergy .... all the guys here are quite amazing at making it understandable

a special thank you to purelyconstructive

@Purelyconstructive,

I did read all your posts/links and thanks for sharing your knowledge

Regards
Zero