Eric P. Dollard

[Nhopa]

Secondary coil testing

Hi Eric:
Attached is the result from the latest test. Space between condenser rings were reduced to approximately 1 mm. Magnification factor is up just over 100. Any practical suggestions on how to improve on the magnification factor?

[madhatter]

Although my work can't be compared to Eric's I would like to thank him one last time for responding with his view on this subject. I maintain my initial thoughts about the propogation speeds in a vacuum of primary electrostatic energy, I retain the conclusion that only obstructions to magnetic current cause light. ONLY obstructions to magnetic current cause light.

Best,
A

Pulsars are fascinating, the beacon of light emitted is due to the electrostatic wave traveling faster than C impacting a region of electro-magnetic fields, this results in the ES wave translating into a coherent photon beam of an EM nature. The translation is an energy release in current theory. The ES wave has no velocity as it's time invariant, this can be hard for many to grasp let alone modern taught people.
a similar effect is cherenkov radiation.

Here's the rub, removing relativity opens pandoras box. The 1927 Solvay conference was the start of why we are where we are now. We should really start a different thread for this topic.

There is loads of good technical information about this and would benefit a lot people here trying to understand what Eric is doing and why. The CRI is an excellent starting point for simple hands on proof, where you go from there?

[7redorbs]

Derived Orbital Energy

Derived magnetic energy is basically simple, but people would prefer to argue about fictions they have no substantiated grounds or methods to prove. I believe my methods can be tested, and I believe that this is the difference between a holistic inductive approach and an imaginative inventive approach.

Dollard is right, if Einstein wasn't dialing 911 before. He is now. I have written a much longer piece that simplifies this more generally, and admittedly will have many less basic mistakes. I am no engineer, I am no scientist. I freely admit that. I do not think others can go on pretending that they are when they cannot even realise what it is running in their electrical wires. For, if it was electrons running in their fancy wires, then what influence would the planets and the suns rays have on it? If they were magnetic currents and flows with an angle of rotation of about 15 degrees, running around the outside of the propagation media, then we could expect the sun and the planets minor north and south pole field fluctuations based on the distance and angle of those bodies to affect the voltage in the line, by magnetic orbit interference. This is without a doubt something that Nikola TEsla and Edward Leedskalnin both considered themselves experts in.

The unfortunate thing for scientists and those that want to do "serious work" in this field, is that Leedskalni claimed he understood the secrets of the "pyramid builders". Mystic Mahem ensues? Perhaps. This is not a new claim though, Tesla pre 1945 said something quite similar the "Ere many generations" quote is a truly marvelous thing to behold. I got this far by taking Tesla on his word. Dollard has done the same, except that he is actually an engineer who has experimented tested and replicated many of these devices, the rotary electrostatic transformer particularly comes to mind. RIP Chris Carson. I have a feeling he is missed by many - the first time I heard him talk was at SBARC and I do not take his claim about electricity vortexing in and vortexing out at first.


Although the above message may be unclear and littered with mistakes, I do believe you will find truths that you will be able to pick out of great value, and had I more time to make my claims more wooden headed and fictional, by suppressing my mental opinion, then perhaps it would be easier to deal with.

Unfortunately I am not very wooden headed, I have no desire for money. So what you are getting from me is quite different than what you would of got from someone who was afraid to be wrong. They are a many. Too many are afraid to describe the electron as a secondary force. This results in the erroneous conclusion that the light from the sun must be primary, due to electricities ability to create the light. Had they realised that electrons were not creating the light, but some orbiting magnetic fields were responsible they would not be as eager to call the light primary, because in that scenario it would at the very least be a secondary, possibly even tertiary force.

Lets see, chemically derived magnetic orbits in battery - > electrical current orbiting transformer -> alternating light appearing on terminal contacts.

I have also noted that the spark gap is magnetic in it's nature. Everything that generates electricity, and has the potential for creating light, consists of lines of force. Just like Eric says.

Although my work can't be compared to Eric's I would like to thank him one last time for responding with his view on this subject. I maintain my initial thoughts about the propogation speeds in a vacuum of primary electrostatic energy, I retain the conclusion that only obstructions to magnetic current cause light. ONLY obstructions to magnetic current cause light.

It's why space is black. Children would get this, but adults have had at least 10 years of exposure to mainstream theory. Since I was 16 I had my doubts, I am 28 now, It has taken me almost 10 years to unlearn it, until I could unfool myself. The electron stuff was a nightmare. If we only realised all derived current, OF ANY KIND was an orbiting field, we would be able to extend the chemical periodic orbiting field of a battery to that of a larger framework orbit by millions of times in radius , of the regular orbit of the chemical itself. PI/2 *C Anybody?

You will notice, that magnets, they want to continue orbiting. Eric has had experience when this has happened, he won't describe it like I have. I think Eric knows what I am talking about. It's impossible to stop.

Ever been working at an industrial plant and one of your engines decides to go runaway? Ever pulled the plug, then suddenly goes real cold and then wondered why it appears to continue accelerating? That is some scary stuff that ends badly in some workshops, it is not a new scenario. As Eric Dollard rightly points out, the old western radar that were produced just after world war II would continue running for quite some time when turned off.

Eric's little device on his car, that keeps running too. These devices all work the same way keeping orbiting magnets running around. This is a reason for the earth spinning, because it is being hit more often in the east. This is a periodic reaction. how about that? As long as they don't escape, your device will continue oscillating indefinitely in the same way that atoms do on a small level. So, to make use of these orbiting magnets really, you need something like the Alexanderson Alternator or the Multiple Loaded Flat Top Antennae employed at the old Bolinas site, the individual magnetic orbits will have to be in great number to be of any use.

Hence, multiple loaded in my opinion. All of Steinmetz work in cumulative oscillations points DIRECTLY at this, adding orbiting magnets in an aerial ground system, that basically over time compress into an asymptotically growing number of impulses per space, per time, resulting in densities much greater than any laser ever built. Play a note on a piano, play it 10 times a second, 100 times a second, 10000 times a second. Note that each time you played that "String" it had a fixed amplitude, so pressing it 10000 times a second has 9999 times more kinetic energy running through the wire at a time. If this was a field magnet spinning against a coil at high speed, lets say 10,000 rpm, then you get 9999 more amount of energy (in impulses) than you would have at 1rpm. This is akin to saying that energy can be concentrated and magnified along a single line column, however, the timing is hideously important, otherwise all of those impulses envelopes collide with eachother and it is not a pretty sound. You want perfect superposition with each impulse. Tesla and Dollard are geniuses, they have found ways to create the variation mechanically and electrically, and importantly had found a way so that the rotating orbiting magnets, have a capacitor system that carefully times the ratio's of potential indefinitely to the tuning of the order of perfect superpositional oscillations. This is the second order of tuning in oscillating current in my mind.

Tesla was very far ahead in his time, since superposition was not really dealt with for at least 50 years after his discoveries.

sorry to waffle on. This could be distracting I suppose. This isn't though:

"The discovery of the stationary terrestrial waves [indicates] that despite its vast extent, the entire planet can be thrown into resonant vibration like a little tuning fork; that electrical oscillations suited to its physical properites and dimensions pass through it unimpeded, in strict obedience to a single mathematical law, has proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the earth, considered as a channel for conveying electrical energy is infinitely superior to a wire or cable" - Nikola Tesla "Tuned Lightening 1907"




Best,
A

[Web000x]

No thanks, but it was nice of you to ask.

Orion,

For being somebody who has "seen the light", that sure was a condescending, dick-ish remark. Please show some respect.

Dave

[7redorbs]

I see many people have struggled with the electrostatic theory of primary sources of rays from suns, and a secondary kind of ray that is produced by the primary electrostatic interaction with period elements in the mass of atmosphere, or planets. Indeed, this is what is involved in refractive and reflective properties classified by science. This is not a new idea.

I believe that if people understood how light was produced.

1) By lines of force, or magnetic current in a running wire, where the mass is reduced, or rather, the current is impeded from traveling through, this causes heat in the wire, and the wire glows, until a bright light is produced from it.

2) By chemical reaction in a match or a fire, two or more periodic elements, with orbiting magnets (or fictional electrons ha ha), asymtotically are able to release their magnets at high speed, these individual magnets by which lines of force comprise are converted into light, by the acceleration of "electrons" leaving the periodic elements at high speed, the "combustive" properties of fire and electricity and the spark can be considered periodically identical in the process. A fire will last as long as it has periodic elements in the same way a battery will last as long as it has metal on one side of it in the same way the sun will last.

e.g. by lines of force magnets can be constricted to produce light from a high resistance obstruction such as a light bulb filament. You can prove it is the obstruction that causes light in the wire the same way as the light bulb by increasing the size of your electrical wire, you will see it was obstruction of the energy running in the wire that caused the light in the same way as the suns energy passing through the atmosphere does.

3) The sun produces primary rays by a periodic element exchange in the same was as I and II, except that it is much more efficient than any electrical system that exists on "planet ignorant". In the case of the sun, instead of a few individual magnets like in a wire, or a fire being produced, many millions of metric tonnes of magnets , that were orbiting around a magnetic field of the entire sun, much like an ocean - are released with great innertia. One can conclude that something about the periodic element exchange caused "fictional electrons", or rather north and south pole primary forces to be violently ejected from the suns surface. Perhaps a varying magnetic field in the core , from the periodic reaction of sufficient intensity and alternation is capable of causing these huge ejections. What else would? "Light"? No. It's inductive just like eric Dollard suggests. Ironically, if peoples way of thinking was inductive, instead of inventive, they would have noticed that it is an electrostatic induction that is making up the primary alternating currents which are capable of creating light.

In short I have spelled out to you that a fire, a sun, and an electrical current are capable of producing light. Not only that, they are only capable of producing a light from a high resistance, or an obstruction impeding a running current, given that only "non vacuum" mass is capable of forming an obstruction to the flow of telluric rays from the sun, a different kind of rays is readily observable in the atmosphere.

Many would have noticed that even direct current produces an alternating current light source. Why? Indeed, why does a battery release "electrons" from dissolving two metals in acid? It is a periodic element exchange which facilitates matter on one end being broken apart into peices , and the other end is built up. This cathode annode relationship is quite important. In the same way that the sun is in a state of deconstruction (yes, it is), the earth is in a state of construction. This point should not be glossed over. The earth and the sun are like a giant anode and cathode of a battery.

If people asked themselves obvious questions instead of inventing new fictions. They could see, in the same way that one terminal in a battery is having it's mass periodically removed by acid breakdown periodic reaction and causing the weak magnetic force that held it together to go elsewhere. In the same way that the suns emision of primary telluric wave causes the energy that was once mass-only. To be converted into an energetic and kinetic electrostatic wave of some form. The key to understanding is recognising that the mass of the sun is decreasing, whilst the mass of the earth is increasing. Why is that? In the same way the battery is breaking apart the mass , and the orbiting individual magnets, and channeling their orbit into a wire to create light. The sun is breaking apart it's mass, causing much magnetic energy to be released, the magnetic poles on the sun were not there until it started breaking apart it's mass in great quantity. In the same way that the north and south pole is easily derivable from the battery, we can see that to convert this periodic energy into something else, each time we must break apart the mass.

In transformers and generators that do not break apart the mass directly to produce the magnets. They burn a fossil fuel, which is carbon held together by the magnetic force. They cannot avoid the magnetic force to create their energy. They will have to break matter apart, with batteries, with furnaces, and even with their nuclear power plants. That is because energy is derived from periodic elements exchanging their energy from an weak-force magnetic, into a high potential magnetic force. Such as the weak magnetic forces capable of generating the heat and light periodically in the furnace, are capable of generating large magnetic fields in a electrical generator which consists of magnet north and south pole running around a circle against a wire at 90. creating those so called fictional electrons.
Or rather proving that even non direct generators (e.g. battery) that combust materials such as coal, or even atomic power, they must create magnetic forces and obstructions for those orbiting magnets that are released at high velocity, and in each case, a magnetic force must always be used to derive it, in the case of metal conductors they already consist of altering ratios of magnets, that is why they can conduct differently. In the same way that magnet pole must be used in the turbines in both the nulcear power station and the coal, you will see huge field magnets and coils.

Or rather, all of that heat energy can exist as mechanical energy, and of magnetic energy. Just like the periodic elements.

It actually amazes me that people do not see things this way.

(contd) as the periodic reaction of oxygen and carbon ensures in the burning charcoal, great heat is produced, and light, by the obstructing atmosphere around it. If one could remove the atmosphere around the fire whilst it was simultaneously burning he would see that it was not oxygen or the mass that keeps it alight, but the cumulative acceleration of a propagating magnetic orbit of atoms which are deconstructing their links at great speed, and then bringing other atoms of the carbon and other elements that are used in turn to excite and liberate the fictional electrons from their slumber.

Essentially there is a great deal of kinetic energy sitting in slumber in any lumber. There is a great deal of derived magnetic energy sitting above any coal fire. You can tap the heat with your turbine and dynamo like system, the problem is that the only way to derive energy is to use a north and south pole. I do not know any generator or transformer that can get around and produce those fictional electrons without the north and south pole.

What does that say to you? Any idiot such as I can point out holes in Electrical and Physical theory that is substituted as reality today, defended to the hells, and adopted through all myriad of technology development, by sticking to some of the plane facts about HOW ELECTRICITY is derived, indeed, how the light is derived, and indeed, how ALL ENERGY is periodic in it's nature. Thus, in the same way radiation is emitted from radioactive elements, a fire of great strength such as a meteor is equally capable of doing so. After all it was not a radioactive source that creates the radiation but a very high density of magnetic lines of force being forced into a material at a great speed.

Unfortunately scientists have abused this force, and suppressed a proper understanding so that humanity might liberate ones self. All because they saw what the magnetic force was capable of.

This in my mind should be considered one of the same to the electrolyte theories of C. P Steinmetz.. how all the energy and electricity was chemically derived. You can't get away from this truth when looking at a D.C battery, or the fact that the weak magnetic force that held the iron together is resulting in a running current that is periodically produced in conjunction with the acid and the "attractive force" of the second terminal metal.

Attractive force? But they are just electrons (Oh please shutup!)

In the case of electrical transformers one thinks that they have got away from magnets being released from their mass, but the physicists are plugging their equipment into a wall. The Eric Dollards and Heaviside's of the electrical production industry are marching full steam ahead with their furnaces, producing all that light, all that heat, and using that to throw their little magnet wheels around. So whilst the physicist points to his power supply that consists of electrons, which is supposedly nothing to do with magnetic orbits of any kind, or the periodic elements by which these supposed-electrons go down, They point to the centre of the wire as if that was how their electrons were propogating. The problem is if they were electrons, then they would not run on the outside of the wire. Yet this is all we find in this so called electron technology.

I am working on some apparatus that can send the same magnets down the middle of an iron bar, and I think you would be interested to know that it does not run the same as it would have on the outside or lengthways. Indeed, centrifugal force appears to be at work with these electrons, and if so, as Steinmetz rightly pointed out, this is a chemical process that can be seen burdening the wire as soon as it exceeds it's rated output potential.

If it is not simple. I dare not believe it. We invent terms like "it's the heat thats buring the wire" it's the "massive current". What is the current? Where does it come from. In the battery, in the coal station, in the nuclear power plant.

Spinning magnets. Funny that. Not an electron in site. AT the very least this means electrons are created by magnetic orbits, periodically, chemically, physically electrically and biologically.

Afterall there would not be much energy in the wood had it not formed it's bonds the way it had, or the fossil fuels.

So , physicists can keep on running their cars on their magnetic sunlight-derived fuels for-evermore, and they can use the combustive release of that magnetic force the sun deposited in the fossil wood that they are burning. This is why all fuels eventually disappear, because they have been converted into something else. Nobody bothers to realise this is the reverse of The same way that the plant and tree that made it's energy and bonds to start with, by converting the light through it's photosynthesis process into matter. The car simply reverses it, in the most barbaric manner imaginable. Had they realised that magnetic orbits, via pressure, and density were responsible for all of the other secondary forces and processes. Had they looked at the methods they generated electricity, it would be hard to avoid that magnetically derived periodic energy is the base of matter structure, responsible for releasing those electrons, and making them available.

[Nhopa]

Transfer images from Excel

Based on couple of your helpful forum members' input this is how I managed to transfer from Excel. It is still cumbersome but doable.
1. Mark section of Excel (for instance the graph part) to "copy".
2. Bring up "Paint" and paste the section copied from Excel onto it.
3. Save the file in "Paint" as jpg picture.
4. Bring up "Pictures - library" and type in file name (with the jpg extension).
5. Upload file to Imageshack and mark "share it".
6. Drag from Imageshack "Full size" "Forum" into the forum's reply section.
It looks like a lots of effort but it works. The trick is that you must work with two open windows most of the time, therefore, I reduce both windows so I can see both and transfer, paste, upload and drag as required.Thank you all.

[OrionLightShip]

I'm willing to talk if you really want answers.

No thanks, but it was nice of you to ask.

[SilverToGold]

ten letters plus

Where in the bible does it say the earth is 6000 years old? It doesn't.

Have you ever read the Bible? What do you think all those long X begats Y were for? Put them together and they give you a definitive time line to the flood and beyond. Add it all up and you get about 6000 years.



http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/timeline5.pdf

Maybe your god does. First it was thou shalt not kill. 40 years of misery in the desert later it was enter the promised land and kill every man, woman, and child. One of hundreds of contradictions in a book you claim to be the only source of real truth.

From the first time man transgressed God's law, ALL men deserved death since the penalty of sin is death. God would have been justified to kill everyone yet he choose not to. The very fact that anyone is allowed to live in itself is proof of God's mercy and love. There are no contradictions in the Bible only lack of understanding because the human heart loves evil and will bend every way possible to justify it. How can a wicked heart judge love and truth? It can't.

So, does the fact that humanoid footprints were found side by side with dino tracks in the paluxy river in texas mean dinos walked with us 6000 years ago? My research shows that to be a big no go as well.

No actually that would be about 4400 years ago since practically all fossils come from the Flood and so did those footprints. If you have one footprint over another, a man's over a dinosaur.... well what other sensible conclusion could there be? You don't believe it because you choose not to.

I don't wish to go too far off topic, feel free to message me if you want to discuss this further. I'm willing to talk if you really want answers.

[Geometric_Algebra]

Node Detection

Rewritten notes from Eric on a technique for coil node detection.

[SilverToGold]

It's not going to confirm that idea, ES or electrostatic waves travel faster than EM waves. ES waves are time invariant, the transition to EM waves then starts the 'clock' so to speak. where that occurs will be hotly debated.

As to the age of the planet, I suggest looking into the data on ice cores. As to what's beyond our solar system, current physics is only reliable to the Jovian system on a macro scale, as to beyond the heliosphere ?????

My point of reference for truth is first the Bible and then man's interpretations of "facts". When in doubt, the Bible gets the benefit of the doubt and not some man's idea.

Ice cores prove nothing but that ice melts and it freezes.

I have looked deeply into these things and not to get too far off topic - if you wish to see more on "ice cores proving an old earth", look at this.

Ice Core Rings - YouTube

[jake]

Originally Posted by SilverToGold View Post
Thank you Eric for this information, it supports the idea of a 6000 year old Earth as stated in the Bible.

Where in the bible does it say the earth is 6000 years old? It doesn't.

About the only claim that is difficult to resolve for me concerning the idea that the Earth and the universe is "billions" of years old is the idea that light takes millions of years to get here from stars. I suspected that the light from distant stars are seen instantaneously - since that would follow what the Bible says.

Where in the bible does it say that light from distant stars arrive here instantly? It doesn't and you suspected wrongly.

A billion or even million year old Earth is a ridiculous idea. No real support for this from my research.

My only advise to you is to continue researching, the truth is plainly visible for all to see.

Do you believe our creator uses mathematics and physics to confuse the masses and to test our faith so that he can condemn us to an eternity of misery for using our brains? The brains he gave us?

Maybe your god does. First it was thou shalt not kill. 40 years of misery in the desert later it was enter the promised land and kill every man, woman, and child. One of hundreds of contradictions in a book you claim to be the only source of real truth.

So, does the fact that humanoid footprints were found side by side with dino tracks in the paluxy river in texas mean dinos walked with us 6000 years ago? My research shows that to be a big no go as well.

Is this forum the proper place for proselytizing? I hope not.
ten letters plus

ten letters plus

I swing both ways. Or no ways. Too many ways to swing I have my ideas.

To many assumptions, but you asked.
Ice Cores and the Age of the Earth

Needless to say it seems everyone is wrong. The one thing we as humans cant do is keep our story straight. But I do see this as related.

The age of the universe and distance of stars is based on light and we (well mostly you all) are working on how light works.

How does Red Shift fit in here?

Is space even uniform and does light travel at the same speed outside our solar system how about outside our Galaxy? Where does our pond meet the galactic atmosphere? Where does the galactic pond meet the universal atmosphere?

I also see photosynthesis related here as well as it is natures TRT.

How about Rods and Cones not quite a TRT but one hell of a detector.

Are there any other natural TRTs out there?

[Nhopa]

Test result

Hi Eric:
Attached is the latest test result. Moved test coil 46 cm below bottom of secondary in order to get peak reading on the meter at 100 uA. Magnification was 89.17% as determined by your suggested method.
For the following discussion I made no chart but have taken data. While the can was still at 8 cm from top of secondary, I disconnected the meter and top of secondary coil from the top ring and connected the meter to the secondary.
The frequency increased to 1347.5 Kcs (capacity decreased) and magnification reduced to 66%.
I then repeated these two tests with the can at 20.5 cm above the secondary. While meter and top of secondary connected to the top ring I measured 1181.0 Kcs max frequency with 80.1% magnification. Next I connected the meter only to top of secondary coil and measured 1328.8 Kcs max frequency and 55.8% magnification.
In both cases, i.e. can at 8 cm and 20.5 cm, respectively, , capacity decreases, frequency increases and the magnification also decreases. Based on this the should I increase the capacity? I can try to reduce the 12 mm distance between the two copper rings to let say 1 mm. Currently I use 1/4" dia copper tubes for both the end ring and the upper ring.

[OrionLightShip]

Thank you Eric for this information, it supports the idea of a 6000 year old Earth as stated in the Bible.

Where in the bible does it say the earth is 6000 years old? It doesn't.

About the only claim that is difficult to resolve for me concerning the idea that the Earth and the universe is "billions" of years old is the idea that light takes millions of years to get here from stars. I suspected that the light from distant stars are seen instantaneously - since that would follow what the Bible says.

Where in the bible does it say that light from distant stars arrive here instantly? It doesn't and you suspected wrongly.

A billion or even million year old Earth is a ridiculous idea. No real support for this from my research.

My only advise to you is to continue researching, the truth is plainly visible for all to see.

Do you believe our creator uses mathematics and physics to confuse the masses and to test our faith so that he can condemn us to an eternity of misery for using our brains? The brains he gave us?

Maybe your god does. First it was thou shalt not kill. 40 years of misery in the desert later it was enter the promised land and kill every man, woman, and child. One of hundreds of contradictions in a book you claim to be the only source of real truth.

So, does the fact that humanoid footprints were found side by side with dino tracks in the paluxy river in texas mean dinos walked with us 6000 years ago? My research shows that to be a big no go as well.

Is this forum the proper place for proselytizing? I hope not.

ten letters plus

[madhatter]

Thank you Eric for this information, it supports the idea of a 6000 year old Earth as stated in the Bible.

About the only claim that is difficult to resolve for me concerning the idea that the Earth and the universe is "billions" of years old is the idea that light takes millions of years to get here from stars. I suspected that the light from distant stars are seen instantaneously - since that would follow what the Bible says.

A billion or even million year old Earth is a ridiculous idea. No real support for this from my research.

It's not going to confirm that idea, ES or electrostatic waves travel faster than EM waves. ES waves are time invariant, the transition to EM waves then starts the 'clock' so to speak. where that occurs will be hotly debated.

As to the age of the planet, I suggest looking into the data on ice cores. As to what's beyond our solar system, current physics is only reliable to the Jovian system on a macro scale, as to beyond the heliosphere ?????

[SilverToGold]

This is to say, no time lag may exist in a primary propagation, it can only be instantaneous. Einstein is calling 911!!

Thank you Eric for this information, it supports the idea of a 6000 year old Earth as stated in the Bible.

About the only claim that is difficult to resolve for me concerning the idea that the Earth and the universe is "billions" of years old is the idea that light takes millions of years to get here from stars. I suspected that the light from distant stars are seen instantaneously - since that would follow what the Bible says.

A billion or even million year old Earth is a ridiculous idea. No real support for this from my research.