@ akashh:

I think we have shown results thus far that put this beyond pure galvanic reaction.  How far beyond is up to debate.  If it were just galvanic than the closer the electrodes, the better the power which has not been the case for me.  Plus, when it rains, my voltage drops and I get much better as the ground dries out.  If you read in the earlier posts about the old telegraph stations, their "electrodes" were hundreds of miles apart, how would pure galvanic reaction apply to this?

If you look at my video I posted earlier, you can see my electrodes are about 4 feet apart.  I have not tried 5 feet yet but 4 feet was better than 3 feet, etc. Another point to consider, if just galvanic then why would an alignment of n/s on the meridian make any difference at all? (Which it clearly did for me)

Don't think for a moment that I claim to know all of what this is about, I don't.  But, I am gathering information along the way that will help me to decide what it isn't.  Do I think that galvanic reaction plays a part in all of this?  Yes, I do, which is why I purchased the carbon rod.  I did get some smaller voltages off of two copper pipes once they were aligned on the n/s meridian but not as much as I am getting now.  I am not totally sure of this but if you made a regular battery with two copper electrodes I don't think it would have any voltage.  there is so much more here than we know right now.

I like your suggestion of the coil to step up the voltage but, and here is my ignorance showing, will that not cut the amps proportionately as in Ohm's law?  If not, this would be the way to go...also a series hookup of multiple electrodes to add the voltages and the amps is something I intend to explore.  Keep us posted of your efforts once you begin. there are possibly a lot of variables here and we need a lot of people experimenting to make some sense of this.

@ George:

Good luck with your efforts, keep us posted.  I'll try to leave a few volts in the earth for you. (grin)

Bill

it don't matter, post whatever you have now and whatever you post later we can always compare

Hi all,

This is a subject close to my heart.  I am not in a position now to do any experiments, but I am enclosing a link to a related subject, underground antennas.  This is by Gerry Vassilatos  who wrote about Stubblefield in his book  "Lost Science".

It seems telluric currents are biodynamic.  That is, they respond to our mental attention.  Here is the link:

http://www.borderlands.com/newstuff/research/ground-ant.htm

It is rather long, but a good read into the nature of underground currents and how they respond to our wishes.  Here is a short quote:

                       "OBSERVATION 3
There are other effects one notices, especially when tuning faint stations with ground antennas. It seems that tuned stations actually become stronger in the act of being heard, a bizarre effect requiring fine order readjustments. Indeed, continued reception of faint stations evidence definite auto-magnification effects. Obtained only through the use of analogue (variable capacity) tuning systems, the tuning process seemingly magnifies the strength of any faintly received signal. One may thus begin with a signal "granule", and end with a booming volume. Such entuned signal growth only occurs with continued attentive reception, a remarkable phenomenon in which receivers literally draw and automagnify signals on demand of the listening site. This strange connective "supply-response" function does not occur without human agency however. In absence of the human "recipient", no such amplification occurs, a curiosity which will find numerous skeptics and critics. But try the experiment for yourself.

Tune a weak station and leave the room. The signal fades away. Walk in again and quickly tune the signal. Walk away once more. The signal fades. Once more, tune the signal and walk back from the receiver. With very minor waverings, the signal strength will remain unchanged...until you walk directly before the receiver. Stay this time. Tune the signal and wait. You will literally hear the signal gradually rising in volume. The faint signal will gradually, almost perceptibly, grow in strength for you as you remain in the room. Now tune the signal carefully, rocking the dial to the left or right of center. Each readjustment raises the signal strength, until the volume is strong. Periodic minor adjustments will reveal a remarkable volume magnification, one which can reach enormous and fixed volume levels. This observation takes time and patience. With such patience, one can thus literally obtain a "signal bonfire" from a "signal spark". We have observed a signal increase while attentions are being focussed on the signal, with a subsequent complete fade back to faintness after the recipients have been removed.

Why can you tune such a weak station, periodically making "fine adjustments", and obtain a signal magnification? Tuning a weak signal through a ground antenna, and then observing the manner in which that signal actually "grows" in strength for a human recipient, is a demonstration of radionic significance. The same has been observed when radionic currents are selected through tuning instruments, and allowed to stimulate a biomonitored plant. The results are always the same, plant responses indicating the gradual increase of radionic current strength. Unlike aerial currents, ground signals are more intensely radionic in nature. They actively seek to infuse appropriate bio-organismic "capacities". Ground currents enter the receiver and are there entuned. The receiving circuit projects an infusive and thready auric radiance which floods the listening space until its natural saturation has been reached.

Those who are in the listening space add an additional absorptivity, a capacity to allow a continued projection of auric emanations. This continued projectivity into proximal recipients produces several characteristic attributes. Recipients who possess an innate desire, an emotional response for the signals, produce sudden surges in the reception strength. When attention is strongly focussed on some faint signal, then it will grow. The ground emerging signals will therefore intensify for you and those with you in a room, pouring into the listening space and being thus articulated among human "capacities". As radio signals are loaded with the articulation of human attention, the signal will grow more rapidly. It has recently been observed that the very same signal, when later left unattended, will fade back into the crashing background. Desirous attempts made to relocate and raise the same signal are not unsuccessful. The absence of appropriate numbers in the human recipients will modify the rapidity of signal growth. The humanly guided tuning process which engages such signals actually entunes the recipients in a radionic manner.

The refinement and entunement of such signals are very obviously a radionic phenomenon of the deepest significance. Entuned magnification effects are therefore radionic entunement effects, the magnification of human articulations by human recipients. Neither electrical nor radio currents possess the articulate nature capable of exhibiting such a detailed biodynamic function. We have previously demonstrated this phenomenon with biomonitored plants, an effect which experimenters may easily reproduce. The implications of this strange effect are enormous for the theoretician. They compel the examination of every notion of radiosignal causality. The only researcher who has treated this effect is Eric Dollard, whose excellent work describes "energy reciprocation" between Tesla impulse transmitters and receivers.

The fact that signals may be drawn from ground on human demand, and automagnified by human presence, should provoke heated debate. How can one explain the veritable control of a distant transmitter by a small receiver? In a biodynamic sense, we are not required to address distant transmitters, since ground currents automagnify with regularity. The additional energy which feeds radionically entuned and capacity-demanded ground signals is sourced within the great subterranean depths."

*********

I think Stubblefield had a strong mental connection with these forces.  I suggest experimenters be patient and leave their projects buried over a longer period of time and mentally suggest the voltages grow to a more usable level.  Nothing to lose by using some extra will power.

It might be worth trying a variable capacitor out of an old radio in some sort of tank circuit to fine tune the AC component of the output?  That would be similar to the experiments within the referenced article.

Hope this helps,
Tishatang

Double post see below

G'day localjoe and all,

I know the idea has been bandied around that the Stubblefield coil is a sort of thermocouple. This cannot be with these specifications. In a thermocouple the dissimilar metals have to be in metallic contact with each other, something the patent states explicitly to avoid!

Hans von Lieven

Hans your right about the thermocouple i wasen't thinking clearly but i did read that one end of each steel and copper should be exposed in the ground ... I couldnt find what it said to do with the other two ends on top ... now if we connected those ends on top to the plates or rods were using .. take bill's example with the magnesium and the carbon.  The initial voltage induced by the rods goes through the coil then the two ends on the bottom in the earth might complete the circuit making an electromagnet. This could be way off but getting the results were getting now with just simple things and realizing that it is polarized ac or pulsed dc then feeding that into this bimetal coil should make a rotating magnetic feild if the ends in the earth are shorted.  Now after realizing i can run a battery in series with the ground rods we've been using and still get the power out on the other side it would be safe to say that two metals such as iron and copper  can form a link or path in the ground.  I feel that once we understand how the rotating magnetic feild is created in the primary bimetal coil it will be a little more obvious how this plug works and should be easier to understand.   

Hans i don't know if you saw it but i took a freq reading and i posted results some depths were 40 hz some were 60. How would DC give a freq reading? Thats what brought me to the conclusion that using the rods we have as the power source would create a rotating magnetic field as opposed to a static dc one.  Now on the topic of the secondary copper coil wound around the whole plug i know there were reports of it having dc output but his patent and other places refer to the output of this cell as secondary current. We do know that some power tools will run off dc and other assorted ac items so maybe somebody got confused along the lines and called it dc when in essence it was polarized ac or pulsed dc.  I could be wrong but after reading all the postings here on this forum and evaluating some of the likeness and differences this conclusion seems logical.
                                                           

@Bill I just saw your video. Awesome man , the same thing happened when i measured amperage, try taking a resistor inline and the measure it meaning positive to resistor then + probe to other side of resistor and - probe to - ground electrode i think that will give you a more stable current measurement.  Again great work, folks are really starting to take an interest.
                                                                                           Joe