Free Energy  searching for free energy and discussing free energy
New theories about free energy systems => The theory of energy streams => Topic started by: GregorArturo on January 05, 2011, 01:12:24 AM

Hey everybody, I haven't posted on this website awhile and I felt it was worth sharing some new advancements in vortex mathematics from my research contribution along with others. This information has been shared already with the YouTube community along with constant discussion on the rodin coil group on google.
So the math has revealed that the 1st dimension is magnetic with three components: Scalar, north pole, and south pole energy. Overlapping magnetic fields cause the twisting of the magnetic fields to cancel out, the doubling circuits, leaving only the scalar component, a true onedimensional string of energy.
By grouping these three sequences it creates a 2D matrix that can be folded in onto itself to create a toroid. The base matrix is 6 x 6 which creates the yin yang and flower of life type flow. This 2D matrix creates a 2nd axis of information which is electric in nature. The Yin Yang is an oscillation of polarized charges.
There are 3 unique and distinct 6 x 6 matrices. These translate into three toroids which interlock with each other forming the celtic knot the Triquetera. However, this is usually seen as one flow, a type of mobius strip. It is 3 distinct toroidal flows the work together to focus or funnel a single magnetic flow into a vortex and implosion. The three toroids are out of phase with each other, a concept Tesla completely understood.
Each toroidal map creates a unique 18 number sequence (which each map contains two of) that represents the oscillating flow of electricity. If you take each three sequences and make them out of phase with each other, you create a 18 x 3 matrix that can further lead to create a 6 x 6 x 6 matrix depicting space and describing the flow and patterns of light.
Currently, I am working on connecting the Fibonacci sequence which is a 24 number cycle in vortex mathematics to the fourth dimension to unify the lower dimensions in terms of how energy flows in, between, and out of them.
A single toroid works only as an oscillating pump with no net energy to say extract as free energy. By elevating the geometric complexity, to allow these pumps to funnel in a specific direction, net energy can be extracted.
There's much more to this than meets the eye, and than what I've already shared. My YouTube channel describes more in detail at http://www.youtube.com/gregorarturo85 (http://www.youtube.com/gregorarturo85)
I'm just hoping to see some thoughts, and see what things people may build! Feel free to ask any questions. I'll share more on material sciences later in relation to these flows.

This is certainly beautiful math, especially presented visually. What isn't clear is what is its connection with physics. What gives you grounds to attribute physical meaning, say, talking about energy, when presenting these mathematical results?

Nice work Gregor. And just ignore the troll.

Nice work Gregor. And just ignore the troll.
The above is written by a troll.

Omnibus, you are absolutely right. The hardest part about the math has been the interpretation of the abstract patterns in terms of their relationship to attributes to our physical world. However, by creating the dynamic systems the math dictates, you are able to see how certain patterns flow versus others. The 1st dimension has three fundamental properties which fit most appropriately with magnetism. The 2nd dimension oscillates between two opposing energies and applies most appropriately to electricity. When looked at from a holistic perspective, it connects everything together rather flawlessly which is a statement in itself.
To explain how three triadic coils linked together would be replicated here, it involves making the three toroids out of a diamagnetic material. This pushes the magnetic field out of its core, or curves it away from its core. Each toroid has its own intrinisic internal magnetic field that all feed off one external magnetic field. If you lined up the triad so one of the three outer arms faces your closest magnetic pole, then there would be a vortex street effect happening on that point with two opposing vortices fishtailing off the toroid and into a cylical flow around the structure itself. A paramagnetic material could be used to guide this magnetic energy through the hole of each toroid. So essentially the hole of each toroid contains 2 diamagnetic toroids, and smaller ratio paramagnetic toroid which feeds through all three diamagnetic toroids. In the central shaft of the entire structure, a ferromagnetic material can be used to focus and implode the external magnetic field. What this doesis create a drain for the earth's magnetic energy (or any other input magnetic energy you are using) which it vortexes, causing it to accelerate toward singularity.
You don't technically have to wind the toroids. It's a concept like Tai Chi but with material science. I'm currently working on construction of one right now.
So study this animation good. There's going on right there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geKTEwd8II8

"Omnibus, you are absolutely right...."
Rotfl!
What a mathematician you are!

"Omnibus, you are absolutely right...."
Rotfl!
What a mathematician you are!
spam

"Omnibus, you are absolutely right...."
Rotfl!
What a mathematician you are!
He wants to sound intelligent yet all his comments are trivial and off topic. What a joke.

He wants to sound intelligent yet all his comments are trivial and off topic. What a joke.
What a joke, indeed, to write posting as the one above.

It is not trivial and it is not off topic to ask what is the basis to claim connection with physics when a mathematical result is presented claiming such connection. That, of course, is not for people who are not scientists to understand. These people, however, should try to learn and not get encouraged by trolls to respond incoherently and interrupt the discussion.
It is a common fallacy nowadays to substitue mathematical results for physical findings. Our friend here isn't at all an exception. That approach is the rule in some circles and that has to change if physics is to regain its integrity. Physics makes mathematics, not vice versa. Mathematics is only a language which makes physics easier to present. In other words, mathematics in physics is only a tool. It is something extraneous to physics which only helps it. A significant physical result or any physical result for that matter will not become less significant or less physical if it can be expressed in words, avoiding any use of math. Many times, however, using math makes it more convenient to express physics clearly. On the other hand, there are many valuable mathematical results which have no physical meaning whatsoever. Those interested in science have to learn those distinctions in order to avoid unnecessary confusion.

I'm with Omnibus on this one. I've been intrigued by this whole notion of vortex based mathematics for awhile. Ultimately it has just led to my own frustration  as I've yet to see anything that correlates the 'math' to anything physical and real. Is it popular because of the fancy numerical associations it produces? Science or numerology? I haven't seen anything yet that indicates it is science.
How do you use this tool (VBM) to make physical predictions? You know, so we can test those predictions. :)

Whilst i don't pretend to understand the more complex aspects of the maths i have enjoyed winding several coils based on them for my pulse motors & loudspeakers. In my limited experience they are so much more efficient than any other coils I've used. So I've confirmed for myself some of the initial claims around efficiency of vortex math based coils, so Im prepared to be further intrigued :)

If you don't know about Marko Rodin, you just have to check this:
http://www.rense.com/RodinAerodynamics.htm
He is the one guy most deeply into vortex mathematics and its applications.
Home Page:
http://markorodin.com/1.5/
Also there is several real intriguing lectures by him on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K93dL65Q724

If you don't know about Marko Rodin, you just have to check this:
http://www.rense.com/RodinAerodynamics.htm
He is the one guy most deeply into vortex mathematics and its applications.
Home Page:
http://markorodin.com/1.5/
Also there is several real intriguing lectures by him on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K93dL65Q724
I don't see any reason why one interested in OU should ever spend time watching these videos? Where is the experimental proof that coil or approach has anything to do with OU?

Seems to me Marko Rodin is onto the very fabric behind our universe.
The geometry of energy fields points clearly towards the vortex concept.
Just look at anything, from atomic spin structures to galaxies.
Thus OUlike effects are very likely to relate to the ever present vortex geometry.
Omnibus, I take the liberty to remind you that we are here to keep doors open.
Gwandau

Seems to me Marko Rodin is onto the very fabric behind our universe.
The geometry of energy fields points clearly towards the vortex concept.
Just look at anything, from atomic spin structures to galaxies.
Thus OUlike effects are very likely to relate to the ever present vortex geometry.
Omnibus, I take the liberty to remind you that we are here to keep doors open.
Gwandau
That's fine, I'm all for that. But the discourse should be reasonable. Just seeming analogies aren't enough to convince a scientific mind that there is anything pointing to the fabric of our universe in those ideas. That's what I'm getting at. Pure mathematical constructs are just one side of the issue but without predictive power which can be tested experimentally they are worthless even if these constructs constitute a beautiful structure in themselves.

Omnibus,
I totally agree, theory is of course secondary to real experiments.
But there are two road towards discoveries.
One road starts with a theory that dawns upon ones mind, call it intuition.
Any theory is worthless without being backed up by experimental proof, of course.
The other road is the incidental discovery through experiments, which thereafter
needs a theoretic sceleton to make sense.
What Marko Rodin has found seems genuine and novel, since his ideas are not based
upon any mathematical construct as such, but are directly relating to sequential values
repeating themselves again and again indefinitely.
I just mean that this unprecedented approach to numerical values seems to unveil
uncharted realms of knowledge, which may initiate intriguing experiments.
Additionally his toroidial coil construct is expressing a very interesting "noise free"
electromagnetic surrounding, which eliminates any need for shielding as in common windings.
Gwandau

I agree. Toroidal coils exhibit very interesting properties. Case in point  Steorn's experiments. I don't know what the additional aspect the Rodin coil brings in that can supplement what we already know about this type of coils such as the confinement of the field within the coil, eliminating the need to shield it from the surroundings. That can only be established experimentally and I don't see for the time being how the numerical approach provides evidence for any new, hitherto unknown but real behavior of these coils.

I get my little pulse motor running up around 10000 RPM on 1.2 watts using a rodin coil. I have not been able to achieve the same results on any other coil & the rodins use a very small % of copper in comparison. So that in itself is worthy of investigation IMHO purely from the cost saving benefit alone.

I get my little pulse motor running up around 10000 RPM on 1.2 watts using a rodin coil. I have not been able to achieve the same results on any other coil & the rodins use a very small % of copper in comparison. So that in itself is worthy of investigation IMHO purely from the cost saving benefit alone.
Definitely. Isn't there a way to carry out proper power balance measurement on your motor? I'd be most willing to help in that, if you don't have DSO and adequate probes. Would you care to mention where you're located if you decide I can be of any help (or maybe send me a pm)?

I think others have got better results than me. I can charge a cap pretty fast using another rodin coil as a pu to 60 plus volts but I think the amps are in the micro range. I had to google DSO which should give you some understanding of my exp :) I do have a USB digi scope ( I'm assuming it's not deep sea oils or distinguished service order, not that I have those DSO either )) I'm in Melb Australia . Russ from the rodin coil disc group posted an interesting vid today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cs5ZpCgHoo not sure what power consumption is but I can't imagine it would be that high given his setup.

I think others have got better results than me. I can charge a cap pretty fast using another rodin coil as a pu to 60 plus volts but I think the amps are in the micro range. I had to google DSO which should give you some understanding of my exp :) I do have a USB digi scope ( I'm assuming it's not deep sea oils or distinguished service order, not that I have those DSO either )) I'm in Melb Australia . Russ from the rodin coil disc group posted an interesting vid today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cs5ZpCgHoo not sure what power consumption is but I can't imagine it would be that high given his setup.
Microamps would be a problem, indeed. Is it both input and output amps?

Microamps would be a problem, indeed. Is it both input and output amps?
input is 100ma haven't successfully measured output. I can dimly light a 6v torch bulb. It slows the rotor but die not draw extra current

input is 100ma haven't successfully measured output. I can dimly light a 6v torch bulb. It slows the rotor but die not draw extra current
I see. That needs to be studied, though. Wonder if the current adapters would do any good to measure microamps correctly (they are pretty expensive, though)? Something has to be done to have proper quantitative data taken for this motor. Can you try someone at the local university? I've gone along that route and got into a deadend, which made me go ahead and buy my own stuff, but still it's worth trying in view of the importance of these measurements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGmrCU3E0 my latest tinkerings with the rodin coil with a RC gen coil.

Seems like quite the conversation hasn't taken place since I last left. Well, some big developments with the math has unfolded. From my own experience, with everything is accelerating so is the understanding of the math.
But let me stop using the word math. Vortex mathematics is really just intrinsic pattern. It is the very nature of pattern itself. The number circle we use is nothing more then a color wheel. And this pattern is inherent in our very being. What I have discovered with my experience in vortex mathematics is how the universe flows. And I breath it. I dance it. I live it. And when I mean I dance it, I know how to create these flows with my body and movement (poi!). It is superconductive movement. It is dynamic Tai Chi.
Well, my big development is this Triadic Coil system, and how three different number maps (the 6 x 6 matrices I talked about earlier) form together to create 3D space ie light. Each of those number maps are essentially the 2D dimension and incorporates the 2nd axis as electric. The 1st dimension then would be magnetic. The 3rd dimension incorporates all three electric pathways, each 120 degrees out of phase, like Tesla understood.
What all this is, is the nature of geometry and potential interweaving and growing together. Pure pattern. I've been able to connect some of these patterns directly with the Mayan Calendar such as finding a 13 note musical scale interwoven into the Fibonacci sequence.
And for the beauty of beauties.
Take a look at the Photo of the Day on Coast 2 Coast AM (The Triad). This is the geometry I was just talking about.
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/photo/category/photooftheday

Claiming to want to make this open source why are there no tutorials on winding the toroid??? I have looked at all their released information and there is nothing. The one that spins the magnetic ball would be a good start.....
Obviously the interwound coils are on the same plane and yours is not.

Hi GregorArturo. Your theory sounds very interesting. I'm wondering what your theory on what the photon is.