Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83399
  • *Latest: SciAnt

  • *Total Posts: 510017
  • *Total Topics: 15198
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: The correct theory of electricity  (Read 31482 times)

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2012, 03:59:26 PM »
I think you have misinterpreted some of Dr. Tesla's statements.
As Tesla stated Hertz waves simply do not exists
I don't think Dr. Tesla said this. He did say that Hetyz waves could not carry signals or power very far due to damping but he never said they do not exist.
This is not about athospheric electricity, not air , not ions.
From 'Tesla Cosmic Ray Motor May Transmit Power ‘Round Earth', by John A.O’NEILL for Brooklin Eagle on JUly 10, 1932, 'I have harnessed the cosmic rays and caused them to operate a motive device', declared Nikola Tesla, famous scientist, in an interview last evening on the eve of his 76th birthday. 'Cosmic ray investigation is a subject that is very close to me. I was the first to discover these rays and I naturally feel toward them as I would toward my own flesh and blood.', said Dr. Tesla. ... Dr. Tesla stated that the amount of power he was able to develop in the device was insignificant. I asked him if its power output was of the same magnitude as that of Crookes‘ radiometer, the device with four vanes in a glass tube that are rotated by sunlight, and which is often seen in jewelers‘ windows. He stated that the power output was many thousand times that of a Crookes‘ radiometer. 'The attractive feature of the cosmic rays is their constancy. They shower down on us throughout the whole 24 hours, and if a plant is developed to use their power it will not require devices for storing energy as would be necessary with devices using wind, tide or sunlight. All of my investigations seem to point to the conclusion that they are small particles, each carrying so small a charge that we are justified in calling them neutrons. They move with great velocity, exceeding that of light. More than 25 years ago I began my efforts to harness the cosmic rays and I can now state that I have succeeded in operating a motive device by means of them.' I was able to prevail upon Dr. Tesla to give me some idea of the principle upon which his cosmic ray motor works. 'I will tell you in the most general way', he said. 'The cosmic ray ionizes the air, setting free many charges – ions and electrons. These charges are captured in a condenser which is made to discharge through the circuit of the motor.'

And from 'In the Realm of Science: Tesla. Who Predicted Radio, Now Looks Forward to Sending Waves to the Moon', by John J. O’NEILL for New York Herald Tribune dated August 22, 1937: 'The effects at great elevations', Dr. Tesla continued, 'are due to waves of extremely small lengths produced by the sun in a certain region of the atmosphere. This is the discovery I wish to make known. The process involved in the generation of the waves is the following: The sun projects charged particles constituting an electric current which passes through a conducting stratum of the atmosphere approximately ten kilometers (six miles) thick enveloping the earth. This is a transmission of electrical energy exactly as I illustrated in my experimental lecture in which one end of a wire is connected to an electric generator of high potential, its other end being free. In this case the generator is represented by the sun and the wire by the conducting air. The passage of the solar current involves the transference of electrical charges from particle to particle with the speed of light, resulting in the production of extremely short and penetrating waves. As the air stratum mentioned is the source of the waves it follows that the so-called cosmic rays observed at great altitude must increase as this stratum is approached.'

So radiant energy recovery, IMO, has everything to do with the atmosphere, ions, and waves but not Hertzian transverse waves.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2012, 03:59:26 PM »

Offline ionizer

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #16 on: October 02, 2012, 05:52:37 PM »
I know there was some confusion back in the days about radiant energy because in the past people associated it with the photo electric efffect in which high energy photons knock out electrons due to secondary emission.
It could also mean something like ion wind comparable to solar wind which charges up bodies it encounters.
I did some experiments long time ago and noticed the ground wire showd up as being positive when the electrode was bombarded with an airflow of highly charged air.

Also when you say atmosphere it's a word with wide spread meaning the earth has a magnetic field which is DC this makes the copmpass point north and then there is the electromagnetic field which is AC this is where all radiowaves go and also lightwaves then there is the electric field which is the atmospheric charge between the top of the ionosphere and ground so there are a lot of things to look at when you say atmosphere.

From Moray i know he did 3 staged frequency conversion probably in a 3 staged ring modulator to transform low frequency to mid range and from there to ultra high frequency and maybe the way around from high to low so in any case he was not just stepping up and down voltages but converting frequencies.
Also the detector seemed to have used a radioactive salt which probably ionized the tube and the area around the detector itself.
Yes he did say it was the ions.
I am unaware of any gas used in his tube but if so it could cointain a plasma which is a superconductor.
He somehow managed to place his load between the waves of energy coming and going from space the energy was forced to run through his load before given the oppertunity to flow back something like that.
But Moray research was a long time ago for me i did do a large amount of testing but never made it to the power levels he was reaching.
It could verry well be the energy radiated by lightning strokes like the schumann resonance or pherhaps it was coming to us from outer space like he was thinking maybe from the sun who knows.

Anywho i did not find enough material about this subject to make a working device.

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2012, 05:56:23 PM »
Isopropyl alcohol vapor capacitor, an extreme high-voltage semiconductor.

Like a sealed Leyden jar but full of the alcohol vapor instead of water. Try to get all the air out and just have the saturated vapor in there. There is an explosion hazard so don't use glass and do wear safety glasses.

Sorry I can't tell you more.

 8)
I apologize for my snarky reply yesterday. I get that way after a couple of days with no sleep. With a rested and clearer perspective this morning I looked into the saturated alcohol vapor 'condenser' and did indeed find an interesting reference - an easily built real time cosmic ray visualization device that can detect charged particles at low altitudes: http://quarknet.fnal.gov/resources/QN_CloudChamberV1_4.pdf
Of course detecting charged particles and harnessing their power are two different things.
Having read the other posts this morning, I find that I have a very limited mind. I cannot conceive of the idea that anyone would want to stroke a contained, saturated alcohol vapor with a 60kV shot. What in the world were you thinking?
I did notice that the above article said that ethyl alcohol works better than isopropyl. Maybe that was the problem. ;)
Quote from: ionizer
So since when did capacitors become semi conductors?
A semiconductor is defined as a substance that can conduct electricity under some conditions but not others. Useing that definition the dielectric in a capacitor is a voltage controlled semiconductor. In its normal state it does not conduct. When the dielectric breaks down, typically from too high a voltage being applied, it conducts. Of course, in the case of a capacitor, it is a 'one-shot' semiconductor that lets out its magic smoke. ::)

Air in a spark gap acts the same way. A sufficienty high voltage will break down the dielectric property of the air and it will conduct when it becomes sufficiently charged. Air, however, has the ability to 'heal' itself by once again becoming an insulator when the voltage is removed whereas the capacitor does not have that feature.

So we can look at air as a semiconductor that operates under unusual conditions and a spark gap device as the transistor of Dr. Tesla's day. The following quote, from page 216 of The Nikola Tesla Treasury by Wilder Publications,  is interesting in that it somewhat describes the use of a transistor today where a low voltage/current is used to control a much higher volatge/current: 'The ideal medium for a discharge gap should only crack...think for the sake of illustration, of a piece of glass or similar body clamped in a vice, and the vice tightened more and more. At a certain point a minute increase of the pressure will cause the glass to crack. The loss of energy involved in splitting the glass may be practically nothing, for though the force is great, the displacement need be but extremely small.'

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2012, 05:56:23 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2012, 05:57:23 PM »
Isopropyl alcohol vapor capacitor, an extreme high-voltage semiconductor.

Like a sealed Leyden jar but full of the alcohol vapor instead of water. Try to get all the air out and just have the saturated vapor in there. There is an explosion hazard so don't use glass and do wear safety glasses.

Sorry I can't tell you more.

 8)
I apologize for my snarky reply yesterday. I get that way after a couple of days with no sleep. With a rested and clearer perspective this morning I looked into the saturated alcohol vapor 'condenser' and did indeed find an interesting reference - an easily built real time cosmic ray visualization device that can detect charged particles at low altitudes: http://quarknet.fnal.gov/resources/QN_CloudChamberV1_4.pdf
Of course detecting charged particles and harnessing their power are two different things.
Having read the other posts this morning, I find that I have a very limited mind. I cannot conceive of the idea that anyone would want to stroke a contained, saturated alcohol vapor with a 60kV shot. What in the world were you thinking?
I did notice that the above article said that ethyl alcohol works better than isopropyl. Maybe that was the problem. ;)
Quote from: ionizer
So since when did capacitors become semi conductors?
A semiconductor is defined as a substance that can conduct electricity under some conditions but not others. Useing that definition the dielectric in a capacitor is a voltage controlled semiconductor. In its normal state it does not conduct. When the dielectric breaks down, typically from too high a voltage being applied, it conducts. Of course, in the case of a capacitor, it is a 'one-shot' semiconductor that lets out its magic smoke. ::)

Air in a spark gap acts the same way. A sufficienty high voltage will break down the dielectric property of the air and it will conduct when it becomes sufficiently charged. Air, however, has the ability to 'heal' itself by once again becoming an insulator when the voltage is removed whereas the capacitor does not have that feature.

So we can look at air as a semiconductor that operates under unusual conditions and a spark gap device as the transistor of Dr. Tesla's day. The following quote, from page 216 of The Nikola Tesla Treasury by Wilder Publications,  is interesting in that it somewhat describes the use of a transistor today where a low voltage/current is used to control a much higher volatge/current: 'The ideal medium for a discharge gap should only crack...think for the sake of illustration, of a piece of glass or similar body clamped in a vice, and the vice tightened more and more. At a certain point a minute increase of the pressure will cause the glass to crack. The loss of energy involved in splitting the glass may be practically nothing, for though the force is great, the displacement need be but extremely small.'

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3862
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2012, 08:28:45 PM »
Nothing was misinterpreted. ;)
Read it by yourself :
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm


http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1929-09-22.htm


http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1932-09-11.htm


If Tesla was right (and I think he was ) there is no transverse electromagnetic waves. Hard to believe but I found how it might evolved - here however there are msotly my assumptions.... I believe ed Leedscalnin was in contact with late Tesla and he described him the correct and simple theory of electricity which is very close to my point of view - longitudinal but rotating waves in ether. Like tubes of force in gaseous substance moving like corkscrew and thus having one of two polarities. Such rotating longitudinal wave can have properties like transverse wave when examined locally.


Anyway, look at tree rocked in the wind : does this transverse movement prove that wind is transverse movement in air ?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2012, 08:28:45 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2012, 01:54:54 AM »
If you go back and read the articles, it is the authors of the articles that say Hertz waves don't exist, not Dr. Tesla. Dr. Tesla does make the point that they are wholly ineffective for transmitting over long distances and that it is delusional to think that they can but that is a matter of transmission, not whether or not they exist. In fact he makes the point in one article by stating, 'As regards signaling without wires, the application of these radiations for the purpose was quite obvious. When Dr. Hertz was asked whether such a system would be of practical value, he did not think so, and he was correct in his forecast. The best that might have been expected was a method of communication similar to the heliographic and subject to the same or even greater limitations.', heliographic signalling being the use of mirrors and reflected sunlight.

Note that in the below I use the archaic word 'aether' simply because I like it and it differentiates the subject from the word 'ether' as used in chemistry.

Here is what Dr. Tesla said about the nature of electricity on May 20, 1891 in Alternate Currents of Very High Frequency and Their Applications to Methods of Artificial Illumination, 'What is electricity and what is magnetism? The most able intellects have ceaselessly wrestled with the problem; still the question has yet been answered. But while we cannot even today state what the singular forces are, we have made good headway towards the solution to the problem. We are now confident that electric and magnetic phenomena are attributable to aether, are perhaps justified in saying that the effects of static electricity are effects of aether under strain, and those of dynamic electricity and electro-magnetism effects of aether in motion. But this still leaves the question as to what electricity and magnetism are unanswered. … we must remember that we have no evidence of electricity, nor can we hope to get it, unless gross matter is present. Electricity, therefore, cannot be called aether in the broad sense of the term but nothing would seem to stand in the way of calling electricity aether associated with matter, or bound aether, or, in other words, that the so called static charge of the molecule is aether associated in some way with the molecule.'

I suppose if you consider matter an expression of aether in motion as a vortex that would tie your theory together with electricity. But whatever electricity is we must interact with matter to harness it to accomplish work.
 

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #21 on: October 11, 2012, 02:03:19 PM »
Ed Leedscalnin was correct about electric current : it is a sound like wave with magnetic part rotating like corkscrew around the center unipolar electric field not undulating (even more , i would state that it's only that magnetic part what is real and electric is a push forward of this screw!)...Interesting that two kinds should exists : positive and negative depending on rotation direction.
See this video. I think it helps visualize your idea. Two motions. One of convection and one of superimposed rotation. Note also near the end a change in frequency reverses the direction of rotation. It may stimulate your thinking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY6z2hLgYuY&feature=player_embedded
Thoughts?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #21 on: October 11, 2012, 02:03:19 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3862
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #22 on: October 11, 2012, 05:27:00 PM »
Two macro whirls of opposing directions in 3D space looking exactly like those cymatics ones are forming magnetic field. Macro whirls are composed of many tubular microwhirls working in synchronicity (Maxwell tubes of force in ether I suppose)


Somebody described magnetic field that way, it is not purely my imagination , however  I can't rememeber who he was.  Anyway my theory matches with that description also.
I'd like to recall who wrote such a book about magnetism, he was free energy inventor also. do you have any idea who am I thinking of ?




Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #23 on: October 12, 2012, 01:11:51 PM »
Two macro whirls of opposing directions in 3D space looking exactly like those cymatics ones are forming magnetic field. Macro whirls are composed of many tubular microwhirls working in synchronicity (Maxwell tubes of force in ether I suppose)


Somebody described magnetic field that way, it is not purely my imagination , however  I can't rememeber who he was.  Anyway my theory matches with that description also.
I'd like to recall who wrote such a book about magnetism, he was free energy inventor also. do you have any idea who am I thinking of ?
I remember something of that nature. I think it was either Dr. Tesla or one of the Thomsons. Maybe J. J. Thomson.
I found this link yesterday. It seems related to what you are looking for. If it is not at that link it may be at one of the publications referenced there.
http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/HTMLdosya1/TeslaDynamicGravity.htm
 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #23 on: October 12, 2012, 01:11:51 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #24 on: January 04, 2013, 11:49:50 PM »
You may find this interesting. It's not so much about your theory but about frames of reference.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130104143516.htm

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2013, 04:09:48 PM »
A few comments about the circuit shown in posts 4 and 6 in this thread. The circuit, excluding the aerial and the ground is nothing more than a voltage quadrupler except for one thing. The diodes are 1N34 germaium diodes. Those diodes are also photodiodes, meaning they convert light to electricity.
Shine a bright flashlight on them and you will get higher voltage output. Wrap the glass cases of the diodes with black plastic tape and you will get the electricity between the elevated aerial and the ground plate connection.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2013, 04:09:48 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3862
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2013, 09:19:12 PM »
Tesla was not in hurry to uncover aspects of his discovery. I suspect he thought that humanity was not ready for it.


I missed that part below, which is the real but not complete explanation   :
And from 'In the Realm of Science: Tesla. Who Predicted Radio, Now Looks Forward to Sending Waves to the Moon', by John J. O’NEILL for New York Herald Tribune dated August 22, 1937: 'The effects at great elevations', Dr. Tesla continued, 'are due to waves of extremely small lengths produced by the sun in a certain region of the atmosphere. This is the discovery I wish to make known. The process involved in the generation of the waves is the following: The sun projects charged particles constituting an electric current which passes through a conducting stratum of the atmosphere approximately ten kilometers (six miles) thick enveloping the earth. This is a transmission of electrical energy exactly as I illustrated in my experimental lecture in which one end of a wire is connected to an electric generator of high potential, its other end being free. In this case the generator is represented by the sun and the wire by the conducting air. The passage of the solar current involves the transference of electrical charges from particle to particle with the speed of light, resulting in the production of extremely short and penetrating waves. As the air stratum mentioned is the source of the waves it follows that the so-called cosmic rays observed at great altitude must increase as this stratum is approached.'




The problem is very big damage to the information we have from Tesla; they are very fragmentary... in other article he just mention how he harnessed it....  ::)

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #27 on: August 31, 2013, 03:34:02 PM »
Two macro whirls of opposing directions in 3D space looking exactly like those cymatics ones are forming magnetic field. Macro whirls are composed of many tubular microwhirls working in synchronicity (Maxwell tubes of force in ether I suppose)


Somebody described magnetic field that way, it is not purely my imagination , however  I can't rememeber who he was.  Anyway my theory matches with that description also.
I'd like to recall who wrote such a book about magnetism, he was free energy inventor also. do you have any idea who am I thinking of ?
Now I remember who it was that described the magnetic fields that way. It was Leedskalnin. His stuff is so hard to read it doesn't stick in my mind very well.

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2013, 01:48:22 AM »
@forest: You will undoubtedly find Harold Aspden's work interesting. There is a lot of it so it will take quite a while to wade through it. The following link takes you to a page that has 10 lessons to learn to understand his perspective on the aether. This is from somewhat deep into his papers but I think it is a good starting point. http://www.aetherscience.org/www-energyscience-org-uk/tu/lessons.htm
 
The following link is the top level page of the web site of his works. http://www.aetherscience.org/www-energyscience-org-uk/index-2.html
 
He has a lot of credibility in my eyes and I'm still wading through his work so don't have much more to share about it right now. He has some British patents, he recognizes that the U.S. patent system is rigged and he has worked for IBM and some power companies so he has an insiders perspective. He is, however, a theoretical physicist rather than technologist.

Offline thx1138

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 89
Re: The correct theory of electricity
« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2013, 03:01:19 PM »
The problem is very big damage to the information we have from Tesla; they are very fragmentary... in other article he just mention how he harnessed it....  ::)
What I've found over 2 1/2 years of these studies is that you have to generally know what you are looking for, i.e. radiant energy, transmission, cosmic rays, etc.  Then go back to about 1891 and work forward reading his works specifically looking for things that relate to that one topic. He worked on so many things, often overlapping in time, that, as you say, it's hard to comprehend what exactly his thoughts were. You'll also notice that as his work progressed, just like anyone, his thoughts on the topic changed so you have to study the documentation in the sequence it was generated. One of the things that helps with this is looking at patent application dates rather than the date the patent was granted. The application dates show the point in time where he had developed his idea to the point that it could be reduced to a patent and date granted may be years later.
 
The reason I say 1891 is that he was mostly working on AC power generation and wired transmission and his polyphase system before then.
 
Something else one must grasp to make headway with his work is to understand what was NOT known at the time of the text you are reading. For instance, in 1891 the atom was still considered the indivisible minimum of matter but that changed in the late 1890's with J. J. Thomson's work on the electron. All industrial scale power was generated by coal at the time - the use of petrochemicals hadn't evolved yet. Another instance is that the jet stream was unknown and would definitely would have affected any "ionized beam to the ionosphere". Plate tectonics was not accepted until the 1960's and I imagine would have affected his transmission through the ground and may be the problem with his superluminal calculation if he thought the wave was reflecting back from the diametric opposite pole of the earth but was actually reflecting back from the tectonic plate boundary. For that matter it wasn't until the 1930's that people started to grasp that the interior of the planet has solid and liquid layers.
 
On the other hand, I do think the majority of his thoughts can be determined by his patents, published papers, and interviews if you know what you're looking for and you focus on one topic at a time.

 

OneLink