Erfinder2,
Thanks for sharing with us your knowledge.
I guess it's up to us how to put together separate pieces of the puzzle to form a SIMPLE construct (read UNITY). This is what I hope and I was looking for years.

It's in our will to share with eachother what we'll find: simple, obvious (read truth) and I hope all this effort not to go in vain.

I whish you didn't stop writing at post no. 13, you know is not good for the morale, but hey, let's not get distracted.

Thanks for stoping by and sharing this message of hope.

I agree Grumpy, I think there is something to this circuit design.  I've been trying to contact Jon, but he hasn't responded yet.  He just became a father so I'm sure he's been busy.

Those magnets will not form a closed loop when connected - I tested it.  It creates an "Axial, Multi-poles" configuration as shown in ResinRat2's diagram.  This makes me wonder what Erfinder's definition of "closed loop" was.  Its hard to follow someone who uses "ancient" measuring systems and personalized terminology!

Stick with the curved bar arrangement.  This is a well-known way to trap the magnetic flux and free the A-field.

6" OD and 2" id - no thickness specified but 2" would make the cross section square - damn big hunk of metal.

hello this is my first post on this site

the last four day's I have bin reading this forum.

and I have learned a lot about magnetism.

Manny thanks to all off you, in some way somthing was triggered in me to get me go in this direction because my dayli works is electronics and iI have bin thinking a lot about magnetism and from what I read it staats my thinking that magnetism is a frequency combined with energy X.I can not realy explane but I go from my sence and feeling about this matter I have not read the patens yet but will do so in the up coming week and then wil start to build the device I will keep you all posted and may also ask some questions.
the way i have read it, just start and do it.

erfinder said al he need to
Vielen dank und bis bald (manny thanks and til soon)

Satyoda

May the force X be with you

All,

I've started to chew the riddle and I'd like to share my first thoughts with you.

From "Divine Cosmos":

Returning to the more ?comfortable? arena of physical matter, Kozyrev?s work
showed that torsion fields can be absorbed, shielded or sometimes reflected. For
example, sugar can absorb, polyethylene film and aluminum can shield, and
other forms of aluminum or mirrors can reflect.

and later,

? A body placed for a certain time near a process [that generates torsion waves] and
then brought to a torsion balance [would] produce the same effect on [the torsion
balance] as [the original torsion-generating] process [produced by] itself. [The]
memorizing [of] the action of processes is a feature of [all] different substances, except
aluminum.

Erfinder2 also said:

The ring is mounted on an aluminium core.  Aluminium is paramagnetic.  Paramagnetism draws paramagnetism to itself and expels diamagnetism!!!!!!   Aluminium in comparison to iron doesn't concentrate the paramagnetic field.  In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism into the circuit.

Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF

My conclusion:
From here we learn that aluminium (paramagnetic), can absorb (atract) torsion fields (in our case EMF = Paramagnetism) and also when the field seize to exist, doesn't memorize the action of the field.
Eventualy, "other forms of aluminum" (here I have trouble making connection - with "other forms") can reflect (repel) torsion fields, in this case the diamagnetism (aka BEMF).

Coments, debates, other correlations?
Regards.

I think it is a little confusing because everyone who talks about it is saying the same thing but with a different interpretation.  Thats what I was talking about when I said a blind man can explain an orange in many different ways, neither of the explanations are wrong yet none will be fully correct - because he will never be able to explain its color. 

I feel that magnetic fields are the backbone of the universe.  They penetrate everything - there is no material known that is not effected by a magnetic field (to some degree).  Whether this magnetic field is the real object or a secondary result of the A vector thing, who knows and does it really matter?  Jon's research definitely supports the idea of the universal backbone, Erfinder's does too but with a different interpretation. 

I personally feel that science is misled in that moving charges are what cause the magnetic field.  I think it is the opposite, it is the magnetic field that moves the charge.  Likewise, the magnetic field inside a permanent magnet does not really come from inside, the metal atoms are aligned in a configuration that "draws" the magnetic field to it (from the outside).

The research I've been doing these past few years deals with alternative ways to manipulate these fields.  I have found that a permanent magnet and a coil have a very special relationship that is not given enough credit.  When the field seen by the coil is changed, the coil reacts to oppose this - common knowledge.  What I find so very fascinating is the fact that the permanent magnet's field is left untouched!  The coil is generating an opposing field unto its own, completely independent (yet coupled) to the magnet - the energy in the magnet's field is not taken!!!  The coil is making it's own field! 

There is so much more to "induction" than what is in the books.  I have found that the electric generator is designed wrong.  The technique used to change the field is completely and totally inefficient and useless!  There is a much better way, one in which the opposition of the coil does not thwart the change.  The new technique I've discovered needs much more testing.  Unfortunately I don't get a lot of time to experiment so it's taking much longer than I had hoped   But if everything continues the way it is going, I would venture to say that a magnet is a device that traps a small amount energy, yet allows one to do work with that energy without ever expending it - a Pandora's box to modern physics. 

Here's some info:
Paramagnetic- aluminum,nickel,osimium,oxygen
Diamagnetic- bismuth,carbon,zinc,tin,copper,silver,gold,mercury,water

Triboelectric material:Electrostatic
Most (+)
Air
glass
nylon
paper
cotton
polypropylene
silica
teflon
Most(-)

Here's a thought-
Schauberger said Matter is a TRIPOLAR Mass having (+), (-) and neutral elements, he also said centripital inward flows are cooling and energizing.
- So why is it almost every OU machine runs cool?
- Why did erfinder2 say the BEMF was the dominant force?
I think because the (+)EMF doesn't drive the motor, it is a means to an end, that is to produce a BEMF(-negative) driving force(ie suction-cooling). The (+) EMF is only to disassociate the potentials into (+) and (-) potentials, the (-) potential is then used as the dominant force, always acting inward, take the analogy of the figure skater moving her arms inward and accelerating her spin.
The problem is the potentials must balance, but the flow remains constant, so im guessing from the schematic that the (+)EMF has no interaction with the closed Bfield but the (-) potential moves inward possibly reacting with the diamagnetic core.
From the schematic you will also notice the HV capacitor circuit is in a closed loop with the primary coils and has no route to the negative 12v terminal other than interaction with the secondaries?
On the other hand the secondaries form a switched series connection with the 12v battery.
Another question, where in nature do you see large currents? Answer- Nowhere
Almost all natural and atomic forces are electrostatic in nature, so maybe the Bemf isn't just (-)negative, it's another kind of electricity, negative electrostatic or as many say high voltage. I can tell you from experience conventional current flow acts nothing like high voltage/electrostatic energy, which was exactly what Tesla was working with when he found success.
It seems the more I learn the more I realize schauberger was exaclty right, "Do the opposite of what we do today". I think all fields are electrostatic in nature, conventional physics agree's with this, so why are we obsessed with trying to manipulate these fields with current? Somewhere along the line we missed something VERY important.

I am getting so close I can taste it, But I can't seem to make the jump from shauberger's machines to electromagnetic ones, they are one and the same only the medium is different.

quote:  "Our collective understanding of electricity, magnetism, is wrong but I leave this for you all to discover for yourselves.  I have been told that I speak in riddles, this is not my intention, it is next to impossible to share what I have awakened to with people who are not willing to open their minds to newer and better things."

ERfinder,
No disrespect, but "our understanding of electricity..." is what we have and yet we search.  The fact that several of us are chasing this proves we are "willing to open their minds".  Those patents have been available for a long time, yet our way of thinking continues.  Please teach/show us what you see different in them.  It would be a breath of fresh air.
Kent