Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

New theories about free energy systems => Theory of overunity and free energy => Topic started by: sm0ky2 on December 08, 2017, 01:59:58 AM

Title: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 08, 2017, 01:59:58 AM
hey guys
I don't want to bore you with 30 pages of math, to show you how I got here.
So I'll make this short and simple.
This was derived by solving a series of equations regarding cosmic background radiation.
And applying this information to half-wave antenna theory (with k-factor compensation)


What I find is (mathematically) that a half-wave antenna with a (half) wave length of:


0.5mm (0.25mm each side)


Should receive limitless free energy from the cosmos.


Directly from background radiation.
Zero-point energy.


An array of such antennas can be scaled up to any power requirements.
(may have to be a very large array?)


It's very tiny, so I will need to procure a micrometer before I begin experimenting
Just wanted to throw this out there.


Cosmic radiation frequency is among the most powerful waves in the microwave spectrum.
And are present in every part of the known universe. Permeate every space, every material.
If we are able to create this type of reciever, it could be a game changer.


Thanks for your time. Let me know your thoughts.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: jojo500 on December 08, 2017, 10:52:26 AM
with 1mm wavelength you are at round about 299,8 GHz  hm..
could be pretty intresting to play with

all the best jojo
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 09, 2017, 07:53:04 PM
Isn't antenna size should be comparable to a wavelength?
In this case we should be talking about angstroms, not mm.
Or you have some kind of a trick?
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: jojo500 on December 09, 2017, 08:12:09 PM
he was talking about half wave  antenna 0,5mm so wavelength is 1mm
so freq is  about 299,8 ghz.
how ever in that range your far away from doing triks of any kind  (only my 2cent and sure not the absolutly known and best)

have fun
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 09, 2017, 11:44:15 PM
he was talking about half wave  antenna 0,5mm so wavelength is 1mm
so freq is  about 299,8 ghz.
how ever in that range your far away from doing triks of any kind  (only my 2cent and sure not the absolutly known and best)

have fun
Except I doubt that there is any background radiation at this frequency.
Haven't he mentioned cosmic rays?
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 02:01:07 AM




The data comes from 1986 NASA spacelab,
and 4 other probes since then. (3 are also NASA’s)
One is a Russian science team.


What I considered the ‘most accurate’ is the one I
ultimately took, actuall values for the 0-point frequency
are slightly different, depending on the base values.


K-factor of the antenna assumes a wire width greater
than 1/8mm, and thus 0.94 was taken.


Base values of the frequency spectrum were taken at


2.754 Kelvin, known and identifiable signals filtered out.
That which remains was then further deduced
Leaving a singular frequency of approx 160.2338Ghz
A wavelength of 1.063mm
Applying the K-factor places us close to 1
Half-wave (dipole) antenna =0.5
This is a microwave receiver, a simple rectifier should
do the trick.
Approximate photonic energy available is
~0.0006626534 Ev x freq. x T x #of antennas
Being as tiny as they are..... I imagine we could fit
a large array in a small space.





Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: Bob Smith on December 10, 2017, 04:43:33 AM
I wonder if quartz crystals could be manufactured (just like they are for providing precise oscillations in electronic watches) to the specs needed for such an antenna array. If you had the right sized quartz crystal, would it not resonate, perhaps better than any metal?  If this were a viable means for harvesting background cosmic radiation, the manufacturing industry would already be in place (from watchmaking), and would probably welcome such a new market, given the drop in watch purchases in favour of cell phones as time pieces.
I may be way off the mark, but for what it's worth.
Bob
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on December 10, 2017, 05:29:16 AM
It is wasting of time to use microwave antennas to harvest cosmic radiations. They will not work for thz range either.

Crystals may not be the right choice.... but it also depends on what crystals you are talking about. There must be some chemicals highly responsive to cosmic radiations.

I believe the some people have already got the answers.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on December 10, 2017, 06:03:07 AM
The cosmic energy measurable by sensitive microwave electronics is the so-called noise or white noise.
Unfortunately, this energy is not so white to an extent that it can be easily measured at terahertz or microwave frequencies.
Noise from free space is easy to found but its energy is usually too little to do meaningful work.
The k-factor from NASA is meaningless because most of the microwave measuring instrument has a very low noise floor.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: Bob Smith on December 10, 2017, 06:07:49 AM
Lahkovsky's multiwave oscillator comes to mind as well, but that's veering off topic, so I won't say more.
Bob
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 11:35:00 AM
@blueplanet


It’s GHz, not Thz.
The K-factor is not a NASA thing,
the concept itself was brought forth from the radio industry
and antenna design theory.


It is an ‘adjustment’ to antenna length based on the frequency shift
caused by variances in antenna thickness.
The signal changes slightly through the metal
So we change the length to compensate, reducing interference.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 11:54:08 AM
On the quartz receiver:


This idea sparked my interest, though upon searching
I am finding a bunch of escatalogical ‘crystal healing’
boxes, not sure the purpose (or if they do anything at all)


Then I find an interesting paper written by the guys at Berkeley
apparently they are using quartz-based receivers to convert
ionic plasma discharge into electricity.


As we know from the electric machines, ionic discharge radiates
at RF and microwave frequencies.
So there may be something there.

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on December 10, 2017, 12:52:45 PM
THz usually refers to the frequency band from 0.1Thz to 2 Thz. Of course i know what k-factor is but this is not an issue. If you have realized any cosmic energy harvesting device, please kindly post it here.  I would love to have a look.




@blueplanet


It’s GHz, not Thz.
The K-factor is not a NASA thing,
the concept itself was brought forth from the radio industry
and antenna design theory.


It is an ‘adjustment’ to antenna length based on the frequency shift
caused by variances in antenna thickness.
The signal changes slightly through the metal
So we change the length to compensate, reducing interference.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 01:23:38 PM
Turns out the ‘quartz antenna’ are actually metal antennas
a quartz coating is applied to protect the metal from
high-temp ionic plasma discharge.


The only thing close to a ‘quartz antenna’ is a doped-silicone
contaminated to the point of conductivity. (0.5-15 ohms)
At least that I’ve uncovered so far.


I’m not sure if pure quartz can be used to receive microwaves.
if this was a thing, we would probably observe all quartz acting
as tuned-frequency receivers, based on their physical dimensions?
I don’t know....







Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 01:38:40 PM
I plan to build a test-bed array, I need to work out
a few details, to accurately fabricate precise dipoles
of this tiny size.
But, the physics supports the operation.
It’s really a matter of building a large enough array
that the reception becomes ‘useful’


What is ‘useful’???


Well basically it comes down to this:


1.06157 x10^-13 J/s
Or roughly one trillion dipole antennas per Watt
of continuous power.


This may be unfeasible.
Of course if we could build this, each unit would produce
24 Watt-hrs of electricity per day.

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 10, 2017, 01:42:56 PM
3.28 million linear feet of antenna per watt.....


We would lose more energy producing the materials
then we could hope to recover by its use.


While it may be technically “possible”
I guess this is a dead end.


Also, I may have found an issue with the base data.
Newer studies are indicating that “absolute zero” may
In fact, be relative.....
Because we are somehow able to cool a sample to
a negative Kelvin value, with perspective to our control temp.
This raises the obvious question of whether or not the
“Background Radiation” itself is a derivation of our inaccuracy
of the measurement of “zero” degrees.

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 10, 2017, 06:52:23 PM
You need to look at cosmic rays as a source.
Radioactive elements work as an antenna to convert cosmic rays
into particles.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: gyulasun on December 10, 2017, 09:55:37 PM
3.28 million linear feet of antenna per watt.....

....


Hi sm0ky2,

You may wish to study parabolic antenna instead of dipoles? 

http://www.rfwireless-world.com/calculators/parabolic-dish-antenna-calculator.html

Even with such very high gain antennas the received "signals" would still be at very low level, hard to do anything with it (like rectification: what diodes at 150 GHz? what forward voltage threshold they have etc etc). 

Gyula
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 12, 2017, 11:52:05 AM
Gunn diodes, IMPATTs,.......
Microwave rectifiers


Most of these are only used in classified weapon technology
But thanks to the military’s ridiculous budget,
The components are commercially available


So they find their way into telecom and rnd


I think the only way to make this reasonably possible
Is to “grow” millions of receivers using nano tech
Or some advanced machining process that would avoid
the required 14 warehouse-sweatshops to pull it off.


But then again if we compare the indentured slavery of
our current energy production systems, making a trillion
of 0.5mm dipoles per watt isn’t really as crazy as it sounds.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 13, 2017, 10:59:19 AM
Radioactivity is a natural mechanism for capturing very high frequency
radiation and converting into the lower frequency rays.
I'm sure there are isotopes which would emit mostly betha
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 16, 2017, 03:06:01 PM
How would we use the radiation for this Purpose?
And how do we get the energy back out?


I have access to a natural beta emitter
A pink granite containing neodymium
And small amounts of promethium trapped in corpuscles in the rock.
The stones glow in complete darkness, so there is quite of lot of beta


(If you play with this stuff, use gloves and don't touch your eyes)


Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 19, 2017, 12:44:01 AM
It is already used:
A ceramic fuel pellet of Plutonium-238 oxide glows orange from its radioactive decay. These pellets are used inside Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) to provide heat that is converted into electricity on spacecraft.Sep 20, 2013
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 19, 2017, 04:06:49 AM
It is already used:
A ceramic fuel pellet of Plutonium-238 oxide glows orange from its radioactive decay. These pellets are used inside Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) to provide heat that is converted into electricity on spacecraft.Sep 20, 2013


That's not quite the same thing as harnessing the zpe.


In fact, with pu238 you probably couldn't even detect the background radiation anywhere inside the chamber.


Unfortunately promethium is not "that radioactive"
It's half life is like 50-55 yrs or something.
(the stuff around me doesn't follow the halflife rule for another reason)


But, it's technically not illegal to own.
The mild betas I guess just cause 'sun burn' after prolonged exposure.
And it is warned to not get it in a cut or eye or anything that goes inside you.
Your digestive system can take more dmg but if it gets absorbed into a secondary
organ it's bad news.


Skin can take a lot of the radiation
(Do not try this with plutonium, uranium, iridium, or any of the available high-energy isotopes.)


Encapsulated promethium only occurs in two known forms.
Uranium ore, and this pink granite
It's not the same as raw promethium, which would still be nothing close to pu
But it's stable, meaning, it will still be emitting beta in another 10k yrs.


Nothing isn't going to heat up, well I mean I could initiate a thermochemical reaction with it if feel I really
needed to prove myself wrong, but it's 'mild' radiation? Technically "Secondary Radiation"
But that's more advanced level stuff most people don't really understand.


We will just say that the promethiums radiation hits other stuff and makes more (but less)
Radiation.....


Not much use for it except as a teaching tool to demonstrate electro molecular chemistry
As least that I have found so far.


Now, if I wanted to make a cheap and freely available and safe thermonuclear heat source
I would use Americum


Teeny teeny pieces are in every smoke detector
Collect broken ones for free
Hell sell the stupid things and people will pay you to replace them and give you their old ones
Find them in the trash, or the junkyard
Start a town wide smoke detector recycling program
Whatever
The stuff cannot mathematically "go critical"
It's perfectly safe in any quantities,Just don't get it on you

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 19, 2017, 05:53:30 PM

That's not quite the same thing as harnessing the zpe.


In fact, with pu238 you probably couldn't even detect the background radiation anywhere inside the chamber.


Unfortunately promethium is not "that radioactive"
It's half life is like 50-55 yrs or something.
(the stuff around me doesn't follow the halflife rule for another reason)


But, it's technically not illegal to own.
The mild betas I guess just cause 'sun burn' after prolonged exposure.
And it is warned to not get it in a cut or eye or anything that goes inside you.
Your digestive system can take more dmg but if it gets absorbed into a secondary
organ it's bad news.


Skin can take a lot of the radiation
(Do not try this with plutonium, uranium, iridium, or any of the available high-energy isotopes.)


Encapsulated promethium only occurs in two known forms.
Uranium ore, and this pink granite
It's not the same as raw promethium, which would still be nothing close to pu
But it's stable, meaning, it will still be emitting beta in another 10k yrs.


Nothing isn't going to heat up, well I mean I could initiate a thermochemical reaction with it if feel I really
needed to prove myself wrong, but it's 'mild' radiation? Technically "Secondary Radiation"
But that's more advanced level stuff most people don't really understand.


We will just say that the promethiums radiation hits other stuff and makes more (but less)
Radiation.....


Not much use for it except as a teaching tool to demonstrate electro molecular chemistry
As least that I have found so far.


Now, if I wanted to make a cheap and freely available and safe thermonuclear heat source
I would use Americum


Teeny teeny pieces are in every smoke detector
Collect broken ones for free
Hell sell the stupid things and people will pay you to replace them and give you their old ones
Find them in the trash, or the junkyard
Start a town wide smoke detector recycling program
Whatever
The stuff cannot mathematically "go critical"
It's perfectly safe in any quantities,Just don't get it on you

Plutonium 238 is an ideal transformer of cosmic rays into heat.
It is an alpha emitter and it absorbs into itself all the alpha particles, which make it so hot.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 19, 2017, 09:03:53 PM
Plutonium 238 is an ideal transformer of cosmic rays into heat.
It is an alpha emitter and it absorbs into itself all the alpha particles, which make it so hot.


Where did you get this from?


Yes pu238 will sometimes absorb its own He(4) emissions
and in the right arrangement can even extend the half-life of a sample
by raising its internal energy after it has decayed.
But all of the energy in these cases are accounted for.


If it randomly absorbed cosmic He(4), that would be evident in the math
which it is not.


There can be ‘some’ change in temperatures (mostly internal) by self-bombardment
But the heat from a thermo-reaction is caused by the particles bombarding a neutral source.
Such as the ceramic casing the Pu is put into.
Then it is simply ran through a Seebeck thermogenerator.


We can count the emissions, there aren’t “extra particles”, which would require a cosmic source.
The rare instance where a high energy He(4) from space were to strike our Pu sample
Is statistically improbable, and would be difficult to stage the event to even test this.
High-energy cosmic He(4) isn’t that common in our surroundings.


Pu238 isn’t “hot” all by itself.
To put this in perspective: a Pu sample by itself will sit around 600-700 degrees
While the ceramic in the radioisotope thermogenerator becomes heated to 1100


A well insulated device can get hotter than that over time,


Besides the obvious point that the Zpe is not ‘cosmic rays’. It is the background radiation
Which is present when there are no cosmic rays.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 20, 2017, 12:08:04 AM

Where did you get this from?


Yes pu238 will sometimes absorb its own He(4) emissions
and in the right arrangement can even extend the half-life of a sample
by raising its internal energy after it has decayed.
But all of the energy in these cases are accounted for.


If it randomly absorbed cosmic He(4), that would be evident in the math
which it is not.


There can be ‘some’ change in temperatures (mostly internal) by self-bombardment
But the heat from a thermo-reaction is caused by the particles bombarding a neutral source.
Such as the ceramic casing the Pu is put into.
Then it is simply ran through a Seebeck thermogenerator.


We can count the emissions, there aren’t “extra particles”, which would require a cosmic source.
The rare instance where a high energy He(4) from space were to strike our Pu sample
Is statistically improbable, and would be difficult to stage the event to even test this.
High-energy cosmic He(4) isn’t that common in our surroundings.


Pu238 isn’t “hot” all by itself.
To put this in perspective: a Pu sample by itself will sit around 600-700 degrees
While the ceramic in the radioisotope thermogenerator becomes heated to 1100


A well insulated device can get hotter than that over time,


Besides the obvious point that the Zpe is not ‘cosmic rays’. It is the background radiation
Which is present when there are no cosmic rays.
All radiation is a transformation of the cosmic rays into a lower frequency energies.
The only difference is that the frequency of the above rates is so high that it can't be measured because it penetrates everything.
In the case of Pu 238, it is getting quite hot on its own.
The fact that it is not sold doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 20, 2017, 07:00:03 AM
Actually we can detect it’s frequency
And we find this to decrease with more mass and more time
Because it is a self-resonant isotope, the larger the mass, the lower the frequency.
Time, because it excites itself the more mass there is.
It is 8.51 MHz/ (kg/s^2)
The more mass, the slower it tics
And the slower it tics, the more energy is emanating with each tic
Until........ boom, and it rains Neptunium
That kills everyone around it, leaving Uranium dust in its trail.


The frequency of Pu238 is consistent, with or without “cosmic rays”.
Even when isolated


Isotopes do not radiate as a result of cosmic energy
(some of them may have been formed in stars originally)
They radiate as a result of nucleic instability.
charged particles in the nucleus are not balanced.
That’s why they sometimes break free and fly off.


We can cause this make a stable element ‘radiate’







Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 20, 2017, 06:10:58 PM
what is causing the nuclear instability?
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 20, 2017, 08:12:22 PM
Imbalanced charges


Nucleic particles must be balanced for stability.
The atomic feedback mechanism resembles an
imbalanced flywheel in the (unstable) isotopes.


But do not be mistaken, even “stable” atoms radiate.
We consider them to be “non-radioactive” because of the magnitudes.
Nucleic<->electron interactions input environmental changes in energy
and output a nucleic response.
Every atom functions this way.


Carbon,sulfur, krypton, yttrium, tantalum, bohrium
each have a high-magnitude response to environmental changes
This is why they form into organic chains (enzymes, rna, dna)
The former 4 are not found in earth-based life forms.
Because of our planetary conditions.



Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 22, 2017, 12:46:56 AM
Instability was proven by Gustave LeBon in 19th century
He was shining light onto steel, it it responded by the increased ionization.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 22, 2017, 02:46:38 PM
Yes


The higher the energy state of electron orbitals, the more pronounced
the perturbations caused by nucleic activity.


In this manner, we can use atoms as energy amplifiers.
Semiconductors operate by this function.


The problem with receiving stellar energies is the frequency and
the size of the atom.


Photons affect atoms by direct impact.


The change in total energy is equal to the energy of the photons
impacting the material.


But the change in amplitude of the atoms natural frequency is
a function of the orbital radii.


Relativity plays a major role in this. The smaller the orbitals the
closer to c the electrons travel.
Therefore their change in amplitude of the atomic frequency is
less than at larger orbitals.
This frequency, however, still persists in the ground state.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: telecom on December 24, 2017, 07:23:04 PM
But when LeBon was shining light on steel, he was discovering the ionizing radiation.
Probably some gamma rays.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 25, 2017, 05:51:48 PM
But when LeBon was shining light on steel, he was discovering the ionizing radiation.
Probably some gamma rays.


Any light over 90-92Thz will ionize steel
Just like rubbing it with wool


E=uf


Go past blue and it’s dangerous.
Why some people have to wear sunscreen


Each element responds differently, so it requires different freq.
of light (or radiation) to ionize it.


HV electricity, and white light both contain these frequencies
for most of the lighter elements. (I mean lighter molecularly, not density)





Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 25, 2017, 05:53:29 PM
This is the basis for electro-nuclear chemistry.
First is ionization, then a controlled frequency reassembly
to bond atoms into molecules.



Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on January 17, 2018, 07:25:22 AM
I have 1 suggestion.

GREEN HOUSE EFFECT

This suggestion is not intended for the American.
You will not like it if you are oil lovers.
You will like it if you are oil haters.


EDIT: remove thrumptards and libtards, sincerely bluetard
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: Magluvin on January 17, 2018, 08:30:27 AM
I have 1 suggestion.

GREEN HOUSE EFFECT

This suggestion is not intended for the American.
You will not like it if you are trumptard.
You will like it if you are libtard.

Ya know what I think Bluetard? You are an annoying Isawit.
Mags
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on January 17, 2018, 10:15:14 AM
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/54/6/002/pdf
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: ramset on January 17, 2018, 10:28:19 AM
GOOD NEWS

here we work to diminish the carbon footprint and try to make the planet Cleaner and less wasteful of her resources.

To the last man we all agree on this and sharing open source [or should not be at this forum]

maybe we should focus on solutions to our agreed goal [a cleaner better planet]

instead of ???

fighting about ...holes in a sinking boat ...while its sinking!

the fix is the same ...the holes will go away if we do what we came here to do ..which is definitely NOT to fight.

just one mans opinion

I hate seeing good people get into frustrated Tussels

respectfully
Chet K

PS here    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSenorAkK_E at about the 12:15 Min mark

Kator01 shared
a discussion of a Device for harvesting ambient energy [inline with the thread topic here] was mentioned and the TREMENDOUS advances that have been made
as well as Kator giving a bit of a secret away.[household glue was used  ]

thread here
http://overunity.com/10682/petrovoltaic-cells/#.Wl8bMbmWxdg..post       post # 12 [I think} the posts numbers can vary here with advertising [don't know why]

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on January 17, 2018, 12:38:59 PM
GOOD NEWS

......

respectfully
Chet K

PS here    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSenorAkK_E (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSenorAkK_E) at about the 12:15 Min mark

Kator01 shared
a discussion of a Device for harvesting ambient energy [inline with the thread topic here] was mentioned and the TREMENDOUS advances that have been made
as well as Kator giving a bit of a secret away.[household glue was used  ]

thread here
http://overunity.com/10682/petrovoltaic-cells/#.Wl8bMbmWxdg..post (http://overunity.com/10682/petrovoltaic-cells/#.Wl8bMbmWxdg..post)       post # 12 [I think} the posts numbers can vary here with advertising [don't know why]


Very interesting. I hope we can replicate this experiment.
We certainly need a lot of this kind of information.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 17, 2018, 02:22:54 PM
He claims that his technology is the tech developed by Tesla
Used in his electric Pierce Arrow car.


At the same time he dodges the efficiency questions
Claiming 10% efficiency at harvesting this “free energy”.
And with lots of r&d $ he may be able to increase to 20-30%
But I guess that’s not far off from where photovoltaics started.


I’m not sure that I gained anything useful from his discussion
All I saw was him put a pencil in the microwave...


We can assume that little thing is 1kw or smaller
20 secs gives something like 0.006kW-hrs
And we have no idea what energy gain or loss occurred in the oven.
Nor how he plans to get it out.


Is this supposed to generate heat to run a steam engine?
By putting metal into a chamber with microwaves?


We could redirect the air-duct of a cheap microwave to pump into
a ceramic heat chamber. Place our metal dust in there,
and use a surface of the chamber for heat transfer
this way the whole machine can be shielded without worry of
damaging the oven.


This would allow for testing,




as what to do with the magnetic carbon?
Samples could be used for experiments with an unknown
carbon structure.
That’s about all I got.....
We would have to dispose of or find a way to recycle it.


The other side of that issue- he claims trace amounts of
platinum group metals. If this is true, that means he tested
the output samples, and he would be able to substantiate his
claims of transmutation of carbon to iron
 (I remain skeptical of this)









Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: ramset on January 17, 2018, 02:52:43 PM
EDIT for clarity and below comment by Blueplanet

Regarding ambient harvesting claim

a better close up of simple components below [identify circuit bits would be a good start.
----------------------------------------------------


Regarding separate  transmutation claim
easy enuff to test [I believe its in the works

the open source works

again Egely Vid here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSenorAkK_E

12 min 19 sec mark for ambient claim
18 min [about] for transmutation claim

Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on January 17, 2018, 05:02:31 PM
I thought this process has nothing to do with electronics. The transmutation process usually involves a chain of nuclear reactions. Nuclear reactions in turns involve a mini mass change. By E=mc^2,it should release a lot energy.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 18, 2018, 01:38:11 AM
I thought this process has nothing to do with electronics. The transmutation process usually involves a chain of nuclear reactions. Nuclear reactions in turns involve a mini mass change. By E=mc^2,it should release a lot energy.


When the mass is increasing there requires a lot of energy input.
In return there is heat (and some electricity) released,
it is theorized that the radioactivity is not the driving function,
and that the reactions will result in stable (cold) fusion byproducts.


Cold fusion is most likely to involve thermal, electrical or rf effects,
Which gives claims like this, plausibility for investigation.
The microwave spectrum envelopes the set of atomic frequencies,
so it is logical to speculate along this route.
My reservation lies in the limited discrete frequency of the water molecule.
Which is a longer wavelength than carbon or iron.
This makes one of my eyebrows sit higher than the other for some reason....
I am doubtful that this would be the solution to the fusion problems.
especially since water-microwaves have been in the public hands since 1947,
and we have heard nothing either from the military side, who has been developing
weapons out of the entire spectrum of microwaves since 1945.


yet we still use dangerous fissile elements.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: blueplanet on January 18, 2018, 07:23:40 AM

Inside the microwave chamber, which is in essence a 1/4-lambda waveguide, it is possible for the higher odd-order modes to exist. This higher order modes can come from differences in phrase velocities in difference dielectric mediums.


The frequencies which actively transmute carbon into iron could be the harmonics of 2.4 GHz.


If 2.4GHz is exactly what we need, he wouldn't need to use resonators or additional electronics to achieve this transmutation process.





...
My reservation lies in the limited discrete frequency of the water molecule.
Which is a longer wavelength than carbon or iron.
This makes one of my eyebrows sit higher than the other for some reason....
I am doubtful that this would be the solution to the fusion problems.
especially since water-microwaves have been in the public hands since 1947,
and we have heard nothing either from the military side, who has been developing
weapons out of the entire spectrum of microwaves since 1945.


yet we still use dangerous fissile elements.
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: ramset on January 20, 2018, 06:00:21 PM
a wonderful discussion!!


a very nice fellow shared some info from his recent investigations into Dr. Egely's work

http://infinite-energy.com/iemagazine/issue130/EgelyIE130.pdf

IMO
experienced eyes and hands need to check these claims with the proper equipment [besides a magnet....
so as to be certain there are no other unseen hazards besides the obvious.

respectfully
Chet
Title: Re: Background radiation reciever
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 21, 2018, 03:54:06 AM
I guess were done then and can retire.


Put Bismuth in the microwave, turn it into polonium and power the world.