I hope this shows up correctly.  All three are magnetic.  I tied a string to only one and it lifted the other two.  I doubt the little one would lift the two big ones, but it is still magnetic on its own.  Why would they be magnetic and does anyone know what they are?  I call the two big ones caps because on the board the first letter was a C.

Hi protonmom,
The little one with the copper wire exposed is an inductor.

(In some of my posts I have been saying,  "I added a 220uH inductor".  It looks exactly like that.)

It must be a magnet because it was magnetized by being used?, but I didn't think ferrite kept the magnetization.
Maybe the other 2 are also, but I do not know about them.

You could put the copper one in series with a pulsing circuit and see if it enhances it.
That could happen if it is the right size. And since computers or tvs are in high frequency levels it might be.

Then you will want a meter so you can know what it is!
Ah, it never ends, does it?
But get the scope first!

 ,

jeanna

I thought they would have lost their magnetism by now, but they are all three still going strong.  Now on the large ones there is a neg and pos side.  On one I found a number of(160) only the zero looks like it has a slash line through it.  The other one has the number125 (degrees)  (I don't know how to put the degree mark in here) And then there is a V and the rest is covered with that former label of 2031 LAE.  Actually that "V" might be a "W"  since it is covered I cannot tell.  Just past the label there is what appears to be a minus sign.
There are NO screw slots for adjustment on any of the three.  The material on the little one which Jeanna says is an inductor looks to be plastic, but the material inside the large ones almost looks like ferrite.  There is a very large negative push when you put the two side by side.  Wonder how that might be useful to me.

I learned something today that some may find interesting. I've been re-running my previous tests as you know, some of which have shown lack luster results. I'm finally getting to the source of the reason.

The answer is, wire size and type of wire. I honestly thought these minuscule details to be unimportant, but apparently the opposite is true.

Originally I was using 2 conductor phone cords as extension cords. In all pic's shown by me thus far, I have used real electrical extension cords, not phone cords. Also, I used magnet wire as extension cords in my original tests. Here in lies the difference. When I go back to basics, I get much better results. I had no idea this little change could make such a difference, but I'm here to tell you it means everything. It's all induction and resonance. You will see that I do end with magnet wire, but I'm not ready to show that yet, the set up will take time.

So take it for what it's worth.

Thanks,
t3t4

T3:

Do you think it might be because the additional magnet wire is like an antenna extension?  I too have used regular extension cords of fairly heavy gauge as connector wires.  It is convenient and, the larger wire size keeps resistance low.

But, as you said, a change like that could and would effect the resonance a lot.

This is very important and I have seen this a lot on here, and other sites.  If someone does an experiment and then others "replicate" it, except instead of a 1k resistor they used a 400k, and instead of a 300 volt cap they use a 40 volt cap and instead of copper wire they used aluminum....well...you get the idea.  I just really detest when this happens and then folks say hey, I tried your experiment but it does not work.

My point is, that this is your experiment and you made what you thought was a slight change and it does not work as before.  So, I think there is an important lessen here for all of us.  One change, no matter how small we think it is at the time may alter the experiment and therefore the results.

I also hate when folks have a great device working, and then take it apart to "improve" it and then can't get it to work again. (I am not speaking of you here)

I applaud your efforts here and thank you for sharing this information.  A lot of folks would not admit to not having as good results as before.  Knowing all of the information is key to understanding how a system or circuit might be working and why.

Please keep us posted on your efforts.  We are all in this together.

Bill

@ Bill,

Do you think it might be because the additional magnet wire is like an antenna extension?

Yes, that is exactly what I'm thinking, but I can also prove it.

But, as you said, a change like that could and would effect the resonance a lot.

Yes it does, and this is why I wonder if I just got lucky the first time.

I just really detest when this happens and then folks say hey, I tried your experiment but it does not work.

I do so sincerely apologize for my mistake, and I mean that to all! But like I said before, if you screw up correctly, the whole world get's to see it.

My point is, that this is your experiment and you made what you thought was a slight change and it does not work as before.  So, I think there is an important lessen here for all of us.  One change, no matter how small we think it is at the time may alter the experiment and therefore the results.

I also hate when folks have a great device working, and then take it apart to "improve" it and then can't get it to work again. (I am not speaking of you here)

I absolutely agree, along with keeping notes and writing all this stuff down in detail. That is something I don't do, but I need to start doing exactly that. However, where I end, I have been able to duplicate many times now, so nothing is really lost, but there are some things I am learning along the way. It's only the individual components that have failed to meet expectation, but now I know why, and so do most of you.

My first demonstration worked, and that was honestly the first time I have ever used an extension cord. Again I apologize to all, but I honestly never thought that such change would occur by using a standard household extension cord. It worked as an aerial alone, and that was the first time I tried using it as such. I should have known better, but I didn't. I'm sorry... I guess it was just my time to be the idiot.

I applaud your efforts here and thank you for sharing this information.  A lot of folks would not admit to not having as good results as before.  Knowing all of the information is key to understanding how a system or circuit might be working and why.

Please keep us posted on your efforts.  We are all in this together.

I said before that I will only tell you all the truth. Although, I never thought I would receive such poor test results as I did. Point is, results are results and truth is truth. I may be a bit eccentric, but I'm always honest. I thank you all for your tolerance in every way. Where this ends may or may not be interesting to you all. Some may think there is some kind of a secret that I'm hiding, but I assure you that is not the case. I have told everyone truthfully how this system works to the best of my knowledge.

It's not magic, it's just induction and resonance. That's honestly all there is to it! Some may want to take it all apart even further, but I personally have no interest. Anyone that tried to duplicate my first demonstration should be able to see the basis of operation. All you have to do in order to get more power is go higher/deeper and tune it to induct more in either case.

The ionosphere resonates between 106Mhz and 108Mhz, but the planet resonates on it's lowest frequency at about 6 Hz. Simply marry the two in one system. I have said all this before, I think anyway. But in either case, again I thank you all for the tolerance you have shown. Do please bare with me, even when I think I know something, this simple little glitch pops up to make me rethink it all.

I'm still at the same point I began, but now I have greater understanding due to my mistake. That's a good thing if you ask me. And you all can learn with me without the public embarrassment. So, it's all good if you ask me.

Thanks again to all. Give me some time, but I can recreate my results. I did it today, or rather, I got close to it. Point is, I know why I failed the second time. And now, so do all of you.

t3t4

I have a question...

 Have any of you tried to marry the earth battery to the radiant energy receiver by using them in combination? If so, can you tell me, was it good or bad?

Thanks,
t3t4

I have a question...

 Have any of you tried to marry the earth battery to the radiant energy receiver by using them in combination? If so, can you tell me, was it good or bad?

Thanks,
t3t4

A simple test I did was bad because they are both positive for my setup.
DonL