Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Discussion board help and admin topics => Half Baked Ideas => Topic started by: Pirate88179 on November 29, 2008, 04:50:09 PM

Title: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 29, 2008, 04:50:09 PM
I started this topic so that folks can discuss this over here instead of polluting CaptainPecan's capacitor experiments topic.

I will admit from the start that I do not know enough about this subject to say for sure one way or the other if cavitation has anything to do with OU devices or not.

Please feel free to discuss this, in a civil way.  Also, please post links or references to back up your opinions one way or the other.

Thank you.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 29, 2008, 04:59:33 PM
If we can get Sparks over here, he has some interesting ideas having to do with cavitation and turbines. 

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on November 29, 2008, 05:26:48 PM
Bill The thing that peaked my interest on this was this post by THE BUZZ
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc   Seems the pistol shrimp can change the state of matter  generate 5000+degrees and produce a PLASMA all by his little self
Cavitation sounds good
I believe Thrapp and his 20 Amish scientists working for the last 20 odd years to figure out how to live without being hooked up to our satanic power grid,[That I take it is how they feel]
 Through necessity figured out how to do allot of things with batteries
Plus patent some things [the lasor thermometer and some others I cannot remember at this moment]
  the post by Sparks of there Cavitation water heater was very interesting viewed through the eyes of Cavitation[BUZZ] 
If a little bug can generate a 5000+ degree flash with NO power, why could it not be possible for men to heat water through cavitation with a little power?

 
   Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on November 29, 2008, 06:27:12 PM
Hi, Pirate!

Cavitation?
Here's a post I made in Mr. Hardy's thread, answering Fritz about possibility that his OU turbine may be driven by a cavitational OU...

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5176.msg115143#msg115143

Links?
Google/Wiki "Cavitation".
If you're intrigued enough, check out "Sonoluminiscence", or even "sonofusion".

Watch the "Chain reaction" movie (starring Keanu Reeves, Morgan Freeman, Rachel Weicz)...
It's all there, revolutionary technology /FE, love story, action, and - of course  - bad guys/MiBs, etc...

A collapsing gaseous bubbles (as a consequence of a shockwave extreme local pressure differences) can transform to a fascinating yet minuscule plasma energy release, where even atomic processes are happening, but it usually happens in a very small (nanoscale) region....

The energy needed for a controllable lab experiment is milions times larger, so this effect is still one of a most inefficient ones...

I think it will be a hard job if you are trying to make an OU discovery based on this principle.

And you can bet this effect is not recognized anywhere in electro-magnetic transactions... (IMHO)

Cheers!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on November 29, 2008, 06:28:12 PM
    Hi Bill and others!  Gotta go but this post serves to find the thread.  Lowering the pressure or cavitating space is cool though.  I think it condenses plasma and this is so electrically disruptive we can expect all sorts of effects.  Sorry gotta go!  The heat driven Turbine is not all mine and probably belongs in the heatpump categorie.
I'll be back.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 30, 2008, 05:32:59 AM
@ Chet:

Yes I saw the shrimp video.  What I can't figure out is how a creature evolves to end up with something like this.  It was an interesting video.  Do I think what Mr. Thrapp claimed he did is impossible? No.  I just don't believe he has accomplished it as he has claimed.  I hope he proves me wrong one day.  We spend a lot of money in this country heating water.  In fact, the only thing a nuclear power plant uses the plutonium for is to heat water.  If this did indeed work, one could have huge spheres producing steam to run turbines.

@Spinner:

Yes, I remember your post in Mr. Hardy's topic.  It sounds similar to what Sparks is saying I believe.

@ Sparks:

What you describe sounds a whole lot like the process of refrigeration, compressing a gas and then expanding it through an orifice.  I know it is not the same as liquids can not be compressed.  I remember in my jet skiing days the jet, basically a ducted fan for the water using a series of impellers, would not work well in the rapids of a river I was running.  Seems it would cavitate when it compressed the air bubbles dissolved into the water from the action of the rapids. It lost a lot of thrust due to the bubbles being compressed, you could feel it.  Again, I know this is not your example but that is basically my only hands on experience with cavitation.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 30, 2008, 05:34:31 AM
@ Spinner:

How old is the "Chain Reaction" movie?  Old enough to where I might watch it online for free?  I will look for it.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: b0rg13 on November 30, 2008, 06:35:36 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oNZcLyCR_Q&NR=1
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 30, 2008, 07:02:56 AM
@ borg:

That was cool!!!  After watching that I found this next to it.  A propeller producing cavitation.  Also it looks like it produces light, but maybe it was the lighting when making the video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KExSxt-lo5c&NR=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KExSxt-lo5c&NR=1)

Bill

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Haliburton on November 30, 2008, 08:39:45 AM
check this video out  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONQlTMUYCW4  it shows some more detail about the shrimp.

This process could be replicated with a high pressure nozzle under water in short burst or longer burst depending on  the water volume of the nozzle!

a simple way to test this is with a compressed water tank with a high speed valve.

maybe a simple high speed valve could be created with a disk with spaced holes and a motor to turn the disk valve.

This also reminds me of the effects of a whip! but under water.

maybe something like a whip can be incorporated but underwater to cause cavitation at the snapping points ???
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: jwk on November 30, 2008, 12:33:23 PM
You should find this usefull:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5385298.PN.&OS=PN/5385298&RS=PN/5385298 (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5385298.PN.&OS=PN/5385298&RS=PN/5385298)


I read about this in a book years ago and this thread reminded me of it. It's not OU but it is apparently very efficient.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ScaryTruth on November 30, 2008, 02:29:52 PM
Cavitation is, indeed, a matter worthy of exploration in the realm of genuine overunity. Not the myriad crap and meaningless, utter bullshit put forth by so many nitwits, especially on video - not worthy of a sixth grader's attention.

However, I've witnessed astounding examples of promising applications, the use of very select materials with very specific geometries, and results that are compelling - to any sensible observer.

It seems that the geometry and construction materials employed in certain structures to produce greatly amplified electromagnetic/radiation and heating of liquids is an avenue of great promise.

The energy in/out ratio is key. Sidestepping this fundamental aspect is to engage in a game of absolute banality. Around in circles, it goes absolutely nowhere. And I become bored - as should everyone that watches.

Proof is just that. No semanitcs or obfuscation. Nothing is important except the brass tacks. Show it. Demonstrate it with no curtains, obscure math or hidden wires.

But make no mistake. Any discovery that is reliably overunity will be met with the greatest of government/corporate power to destroy/discredit/vanish the technology.

And the person, if ever, with genuine evidence, lives to tell of it?

Does a single person on the planet think that the energy companies are playing? That they don't stand to loose the largest market share and profits in recorded history - on planet earth - overnight?

That these power hierarchies on the world stage would risk giving them up?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Paul-R on November 30, 2008, 03:36:01 PM
Cavitation is thought to be in the
1. Hydro-vacuo-machine of John Worrell Keely
2. Peter Daysh Davey water heater.

...and of course, the motor designed by Dale Pond based
on J.W.K. using standard plumbers supplies, which I cannot
find anywhere.
Paul.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on November 30, 2008, 05:52:21 PM
@Scary Truth  Thanks for your contribution
Question: do you feel it is possible to vibrate water to make heat the way we do every day with a microwave ,but with a much smaller input through resonance /cavitation and a design [shape] specific vessel that would amplify

@Paul R  This Dale Pond motor, with common plumbing parts, can you post a link PLEASE
   
   Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on November 30, 2008, 07:22:47 PM
Cavitation, or vapor phase implosion, may be generated by ultrasound and hydraulic flow. The Richard Clem Engine did derive its motive force from the later. Reference the Houston Chronicle: Cavitation drove the Clem Engine. See Posts: Keelynet.com, Joseph Hasslburger about the Clem Engine.
To cut to the chase: Omitted from the working fluid description were water and salt (NaCl) in all of the articles I have seen. Mr. Clem used recycled vegetable oil from a Cafe/Bar he frequented and condensation in his engines reservoir provided the water. Unique to the truncated helical conical drag pump were channels open to the engine case. In operation a standing Von Karmen Vortex was formed from the top of the channels to their base. Heat from oil shear and cavitation of the salt water near the center of the channel caused first expansion and then implosion driving the motor and creating excess heat. 1. Oil shear heating would be effected  by oil weight. 2. Imploding water micelles with negative shells, owing to salt content, would not coalesce but remain small in the emulsion. The cavitation heat would transfer to the oil along with light and neutron radiation. Radiation shielding would be required for safe operation. Unfortunately Mr. Clem did not become aware of possible nuclear radiation until he had his engine torque tested by the Bendix Corp.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on November 30, 2008, 08:23:37 PM
Crazy Fox   So after reading your post it seems cavitation should not be taken lightly
Do you think the little shrimp in the ocean is also radiating?
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 30, 2008, 09:07:03 PM
G'day all,

For some information on sonoluminescence have a look at http://keelytech.com/sonoluminescence.html

Hope you find it interesting.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 30, 2008, 10:26:02 PM
@ Hans:

Excellent article.  Thanks for posting it.  I wonder if anyone ever checked the mass of the bulb prior to running and after a long time of light emission, checked the mass of the bulb again.  If something is getting burned up it should be lighter, if something is occurring like fusion, the overall mass should still be the same no?  I am not sure.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on November 30, 2008, 10:42:45 PM
@ Haliburton:

Wow, that was a very detailed study on those shrimp.  Amazing little things.  I think your idea of a mechanical disk with holes to generate high speed pulses is very possible.  We once made a polished quartz "Chopper" wheel designed to break up a laser beam when it spun in its path for generating higher frequencies of light.  We made this for Bell Labs and, of course, they didn't tell us how or why they were using it.  If it works with light, why not water as you suggested?

One thing the video did not mention about the shrimp.  I find it difficult to believe that the piston on the claw and the pocket match with so much precision that this alone creates the implosion bubble.  After reading what Hans posted about how they have to introduce a small air bubble into the sealed bulb and manipulate it to the center before turning on the sound I got to thinking.  Nature always finds a way.  What if the shrimps "farts"  (for lack of a better term) a small amount of gas/air into the pocket to "charge" the claw just prior to slamming it closed?  I know the video did not mention this but this bubble could be almost microscopic and near undetectable but still be compressed to below the vapor pressure of the surrounding water causing the implosion.  Just a thought.  This would allow for a lot less precision fitting of the two parts of the claw and make more sense to me. I am just guessing, obviously, I am not a shrimp expert, although, they are good with a little cocktail sauce.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: hansvonlieven on November 30, 2008, 10:57:07 PM
G'day Bill and all,

As far as I understand it cavitation is not an excess pressure (like a fart as you suggest) but quite the opposite. It is a small area of high vacuum that releases energy as the "bubble" collapses. in centrifugal pumps it is caused by water flowing so fast that a vacuum is created at the input side and these bits of vacuum are incorporated in the stream. That is why high pressure centrifugal pumps are staged to ensure that there is enough water pressure at the input to prevent the formation of a vacuum.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: elektromann on November 30, 2008, 10:57:39 PM
G'day all,

For some information on sonoluminescence have a look at http://keelytech.com/sonoluminescence.html

Hope you find it interesting.

Hans von Lieven

The article , that you cant remember the source...
comes from here:

http://portal.brint.com/cgi-bin/cgsearch/cgsearch.cgi?where=web&query=Sonoluminescence

EM
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 01, 2008, 02:02:13 AM
    Ultrasonic tanks are designed to produce sonic waves that get out there into the field.  You want the cavitation to happen at the interface of the metals to be cleaned.  The metals absorb the sonic waves just like an atom will absorb a photon or emwave.  The metal then emits it's own wave which will result in cavitation at the metal to solution interface.  This is totally a result of the mechanical resonation of the metal matched to the frequency of the pressure waves.  The cavitation is so disruptive that it will etch the metal if a standing wave is created.  The frequency of the transponders are swept to avoid standing waves in the solution so as not to destroy the metal.  This is optimized cavitation differs from the cavitation that is the product of decreased pressure of a solution saturated with a dissolved gas as you would see on the output of a prop or in a hydraulic solution.  The solution using hydrosonic cleaning is degassed before operation of the tank for efficient transfer of the pressure waves from the transponder to the metal interface.  
     The cavitation of the liquid from the pressure wave hetrodyne results in a vacuum bubble not an expanding gas bubble.  There is no surface tension in a vacuum bubble and chemical reactions on the interface of the bubble will proceed as they would in outer space.  Water will boil rapidly at this reduced pressure and concentrate heat energy from the solution in the region of the vacuum bubble.  Upon collapse of the bubble this heat gain is being concentrated in an ever condensing field and the temperature increases at an astounding rate.  Plasma formation water fracturing and neuclear disintegration are all possible results of temperature rises like this.  
    The energy gains of cavitation boilers may be just the result of lowering the vapor pressure of the fluid so that water boils at a very low temperature in the machine allowing for heat transfer from the ambient field to flow into the system.
This is very simple physics and is used in reduced pressure distillation processes.
Either way mainipulation of pressure to lower vaporization temperatures is the way to go.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 01, 2008, 02:24:52 AM
Sparks    WOW that is allot of info in a few paragraphs Thanks
          Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: christo4_99 on December 01, 2008, 04:46:52 AM
http://www.articlesextra.com/supercavitation-torpedoes.htm and http://www.articlesextra.com/cavitation-fusion-nuclear.htm
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 01, 2008, 05:42:15 AM
@christo4_99
Thanks for the links, that Articles Extra is an awsome website.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: nueview on December 01, 2008, 06:11:17 PM
Hi all
the topic has generated a lot of interest for me over the years so please take what i am to say with a grain of salt there is allot to this topic and allot of proof for it .
the two things i find most interesting about this are that all matter seems to heat at a 642 ohm/circular mill area and the infra red band is at 642 nanometers i think this points toward heat being generated at an extremely small or atomic level or perhaps the basic building level of matter.
if any of you have tried to melt metal you know that trying to melt a very conductive metal requires more work than trying to heat a less conductive one it is because of the energy transfer.
not all materials react to magnetic stimulation for heat in the same manner either different angles are required for each to strip away the negative charge carriers.
friction is a form of this charge motion on a better platform as it seems to add compression to the equation which tends to allow the energy transfer to be held or left behind in adjasent materials. welding is a fine example of this in a more relavent form.
in the case of compression and decompression cooling occurs over a larger area than heating due to the material transfer rates of the materials at hand.
suns only exist above a certain size the earth remains molten at a certian level perhaps for the same reason it should be noted that heat tends to aleave magnetic bonds and cold enhances them as does magnetic field orientation i have found it interesting that i magnet can suppress the heating of substances by its presents to the reaction.

just some things to think about hope it gives some insite.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 02, 2008, 03:30:28 AM
    Ultrasonic tanks are designed to produce sonic waves that get out there into the field.  You want the cavitation to happen at the interface of the metals to be cleaned.  The metals absorb the sonic waves just like an atom will absorb a photon or emwave.  The metal then emits it's own wave which will result in cavitation at the metal to solution interface.  This is totally a result of the mechanical resonation of the metal matched to the frequency of the pressure waves.  The cavitation is so disruptive that it will etch the metal if a standing wave is created.  The frequency of the transponders are swept to avoid standing waves in the solution so as not to destroy the metal.  This is optimized cavitation differs from the cavitation that is the product of decreased pressure of a solution saturated with a dissolved gas as you would see on the output of a prop or in a hydraulic solution.  The solution using hydrosonic cleaning is degassed before operation of the tank for efficient transfer of the pressure waves from the transponder to the metal interface. 
     The cavitation of the liquid from the pressure wave hetrodyne results in a vacuum bubble not an expanding gas bubble.  There is no surface tension in a vacuum bubble and chemical reactions on the interface of the bubble will proceed as they would in outer space.  Water will boil rapidly at this reduced pressure and concentrate heat energy from the solution in the region of the vacuum bubble.  Upon collapse of the bubble this heat gain is being concentrated in an ever condensing field and the temperature increases at an astounding rate.  Plasma formation water fracturing and neuclear disintegration are all possible results of temperature rises like this. 
    The energy gains of cavitation boilers may be just the result of lowering the vapor pressure of the fluid so that water boils at a very low temperature in the machine allowing for heat transfer from the ambient field to flow into the system.
This is very simple physics and is used in reduced pressure distillation processes.
Either way mainipulation of pressure to lower vaporization temperatures is the way to go.

So i guess you are talking exactly about this: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.0
... I would be very happy to see some comments inhere... I belive that this is the most efficient way to obtain OU, what do you guys think?

...and don't tell me that the inventor is the only person on this freakin planet that did this...

I would also like to share a good video lecture that i came across - its about radionics and vibrational theory (John Worrell Keely's work) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMEpCpzahFY&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=0

Hope it opens some minds  ;)

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: nueview on December 02, 2008, 11:25:22 AM
Hi all
magnetic induction heating is done in many ways since it is not absolute as to there are or are not electrons the discussion would become quite foggy as to the explanation but suffice it to say that a negative charge in oscillation with a positive does not cause heat unless it cuts deep enough to remove what shell of negative is pressent.
electric elements are considered to be 100% efficient and induction and microwaves as well though i would not consider microwaves in the same catagory because they are direct without convection and conduction losses. so lets say that you rotate a magnetic field about a piece of iron the best that you can do is to get so many btu/hp with a standard electric motor but if you generate that horsepower with a more efficient motor then you begin to see overunity but you can't patent it. because you will break the laws of physics.
essentually a plasma arc is this type of negative heating at a much more basic level and this does not seem to be that well understood as of yet i am still working on this myself but believe it has to do with the ratio around the 642ohm/cir mil in a current to tention rate of energy.

thank you all
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 02, 2008, 01:04:00 PM
Yeah that's great.
And had we been talking about induction heaters, it would have been on topic too.
But the thread is about cavitation, not induction.

Just to throw my 2 cents in:
- I don't see what is any more remarkable about the evolution of a shrimp which uses the
sonically induced cavitation of its naturally surrounding medium to produce a compact
shockwave that in some cases is strong enough to actually produce a minuscule plasma
flash, than there is about a bird which has evolved to use aerodynamics and currents in
its naturally surounding medium to give its body lift and speed. But then again, there's
many people who seem to have trouble understanding how evolution can shape the
various remarkably complicated mechanisms that we like to call organisms.

- Am I the only one who smells something fishy when people start talking about
Thrapp and his "Amish scientists"? Come on now. Amish scientists? That's almost
like vegetarian butchers or Jews eating bacon. ;)

- Cavitationnally induced fusion is an interesting concept, and if heavy water were
used instead of normal water the plasma inside the compression bubbles might
even be used to fuse deuterium (and/or tritium) into helium. Experiments along that
road have been done (are still being done?).
Problem is, how would we get the energy out? A possible way would be to "simply"
have the miniature fusion reaction dump its energy into the surrounding water as heat
(or mostly heat), then use the hot water to run a turbine or generator.
And that is an idea not much unlike the Chain Reaction movie shows.

So what would we need to do this?
Well, a sonoluminescence setup, so that's what, a quartz tube with pure water in it,
and a speaker arrangement with a freq gen so the right frequency can be pumped
into the tube, and then of course input and output flow valves with a connection to
the generator or heat exchanger.
Then we need a generator that can run off the hot water.
And we need a supply of water to pump around, and preferably heavy water.
Where do we get heavy water? :)

Anyway, get all that set up water and air tight (you don't want to accidentally
inhale heavy water or tritium vapour) and get the sonoluminescence going,
and with some luck you can actually fuse enough of the stuff to produce
excess heat => energy.  ;)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 02, 2008, 02:43:44 PM
  The reason we get the light and plazma is because the vacuum condition created by the pressure waves creates an atmosphere where water can boil into the cavity of the bubble.  This heat of vaporization is supplied by the bulk fluid.  Then this water vapor is compressed very quickly on collapse of the bubble.  Now imagine that instead of using sonic waves to lower the pressure on a fluid we use a vacuum pump to lower the pressure on a chamber where surface area is optimized.  On introduction of water into this evacuated chamber it immediately boils.  This is an endothermic reaction which will cool the chamber walls.  The chamber walls act as a heat exchanger and is immersed in an ocean seabed.  The pressure will rise and now the steam is allowed to go through a turbine to a chamber which was pumped down to the same conditions as the first reactor.  This chamber however is insulated and the walls of this chamber are cooled by a heat load.
As the vapor gives up heat to the load it condenses back into water which maintains the pressure differential across the turbine.  The water is recycled back to the ocean heat exchanger and around and around and the turbine goes faster and faster driven by the heat in the ocean.  One pound of water 144btu plus superheat.  One gallon of water about a 1000btu's  1000 gallons one million btus  one million gallons 1 billion btus.  One million gallons is nothing.  It's a good sized water park.  How many gallons in the gulf of mexico sitting there at  seventy degrees ripe for some temperature gain?
   Why is this possible?  Because we cavitated the system to begin with.  So water would boil at -10c instead of 100c. Fusion is exotic but low temperature vaporization is tried and true.  Why drill for geothermal when it's 5 feet down below the surface.  Because oil companies are good at drilling?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: alan on December 02, 2008, 02:54:05 PM
Fusion due to cavitation would mean that the energy of the implosion is greater than the strong force which's keeping the atoms apart?

This was also posted in cap pecans thread:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StringhamRcavitationb.pdf
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 02, 2008, 03:29:12 PM
@alan

    The concentration of the heat energy is stronger than the electrostatic repulsion of the protons in the plasma field.  Holy grail of particle physists.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Paul-R on December 02, 2008, 03:47:45 PM
@Scary Truth  Thanks for your contribution
Question: do you feel it is possible to vibrate water to make heat the way we do every day with a microwave ,but with a much smaller input through resonance /cavitation and a design [shape] specific vessel that would amplify

@Paul R  This Dale Pond motor, with common plumbing parts, can you post a link PLEASE
   
   Chet
This is the book:

"Cavitation"
by F. Ronald Young,
MacMillan & Co

Also interesting:
"The Keely Motor"
Delta spectrum Research
PO Box 316
Valentine
Nebraska 69201
USA.

I cannot find any links other than to bookshops.

Paul.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 02, 2008, 06:26:03 PM
@ Koen1:

I read somewhere (who the heck knows where) that heavy water exists in all water.  In a gallon of "tap" water, a certain percentage of that water is heavy water.  I don't recall the numbers, and yes it is a low percentage but the experiment you describe would have "some" heavy water in it with just regular water.  I don't know if that would be enough to make any difference or not. **Edit**  OK, I found a site that says 1 in 20 million water molecules, wow, very low percentage.**Edit**

@ Sparks:

Your posts are so detailed with a lot of info.  I am going to have to go back and read the last few again.  Thanks for posting them.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 02, 2008, 08:03:00 PM
Cavitation in water/oil emulsions in a vortex flow
The question of "Heat Energy" over "Electrostatic Repulsion" by protons. Right On! This is what the Clem model changes. The
 Lorentz - Lorenz equation plugged into the Clem model illustrates just how cavitation in a vortex flow raises the potential high enough to cause fusion in lite salt water. The hydroxyl shell, after initial fusion, keeps Tritium as a dissolved gas that aids in future fusion reactions. More over, in sonofusion, the frequency of ultrasound =~400 cycles is not present in the Clem model and the resonant frequency of water governs the angular velocity (kinetics) of implosion.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Linearfashion on December 02, 2008, 11:19:24 PM
One thing that I think has been overlooked is that little shrimp is how many feet deep? and this would have an increased pressure, therefore the cavitation would collapse much faster and possibly create a larger bang. So the insight here is to pressurize a container then cause cavitation. just a thought
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: alan on December 02, 2008, 11:53:21 PM
@alan

    The concentration of the heat energy is stronger than the electrostatic repulsion of the protons in the plasma field.  Holy grail of particle physists.

Exactly, not strong force :P
But you're not talking about cavitation right now, correct?
Or are you aiming at cavitation using plasma?

Clem model, Google shows Hao-Clem model, same thing?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: hansvonlieven on December 03, 2008, 12:09:40 AM
G'day all,

Just a few facts about water that seem to be relevant here.

WATER (H2O) is the third most common molecule in the Universe (after H2 and CO), the most abundant substance on earth and the only naturally occurring inorganic liquid, a billion cubic kilometers of which reside in our oceans and 50 tons of which pass through our bodies in our lifetimes. It has been very well studied with a number of model structures having been proposed and refined. Notwithstanding this, extensively hydrogen-bonded liquid water is unique with a number of anomalous properties. It has commonly been stated that no single model is able to explain all of its properties.

And we all thought water was the simplest of all things. Evidently not. Let's have a closer look at it.

The first complication with water is that there are three different forms of hydrogen that we know of, each capable of combining with oxygen to produce a clear odourless liquid that on first inspection looks and feels like water.

The first, protium (H), is the one we commonly associate with hydrogen. It has at its core only one proton.

The second, deuterium (D), has one proton and one neutron at its core. In combination with oxygen it becomes D2H, which is known as heavy water. Deuterium occurs in water at about 0.015%.

The third, tritium (T), has one proton and two neutrons at its core. It is radioactive and has a half life of 12.32 years. It combines with oxygen to form tritiated water T2O. The low-energy beta radiation from tritium cannot penetrate human skin, so tritium is only dangerous if inhaled or ingested.

The three forms of hydrogen combine with water to form what we know as water and five isotopologues. (The isotopologue of a chemical species has at least one atom with a different number of neutrons.) This gives as the only possible combinations , all of which occur in what we call water:

H-O-H , D-O-H , T-O-H , D-O-D , T-O-D , T-O-T


With Koen's idea about using heavy water D2O instead of ordinary water why not use tritiated water  T2O instead, since it is radioactive and unstable to start with. Trouble is getting hold of the stuff.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 03, 2008, 12:12:56 AM
Cavitation in a water/oil emulsion flow:
There is a quatum phase shift due to vortex motion at the implosion "Thermolic Center" of the micelles. The elongated micelles thermal center is nearer the center of rotation than the channel wall. With proton repulsion ~0.7MeV and thermal Plasma above 3 X 109K (Kelvin) the 0.6 X10-13J Kinetic energy ...hydrogen fusion occurs.
Little is known about the phase shift in relation to hydrogen fusion except the 1 nano second implosion time is distorted. This may or may not effect the orientation of the dipole moment of water molecules at different locations in the vapor phase water vapor micelles that are elongated. I suspect that this may well determine which water molecules go to fusion rather than reforming.
It may well be the determining factor in lite water fusion in the Clem model vortex.
Viktor Schauberger had been working on this at the end of WWII. He did not use complicated equations to express his ideas but later asked his son Walter to remedy that so the scientific community could better understand his ideas. I am a retired Boeing AWACS technician and developmental software lab operator. I am not very proficient with quantum calculations.
This will conclude my comments on the Clem Engine model.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 03, 2008, 12:11:21 PM
So after consideration of this Cavitation concept, I've concluded that
this is the secret to making the "fuel less heater" work.
As one container spins inside the other cavitation bubbles are formed between the two containers.
And these bubbles release large amounts of heat as they implode.

So I see a better system would have small holes drilled in the sides of the cylinders, that only go part way through.
And then as you spin the inside container, these small holes in the walls would set up a strong cavitation.
So anyone that tried to get the "fuel less heater" to work but couldn't knows what to do now.
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 03, 2008, 02:05:52 PM
From user Maddan in the Witt's thread   
    OK now this thing operates on "sonofusion" or "bubblefusion" (also cavitation, microcavitation, ...call it whatever you want) principle. Here are some links you do better see before posting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMEpCpzahFY&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_fusion
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Sonofusion
http://sonofusionjets.com/

...and here is the proof that this is real - it does heat water (but in this video no OU is present, 'cause of the way it is done, but you can see what is hapening - Tesla did this with electricity):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oNZcLyCR_Q&feature=PlayList&p=C9FA62002A6557CA&index=100

...now here is the proof that also the OU can be obtained:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh_-DUKQ4Uw&feature=related

...but what is the difference between the last one and the "resonant sphere" approach? It is the far greater power input versus power output ratio and this happens 'cause the microcavitations caused by the resonance are more coherent (equally dispersed) in water.
So this is it, we just have to put it together the right way!

Let me say that most of the OU systems do operate on the same principle - 'causing an explosion causes an implosion which is of much greater power - and If we can catch the implosion power, then we get OU. On this operates the cold fusion (water fusion), hydrogen fusion (the MAHG by jlnlabs), Bedini motor, Newman motor, explosion implosion wing, ... the difference is just the cavitation in different materials.


Here are some other related videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR0YBAhY2PQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONQlTMUYCW4&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=30

Your comments are wellcome!

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 03, 2008, 03:07:25 PM
1. Yes the cavitation is the key
2. Yes the cavitation is what makes the "fuel less heater" work - it was done already - i saw some of them on youtube and if you would like to see the one that is even more efficient of the "drilled holes" approach please see here (i also added some useful links there):
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.0
3. Some people (most of them) will just not believe this thing no matter what - probably 'cause one selfish idiot some time ago made the world go in the way he wanted to, and today we still believe this thing and serve the group of people that followed him...
4. Why complicate things when there is no need for?
5. Who am i to say all this? - it doesen't matter... i could be a piece of shit, i could be god... what matters is the truth!

...cavitation is present in our everyday life, we just don't see it (don't pay attention) ... so how do some of you open a jar? - (the hit and pop effect)

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 03, 2008, 03:09:27 PM
Oh well ... just saw the post above mine ;D
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 03, 2008, 03:14:54 PM
   Particle accelerator scientists trying to achieve hot fusion with more out than in found a very interesting anomaly about a self confining plasma.  This was that this type of plasma has a negative specific heat.  This to me means that as the plasma gets heated it appears to the field as dropping in temperature.  What is happening is that heat contained within the plasma is showing itself as being cold to the rest of the field.  Combine this with the electrostatic field flux densisty at the ion core things aren't normal around this type of matter.  I've got a feeling that Tesla discovered this negative specific heat a long time ago as he created a plazma in his spark gaps.  I also believe that he placed his plasma fields so that the ion field protonic charges which would radiate beyond the accelerated electrons circulating about the plasma  were utilized to capture radiant energy or what I consider space pressure.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 03, 2008, 07:24:58 PM
Exactly! If you saw how John Bedini uses his motor to capture the "radiant energy" you would see the similarity - just using electromagnetism... and he does it preety sucessfully.

Two months ago I came across theese videos: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread400583/pg1

... I did watch them, but now the videos seems to be removed... i wonder why... anyway that was 4 hours of very good video about "Energy from the vacuum" from Tom Bearden and John Bedini... and there was another one that i found somewhere else about John Bedini - a guy filmed the complete operation of his motor and charging batteries with "radiant energy" ... here are some trailers of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PBHePZ_6U8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6EnDBjCjBw

I think all this videos are still out there, just search them in the right place  ;)

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 03, 2008, 07:25:10 PM
Cavitation: (from the "Hunt for Red October")... .."they can here us!"
One last parting shot. All cavitation is not equal. Electrostatic potentials vary. Fluid density will vary. Flow or oscillation will vary. Fluid chemical composition will vary. Temperature will vary. And last and most important, application climate will vary.
Few of us would be talking here if it were not for the fact we are frustrated in an attempt to come up with a device that offers overunity or something very close to it. On the flip side of the coin there are those that are very sure they can stop competition with their markets .....be it overunity devices or the Russians.
Interesting thing about the new project 677 "LADA" class Russian subs. Do they employ a derivative of the Clem Engine in tandem with super conducting motor/generators? The point is made here that until forced by extreme circumstances inventors and workable devices remain in the files at the patent office and nowhere else. To stagnate as a technical society is to be doomed by those that apply the "dominant" technology......And what of green machines...... or is it just hype?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: TechStuf on December 03, 2008, 07:33:32 PM

Quote
The point is made here that until forced by extreme circumstances inventors and workable devices remain in the files at the patent office and nowhere else. To stagnate as a technical society is to be doomed by those that apply the "dominant" technology......And what of green machines...... or is it just hype?



Great point.  And sadly, TPTB think it's themselves that are applying the dominant technology.


For the word "dominant" is a such a highly relative term.


TS
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 04, 2008, 12:53:09 PM
Wow, great way to kill a thread there ...

So, we have the option of Sonoluminescence which uses
sound waves to produce cavitative bubble fusion in a water-
filled quartz tube.
And we have the option of using deuterium ans tritium infused water.
This could produce fusion in the bubble generated plasma.
And this would yield lots of heat and some Helium.
The Helium should bubble up as it is an inert gas.
So we'd just need a good heat exchanger and a turbine running
off that to turn the heat into useable energy.

Ok, well, I can get tritium, I should be able to get deuterium
or at least a form of deuterium-infused water ("heavy" water).
I can get a quartz tube, speakers, a freq gen, a heat exchanger,
and perhaps a usefull turbine too.

Of course that will not be Over Unity, it will just be hydrogen fusion.
But hey, it will be able to output quite a bit more energy in the form
of electricity than we put in. And it'll cost us heavy water.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 04, 2008, 01:50:18 PM
@Koen  This Dale Pond video [posted by Maddan]  is VERY on topic
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMEpCpzahFY&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=0
     Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 04, 2008, 03:21:32 PM
@Koen  This Dale Pond video [posted by Maddan]  is VERY on topic
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMEpCpzahFY&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=0
     Chet

This Dale Pond video is just another delusion.
Science researched thoroughly and understands the effect of cavitation. In it's many forms.
The guy is mentioning/quoting John W. Keely as a discoverer of a cavitational/vibrational/.. FE?
Lol, JWK is a certified charlatan, one of the first and most known fraudsters, ....  ;)

And the Witts thread?
Fascinating, boiling many liters of water with a 9V battery.... Yeah, wright..

The guy should be filthy rich and famous by now... A hero discoverer, solving all the energy problems on Earth....
I love YouTube science!.

IMHO, the guy is using an old trick (seen on YT many times), a low power ultrasonic humidifier (you know, artificial fog with colored lights and other effects ...).
So the "steam" coming out of the "boiling water" is still at the ambient temperature...  :o.

The heat protective gloves, or the IR thermometer are a very nice requisites....

A Clem engine? Neutron radiation?  ;D...
Well,...
Ah, never mind....
 
Jeeez... Where are the limits?
Fascinating.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 04, 2008, 03:50:04 PM
@spinner: good post. :)

@ramset: well, indeed if you wish to believe that cavitation is
something different than the fairly clear science it is, then
perhaps it is on topic.
Metal spheres with simple wire coils stuck in the middle
are not usually considered cavitation devices.
Yes, cavitation can be achieved by pumping the right
frequency of sound into water, which makes sense
because sound is pressure waves in the medium so to obtain
a pressure effect like cavitation from that is possible.
Pumping EM frequencies into the water shouldn't really do anything
related to cavitation at all, since no physical pressure waves are
created by EM waves, and no physical pressure effect like
cavitation should be possible.

I still have not heard anyone explain that huge difference.
How do you want to get a pressure effect like cavitation
by using EM waves which are not pressure waves in
the physical medium that you want to compress to achieve
cavitation?

And then there seems to be a spinoff that is also named "cavitation"
by its proponents, but they seem to be talking about "cavitating"
 the "aether" by using EM waves. This is clearly not exactly
the meaning of "cavitation" in the normal physical medium sense,
and should not be confused with cavitation of water for example.
It is also highly theoretical and according to some totally impossible.
Perhaps this field of study would best be named "aether cavitation"
or "EM compression"?
In any case, although that is an interesting pth of thought, I do think
we should make a clear distinction between the two.

Anyone agree (or disagree)? :)

Regards,
Koen
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Paul-R on December 04, 2008, 03:51:27 PM
This Dale Pond video is just another delusion.
Lol, JWK is a certified charlatan, one of the first and most known fraudsters ....
Do you have any evidence for these remarks?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 04, 2008, 04:25:13 PM
Thanks. Koen1!  ;)


@Paul-R

Quote
Do you have any evidence for these remarks?

"This Dale Pond video is just another delusion."

The guy is talking a lot about how science was and still is wrong, ... he is talking about oscillation, cavitation, and even water hammer effect as being OU... etc....
As it is normal with such people - all talk, but no proof....


"Lol, JWK is a certified charlatan, one of the first and most known fraudsters ...."

What, you didn't knew that?  ??? The Hydro-Vaccuo stuff, and all the fancy talk, the drained investors and his pneumatics hobby?  ;D
I suggest you search the web....
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 04, 2008, 06:25:24 PM
@ spinner

Ohh my ***************************************
...i really do not like to argue and it is not in my interest to do so, but just look at what are you saying... guys like you will just never gonna get it and i'm not gonna say a word more.

@Koen1

"Metal spheres with simple wire coils stuck in the middle
are not usually considered cavitation devices."

-Maybe, but there are no wire coils in that device - at least not that i'm aware of - do you see any? So show it to me please.

"Yes, cavitation can be achieved by pumping the right
frequency of sound into water, which makes sense
because sound is pressure waves in the medium so to obtain
a pressure effect like cavitation from that is possible."

-Correct - this should be the way that this device works.

"Pumping EM frequencies into the water shouldn't really do anything
related to cavitation at all, since no physical pressure waves are
created by EM waves, and no physical pressure effect like
cavitation should be possible."

-I'm not sure about that, but anyway it seems to have nothing to do with that device.

Koen1 you are very welcome to post into my thread, so go ahead and post statements about what you think should work and what not, but please leave the hate aside from that. The purpose of the "Water heater from WITS" thread is to collect data about the device, so anyone that thinks to know something about how it works, or how it does not work, please post into that thread, so we don't go offtopic here THX.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.0

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 04, 2008, 06:44:46 PM
Well actually the remark about wire coils was aimed
at the Thrapp "OU cavitation heater" video...

Watching that (several years old) video I see a rod type
thing stuck into the metal sphere, and wires running to it.
The wires are connected to a multimeter, so that would imply
simple electric input.
If you look at the shots where he pulls the thing out to pour
the hot water out of the sphere, and you can get a good look
at about 8 minutes into the video, you can see a gizmo on that
rod, and that gizmo looks a huge lot like a coil.

It certainly does not look like a speaker for producing sound.

Now it could be that he is generating sound waves but then
how does he do it without any oscillating membrane?

And if it is a speaker, then can you tell me what type of weird
rod-mounted coil-lookalike speaker contraption it is?

;)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 04, 2008, 06:54:28 PM
Cavitation: Specific heat of a plasma

Space pressure in the Eather? In  terms of pressure, that is relative to time? This is the very problem I have difficulty expressing with quatum calculations although you have brought it up in your statement. The distortion of time in fusion plasma in a vortex is the problem I have been addressing. Where is the heat going? By conservation of energy as light in another dimension? I am begining to beleave there is a link created in a vortex or in this case of the linear accelerator, an eddy current. That is why, for instance, if building the Clem Engine, magnetic materials should be avoided in its manufacture. I would suggest using Aluminum-Nickel-Bronze with a Sol Gel coating in this case and runner with a hollow stainless steel (non magnetic) drive shaft. Plasma behave strangely in a magnetic field.....like Ball Lightning. If I were constructing a craft dependant upon plasma fields, I would avoid the use of magnetic material in its structure. Predictability of plasma constants are greatly improved in magnetic field free environment. Ironic about the Cern experiment. Just try to predict particles from a collision that occures in the earth's magnetic field.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 04, 2008, 09:02:17 PM
Well actually the remark about wire coils was aimed
at the Thrapp "OU cavitation heater" video...

Watching that (several years old) video I see a rod type
thing stuck into the metal sphere, and wires running to it.
The wires are connected to a multimeter, so that would imply
simple electric input.
If you look at the shots where he pulls the thing out to pour
the hot water out of the sphere, and you can get a good look
at about 8 minutes into the video, you can see a gizmo on that
rod, and that gizmo looks a huge lot like a coil.

It certainly does not look like a speaker for producing sound.

Now it could be that he is generating sound waves but then
how does he do it without any oscillating membrane?

And if it is a speaker, then can you tell me what type of weird
rod-mounted coil-lookalike speaker contraption it is?

;)

I think we are talking about exactly the same device here, i just named the thread by the video on youtube 'cause i didn't know how to name it, so i think that "Thrapp OU cavitation heater" is the same thing as "Water heater from WITS", and thanks to you now i finally found where is it discussed, (but there is al ot of mess into  ??? )...

So can you please comfirm that this two threads (in the links below) are about the same thing? THX

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3403.0
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.0

Dann

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 04, 2008, 09:43:31 PM
@Crazy Fox

    With a plasma which finds itself with the ions magnetically confined by the electron current about the ion field we have a funny critter.   If this construct is capable of converting heat to electron velocity about itself and a subsequent densification of the matter we have about this contracting matter a cavitation within the spacetime frame itself.  A vacuum within a vacuum.  Weird science around a collapsing heated cold field.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: nueview on December 04, 2008, 09:47:34 PM
hi all
thank you for giving me a hole new approach for this concept to far out for discussion here as some don't seem to be able to get out of there box but to the rest multiple ways may yield multiple results so thanks for the input.

have fun
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 04, 2008, 10:09:37 PM
I think we are talking about exactly the same device here, i just named the thread by the video on youtube 'cause i didn't know how to name it, so i think that "Thrapp OU cavitation heater" is the same thing as "Water heater from WITS", and thanks to you now i finally found where is it discussed, (but there is al ot of mess into  ??? )...

So can you please comfirm that this two threads (in the links below) are about the same thing? THX

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3403.0
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.0

Dann



@Koen1
Sorry i messed up one of the links above... but can you just confirm that this is the spheric device we are talking about - in this video here?   THX http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxnEQssJ4FQ&feature=PlayList&p=C9FA62002A6557CA&index=0

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Paul-R on December 04, 2008, 11:18:56 PM
Thanks. Koen1!  ;)


@Paul-R

"This Dale Pond video is just another delusion."

The guy is talking a lot about how science was and still is wrong, ... he is talking about oscillation, cavitation, and even water hammer effect as being OU... etc....
As it is normal with such people - all talk, but no proof....


"Lol, JWK is a certified charlatan, one of the first and most known fraudsters ...."

What, you didn't knew that?  ??? The Hydro-Vaccuo stuff, and all the fancy talk, the drained investors and his pneumatics hobby?  ;D
I suggest you search the web....
I asked if you had any evidence. Do you have any?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 05, 2008, 12:34:45 PM
@Koen1
Sorry i messed up one of the links above... but can you just confirm that this is the spheric device we are talking about - in this video here?   THX http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxnEQssJ4FQ&feature=PlayList&p=C9FA62002A6557CA&index=0

Dann

Hey no problem dude, people make mistakes sometimes. Just a little url error, it happens. ;)

Yes, that it the same thing. The guy with the beard is Thrapp, if I am not mistaken.
We discussed Thrapp and his OU device claim, and the documentation from Thrapp's organisation/foundation
some time ago, something like a year or two ago... We being some of us here on the forum, and
I seem to recall Stefan Hartmann (forum owner and admin) tried to contact Thrapp to get more info.
In the end all we got was text basically repeating that he claims to have an OU heater and that
those willing to work "for the good of humanity" and willing to pay something like $100 to have him
come and do his presentation would be given more details on the device. If you really wanted a device,
you need to pay even more. And you're not getting any guarantees.
Or at least, that's what I recall from back then.
In the end we were unable to get any clear details on the construction, design, nor functioning of the device.
Thrapp clearly was not willing to share his OU breakthrough with anyone unless they pay him
up front without any guarantees that you're actually going to get anything for your money.

And that is fairly typical scammer behaviour.

Which is even more surprising because they claim to be in it for the benefit of mankind and
out of christian love for the fellow man and all that... So why then not just spread the word,
why then would they focus so much on getting your money?

Anyway, it's the very same video that we saw back then, and it still looks like
he's pulling some coil-like contraption out of the metal sphere.
And that makes me question whether it really is a form of sonically induced
cavitation, as I still don't see how you make sound with a coil.
Besides that, it seems to me that the most logical spot for cavitation to occur
in a spherical container, would be in the center of the sphere, where all
pressure waves can collide into a focussed point. It seems to me that
placing a rod with a contraption on it in the center of the sphere would
very much interfere with that process because it occupies that cavitation
spot.
So even if I'm totally off and the contraption on the rod is a funky weird
form of sonic inducer (speaker), then it still would seem to be in the spot
where you don't want it to be if you want to achieve concentration of the
pressure waves in the center. And really, the only good reason for a spherical
container would seem to be that nice contentration and reflection of the waves
to the center point.

I shall try to find you that original thread if I find some time later today.

@Paul-R: check out http://www.keelytech.com by our fellow forum member
Hans von Lieven for some good Keely info.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 05, 2008, 02:00:39 PM
@Koen  Quote from Hans at Keely net  "I have come up with some startling revelations that seem to indicate that Keely's technology is real."
 How does this make @spinner's post a good post .Unless you also feel Keely a joke and a fraud?
 I think there is not enough info to declare Thrapp a fraud and a trickster [miss guided religious zealot maybe?]  Switzerland comes to mind
And I suspect that would make old man Peter Davies[and his bells A fraud also ]
 I am not so sure we Know enough about water yet to ignore these devices, or fit them in a standard box
   Chet
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 05, 2008, 02:33:22 PM
Ehm... Have you actually checked out Hans's website on Keely?
If you did, you would have seen that Hans makes a very good
case.
Basically, no, I do not think Keely was a complete fraud.
I believe Keely did some very good work in the field of acoustics,
and that he basically managed to make a sonic "laser" like
Hans von Lieven describes.
At the time, such work on harmonic waves and coherent
"polarised" oscillations had not been as extensively studied
yet as it has been nowadays, and he did probably manage to
produce some seemingly remarkable results.
That said, his sound wave based machines were very sensitive
to disruptive ambient sounds and probably only worked
continually when care was taken to avoid such ambient interference.
Which Keely himself most likely knew very well as he had himself
discovered how difficult it was to isolate the desired frequencies
used in his experiments.
As Hans says, it seems very likely that Keely knew damn well that
his devices would "grind" to a halt when connected to and used
as mechanical engines, because the slightest resonant oscillation
could knock the sound off key and stop the machine from functioning.
This is similar to the problems that arise when you try to use a
badly isolated electric motor in an environment where lots of stray
and strong magnetic fields and electric fields fluctuate about: the functioning
of the motor will be obstructed and it will not run properly anymore.
Keely most likely knew this but after having spent most of his life studying the
ideas and after having built a name for himself he couldn't really tell people
that now could he... And he was correct that his ingenious methods and
devices for utilising sound waves were a field that was hardly known before
he started working on it. In fact, a lot of his work is similar to the later work
on resonant waves, but he used sound instead of the electromagnetic
waves that were later studied so extensively.
So yes, he was a bright guy and yes his work is remarkable and yes he
did pioneer some of the sonic resonance field.
But in my opinion no, he did not invent an OU device that could actually
run a car or power a household continually. He may have invented a device
(his "rotary engine") that was able to run at apparent OU in a properly isolated
room for certain periods of time. Untill the harmonics were "broken" by
sound interference from the environment.

So no, I don't think Keely was a joke nor a complete fraud, but I do believe
that most OU/FE info about Keely is overenthousiastic and that he was not
the free energy guru they tend to make him out to be.

I am not sure what you mean with your remarks
"Switzerland comes to mind"
What's with Switzerland? You mean Methernitha and their Testatica?
If so, what the beep does that have to do with Thrapp and his water boiler?
"And I suspect that would make old man Peter Davies[and his bells A fraud also ]"
No clue what you mean there.

I am pretty sure we know enough about water to study these devices.
If those guys can build them, they can tell us how to build them,
and then we could see if our replications are indeed OU.

If people claim they have an OU design and claim they have proof that
it really is OU, and they claim they want to spread the design to get
free energy to all people for the benefit of mankind,
then it is, in my opinion, highly suspicious when they keep asking for
money and never start to give the info away freely, and still keep
advertising their device for a decade or so... ;)

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 05, 2008, 02:51:55 PM
Koen  O.K  Thanks for your responce
My bad .I should have posted links on the Peter Davies water heater [looks like Witts turned inside out]
I will post a link tonight after work
   Chet
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 05, 2008, 04:45:55 PM
@Koen1
THX alot for all the info!
Now i don't think that neither of this guys (Keely, Peter Davies, Thrapp) is a scam. They all knew exactly what were doing and the "dale pond" video does really explain it all.

"So why then not just spread the word,
why then would they focus so much on getting your money?"

-'cause the world today id fu***d up for good and you can't even shit without money

"Anyway, it's the very same video that we saw back then, and it still looks like
he's pulling some coil-like contraption out of the metal sphere."

-i don't think is a coil in there (maybe i'm wrong), i don't think there is an electric device in it at all - well maybe there is a crystal at the end of the coil - not sure yet...

"And that makes me question whether it really is a form of sonically induced
cavitation, as I still don't see how you make sound with a coil."

-speakers makes sound with a coil... but again, i don't see a coil there

"Besides that, it seems to me that the most logical spot for cavitation to occur
in a spherical container, would be in the center of the sphere, where all
pressure waves can collide into a focussed point. It seems to me that
placing a rod with a contraption on it in the center of the sphere would
very much interfere with that process because it occupies that cavitation
spot."

-look at the video again and pay attention at what he says - he claims that the water heats up perfectly evenly (i think almost evenly), and i think he is telling the true. So instead of cavitation occuring in the center, it occurs all over inside the sphere evenly - well maybe the cavitation is not occuring yet at all, 'cause the power is too low, but is sufficent to make an effect similar to that inside microwave oven, just more powerfull.

...i think that the world today is enough advanced and informated that we should be able to figure out how this works - so just share the info and knowledge... the creativity is your limit  ;)

...again... anyone that wants to discuss the technical stuff and ideas about that device is welcome in the thread that i created for this purpose and look at the info provided here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.new#new

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 05, 2008, 05:27:03 PM
Koen  O.K  Thanks for your responce

Very welcome.
Quote
My bad .
Nah dude, nobody's bad.
You're just trying like the rest of us to find a real OU device.
Can't blame you for getting excited about things. :)
Quote
I should have posted links on the Peter Davies water heater [looks like Witts turned inside out]
I will post a link tonight after work

Ok so I looked him up, and now I remember! :) It's the old guy with his hemispherical
device that he sticks in a glss of water to make it boil almost instantly...
Yeah, I looked up his device quite some time ago as well, seems to be along the same
lines as the Thrapp thing, but only half a sphere and quite a bit smaller too.
I didn't stick with it at the time because there was a huge lot of overenthousiastic
people and only very few who really wanted to get to the bottom of it...
...but scanning through the latest pages of the Davy Heater thread on this forum,
I did find a possible explanation which I recall already came up back then too,
but was generally dismissed by most fans in favour of some weird pseudo-keely
resonance theory.

Anyway, this post http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4083.msg135587#msg135587
gets close to the most plausible resonance related explanation I have heard.
Allow me to quote that post:
Quote
Davey found an effect called magnetostriction : http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solids/magstrict.html

That joined with cavitation explain his device very well. The external shell is resonant cavity and probably contains very small holes. The internal bell is made from highly magnetostriction material. Both are probably somehow insulated to limit current but still allow magnetostriction.The effect is and contraction/expansion process of inner bell walls at 100 or 120 hz frequency which in correct shape should produce circulation of water between bells at around 3600 rpm, very similar to commerial cavitation heaters driven by electric motor.

So this implies that indeed a physical oscillation may be induced in the medium between the "bells" (hemipheres),
by utilising the magnetostrictive "reaction" of the "bells" metal to the applied magnetic field fluctuations,
in combination with the proper dimensions of the "bells" (and their resonant coupling with the magnetic field
oscillations). The "interference" pattern of these two "bells", each "resonating" at their own frequency,
might indeed produce magnetistrictive "expansion" and "contraction" of the "bells", which could indeed
produce pressure waves in the medium (the water) of specific frequency. And that is sound.
And if properly tuned, this could indeed generate cavitation in the center of the (hemi)sphere.

Wowsers. :)

Yeah, that might even work! :D

Ok, now that is interesting LOL because here we finally have the coil-like sonic inducer
which I asked you to explain. ;D
Here's the weird looking speaker I was giving you crap about. Sorry about that.
It seems you may be correct that there is indeed sonocavitation going on...  :o  ;D

At least, in the Davy version I can imagine how that might indeed be done.
Takes a lot of finetuning incl getting the physical dimensions of the components
just right and tuned to the input signal and both should be tuned to the proper
frequency to cause actual cavitation... Seems quite complicated to work out
from scratch...
Let's see if we can get a full description on how to build one, including the exact
dimensions and input signal etc, then that might help.

Anyway, looking at it, it might be that Thrapp simply built a variation of it,
one that uses a spherical vessel instead of the hemispherical version.
I suppose the cavitation does not need to occur in the center of the thing,
and it is possible that the spherical shape is intended to obscure the actual
innards of the device. Imagine that he's actually got a hemispherical
Davy heater inside the sphere somewhere, and he could just as well have
stuck it in a bucket but that wouldn't look nearly as impressive. ;)

Ok, so, hehe now we do have a possible method for generating sonocavitation
without using an actual speaker or direct sonic input, but rather by using
electromagnetics to produce sonic oscillations in the water.

That said, I am still not convinced it is really OU.
(LOL yeah I know, what an annoying bastard, still not convinced. ;) ;D)

It is a known fact that properly attuned heating devices can heat water
with almost 100% efficiency, and that is a huge lot better than
any "standard" water boiler that uses an "inductive" heating element.
And I will eagerly concede that the Davy heater would appear to be
a very good example of such a highly efficient heater, which can boil
water at almost 100% efficiency.
So there's no question in my mind that the Davy boiler is a lot better than
the average electric kettle, and better than most inductive heating elements.
For that alone the Davy heater and similar efficient heaters should become
the next generation of energy efficient boilers, and their inventors should
get the credit for that. Absolutely.

Whether they can produce OU under certain circumstances, that I am not
so sure about. If they can produce sonoluminescence they might be used
as sonofusion devices, and in that case they might offer a good method
for miniature fusion experiments (if one can obtain water with a lot of
deuterium and tritium in it). And that is very interesting stuff. Still not
technically OU, but at least a lot of energy output. :)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 05, 2008, 06:47:06 PM
    Say the cavitation occurs near one surface.  The fluid boils into the cavity near surface a and extracts heat of vaporization from the surrounding fluid and surface a and the bulk fluid flow is such that the cavitation bubble collapses nearer to the outlet of the fluid tank.  Or carried off all together.  The laws of thermodynamics now kick in and the heat spreads out but results in a heating of the field closer to point b.  Now we got a heat pump going transporting heat from the region of surface a to the bulk fluid.   As long as surface a is cooler than the bulk fluid things heat up due to the heat of vaporization inside the bubble transporting it from the ambient field to the bulk fluid temperature?  Negative entrophy of sorts.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 05, 2008, 07:21:21 PM
@Sparks

Plasma balls are common in the mountains of Washington State near where I live. Around Mt. Adams they are almost dayley events. Locals call them UFO related. Perhaps, a ball plasma may be tapped for energy? Then again, plasma in an engine that I just discribed might reveal itself from light leaking into our dimension from an adjasent one? Vacuum/Vacuum event in the time continuum is a subject best left to fiction writers for the present. Don't ever let the "Pistol Shrimp" become a smoking gun! Cavitation implosion deserves closer and, most of all, applied research. The Pistol Shrimp is doing what comes natural and humans might take a hint from it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 07, 2008, 06:16:31 AM
A friend of mine bought a room humidifier that used an Ultrasonic Transducer to make water vapour.
When this thing was running it would put out as much water vapour as an electric kettle at full boil.
And it use less then 15 watts to do it. Of course the vapour was room temperature.
Now if we had 2 of these Transducers placed in parallel to one another and
maybe running at a slightly different frequency it might set up a cavitation.
Now were to get the Transducers?

Does this look like what the "Thrapp OU cavitation heater" was using in the center.
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=200257627403
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 07, 2008, 01:46:07 PM
Well it is a rod with a gizmo on the end and there are visible wires...
... so for all I know it could indeed be one of those! :)

But check for yourself, just boot up the youtube video of
Thrapp and his spherical boiler and check the blurry shot at
about 8 minutes into the vid, where he pours the steaming
water out of the sphere and then re-places the rod+gizmo.

Which makes it even more odd really, since now he could just be
creating room temperature vapour and pretending to be producing steam...?

But let's just give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's using
two of such transducers to produce a cavitation effect. ? :)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 07, 2008, 02:47:25 PM
@Abba Rue 
 Boy that transducer sure looks similar [always wondered that that probe?? was? Thrapp pulls out of the heater {not saying thats what it is but that shape always puzzled me.]
 
Your observation encourages me greatly.
Would be pretty funny if it wasn't proprietary and he bought it off the shelf at EBay
@Koen do you think its possible to produce cavitation with transducers?
One of my customers is a large boat yard ,I know they update the larger vessels all the time .
I Know they have a bunch of old transducers[the owner throws nothing out] I will talk to him on Tuesday
and see what he has
If I do find some matched sets I would gladly ship them to someone here no charge for experiments, or if any one could suggest a way this theory could be tested ,guide me through and I will do the testing
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 07, 2008, 05:39:29 PM
  I can't remember where but it was a radio interview with a person that said the frequency they use in the oscillators inside of compact flurescent tubes operates at 20 khz and that when used to vibrate water causes cavitation of the water that results in voltage only electrolysis of water. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 07, 2008, 10:51:09 PM
@Koen1
"Which makes it even more odd really, since now he could just be
creating room temperature vapour and pretending to be producing steam...?"

-the steam produced is real hot steam - look at the video, the steam is moving upward quickly, so it is hot steam not cold.

"But let's just give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's using
two of such transducers to produce a cavitation effect"

-one transducer maybe, but two of them, not sure about this - how do you connect a transducer with only one wire? Look at the pictures that i provided (or at the video), there is only one wire on the top of the rod!
here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.new#new

and there in that thread is also this video that i provided about cavitation with transducers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oNZcLyCR_Q&feature=PlayList&p=C9FA62002A6557CA&index=100
-and a copy paste of the comments on the video:

"HielscherUltrasonics (1 year ago) Show Hide
20kHz, ordinary city water at 20degC, ambient pressure, the pipe is approx. 140mm in diameter

SGiHunter (1 year ago) Show Hide
Is this process heating the water? Is there any hydrogen oxygen being produced/extracted at all?

HielscherUltrasonics (1 year ago) Show Hide
The basic law of thermodynamics applies: All power is finally converted into heat. Nothing is lost. In this case it is 1000 W of which 85% are mechanical output at the sonotrode. Given a volume of approx. 1 gallon, this will heat the water at approx. 0.2K/sec.

kalamar73 (1 year ago) Show Hide
Nice job.

apeshkov (11 months ago) Show Hide
what is the peak-to-peak amplitude of the sonotrode?

HielscherUltrasonics (11 months ago) Show Hide
for this setup approx. 25 micron (peak-peak). The amplitude can be changed by means of different booster horns and electronically at the front panel. Therefore, amplitudes from 3 to over 170µm are possible using the UIP1000."

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 07, 2008, 11:02:30 PM
Ohh sorry guys, i might be wrong about the one wire on the rod thing - the video is so bad that noone can really tell.
So what we have here is just a transducer inside and one outside to put the thing in resonance. I thought it is much more complicated. Is there any cheaper transducer that the one seen on ebay?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 07, 2008, 11:14:17 PM
 ;D
Quote
HielscherUltrasonics (1 year ago) Show Hide
The basic law of thermodynamics applies: All power is finally converted into heat. Nothing is lost. In this case it is 1000 W of which 85% are mechanical output at the sonotrode. Given a volume of approx. 1 gallon, this will heat the water at approx. 0.2K/sec.
Ooops, I forgot you don't want to talk with a skeptic like me..  Maybe I just like to tease rookies? Madddan, Hello!?

Have you considered what a common, resistive 1 kW heating element can do when immersed in water?  ;D   I bet you don't.....

It is beyond my understanding what some of you people see in "cavitation".... It was well understood many decades before FE enthusiast jump over it....

This is actually one of the MOST inefficient energy transforming processes.... 

But, please, feel free to discover something new...



Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 07, 2008, 11:53:48 PM
Dan
The sound card went on my computer today. During the Thrapp interview I believe he mumbles something about this tech [whatever force was at work heating the water] working with electricity also
@Spinner I would absolutely love to shake your hand some day
   Chet
Dan I see your post below thanks for the info [yes resonance lets break the glass]
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 07, 2008, 11:54:11 PM
I posted this as a response to ramset, only to provide the proof that cavitation can be acheived in water using transducers.
I know exactly what a 1 kW heating element can do to water, actually i have a 200l homemade water heater placed right here next to me in this room right now - i can send you a picture of it if you want  ;) You think i'm a rookie? Well think whatever you want and also go to learn what can be acheived with resonance.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: allcanadian on December 07, 2008, 11:59:08 PM
@spinner
Quote
Have you considered what a common, resistive 1 kW heating element can do when immersed in water?     I bet you don't.....
It is beyond my understanding what some of you people see in "cavitation".... It was well understood many decades before FE enthusiast jump over it....
LOL, thats funny ;D
Can you tell me the last time you have heard of a resistive heating element forming resonant standing waves in the media it is immersed in and returning over 90% of it's energy to the next cycle?.
As well if cavitation is so well understood why is there a huge amount of interest in it by universities and corporations in this day and age? Why is there a great deal of literature concerning cavitation coming from the scientific establishment concerning an effect you state is "well understood"?.The fact of the matter is that cavitation is not well understood, LOL, science still cannot explain why a bumblebee can fly as physics still states it is impossible. I believe the problem here is that you cannot get past the thermodynamics involved, the heat energy may be conserved in cavitation but you have not considered the shock wave and the fact it may form "oscillations" or standing waves adding to the source.

RULE #1-----You harness the "ACT" of power as well as the "REACTION" to it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 12:01:34 AM
Anyone in this forum built working(!) cavity heater? Not speakings, tellings, not selling pages, not videos!
What results?
I do not chaff - just real interest.
regards,
lhabe


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 08, 2008, 12:16:50 AM
Khabe    Hopefully soon  .Personaly im still learning .Is there anything you can teach /show us about this cavitation ,or resonance heater theory
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 08, 2008, 12:22:58 AM
@ Maddan: (Quote below)

"the steam produced is real hot steam - look at the video, the steam is moving upward quickly, so it is hot steam not cold."

I hate to tell you this but steam is invisible.  You can not see steam.  When a teapot boils, what you see is water vapor that has cooled down from the steam stage, so you can see it.  I learned this a long time ago watching Mr. wizard.  He used a torch and reheated the water vapor from a teapot, and, once heated, it became invisible again.  This does not prove/disprove Thrapp's device, I just thought I would share this info with you for future reference.


Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 08, 2008, 12:32:10 AM
There is no question in my mind that the water he poured from the unit was very hot.
Ultrasonic vapour wouldn't keep steaming after the power is cut.
My friends Ultrasonic Humidifier would stop producing vapour as soon as the power was cut.
As for the prob having only one wire connected to it, this isn't a question either.
The steal tank would supply the other wire, just like items are run in a car, the chassis serves as the negative ground.
The main question here is the frequency.
He also claims the battery isn't the energy source, just a means of getting the energy flow started.
Probably the spherical shape has a lot to do with the functioning of it.
He also does state that it has a resonator on the side. 
So it looks like Ultrasonics is at work here.
I wonder if someone could record the sound from his video and feed it into an oscilloscope.
Maybe we can find out at what frequency the unit is working from the background sound.
It may be possible that small pieces of the frequency were picked up by the camera's mike.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 12:33:03 AM
Khabe    Hopefully soon  .Personaly im still learning .Is there anything you can teach /show us about this cavitation ,or resonance heater theory
Chet

Unfortunately Im more like student in this cavity area,
If it works for you - I´ll try.
Good luck,
khabe
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 08, 2008, 12:43:36 AM
@ AbbaRue:

Excellent idea on recording the sound and attempting to see what the freq. is.  I don't know if it will work or not, and I don't have a scope, but I hope someone gives this a try.  Good thinking.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 01:00:19 AM
@spinnerLOL, thats funny ;D
Can you tell me the last time you have heard of a resistive heating element forming resonant standing waves in the media it is immersed in and returning over 90% of it's energy to the next cycle?.
As well if cavitation is so well understood why is there a huge amount of interest in it by universities and corporations in this day and age? Why is there a great deal of literature concerning cavitation coming from the scientific establishment concerning an effect you state is "well understood"?.The fact of the matter is that cavitation is not well understood, LOL, science still cannot explain why a bumblebee can fly as physics still states it is impossible. I believe the problem here is that you cannot get past the thermodynamics involved, the heat energy may be conserved in cavitation but you have not considered the shock wave and the fact it may form "oscillations" or standing waves adding to the source.

RULE #1-----You harness the "ACT" of power as well as the "REACTION" to it.
And here we go again...
What's up with the resonance??? Why is it so special?
How about standing waves? Are they causing OU, or what? Is this a Keely project?
What do you know about cavitation that it's not already wide known? Any new info? Why are we not using all those cavitational heaters??

Or,  the fixed idea about science saying that bumble-bee cannot fly? Where the hell you're getting this info? Ah, from a reliable OU sources? Yes, I've been reading this for a long time. Surprisingly, I cannot find a source. It must be the MiBs...
Do you have a verifiable proof that thermodynamics failed in any of those "FE" devices?

BTW, a very common resistive electrical heating element can convert electricity to heat with a +98% efficiency. Can you do better?
How about FE alternatives? Friction heaters?  etc, etc...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 08, 2008, 01:07:24 AM
Let me say that probably the frequency is not picked up by the camera, 'cause it is higher that the camera can detect, but if you tell me a fast way to get the video on my PC, i 'll try to look into it and post a picture of the spectral analyzer.

Anyway i think the device is all about circulation and amplifycation of a shockwave inside the sphere the timing is the key here. The timing is defined by the position of the detector outside on the sphere.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 08, 2008, 01:15:15 AM
@Pirate88179

Thx for your input about steam.

@spinner

What is your point here anyway? All i can say to you is observe the nature and learn from it, then do experiments... this is the key to new knowledge.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 01:16:09 AM
I posted this as a response to ramset, only to provide the proof that cavitation can be acheived in water using transducers.
I know exactly what a 1 kW heating element can do to water, actually i have a 200l homemade water heater placed right here next to me in this room right now - i can send you a picture of it if you want  ;) You think i'm a rookie? Well think whatever you want and also go to learn what can be acheived with resonance.

Dann

FYI, there are several cavitation mechanisms... Which one are you referring to? Or, which one is OU?

How is your water heater powered?
Maybe it's just one of those old water heaters where electricity is wasted only to produce heat...
Why don't you change it with any of the FE heating devices widely known on the market? How about your Witts ultrasonic cavitation device?
What can be achieved with resonance? A Unity? This is known for many many years.....
I thought you said OverUnity...
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 01:17:28 AM

BTW, a very common resistive electrical heating element can convert electricity to heat with a +98% efficiency. Can you do better?
How about FE alternatives? Friction heaters?  etc, etc...



I dont know much about cavity principle but ... are you sure that common resistive electrical heating element can convert electricity to heat with a +98% efficiency ???
Then what about direct current heaters wheres 3 phase  electrodes are direct in water  and whats bit more efficient mode of water heating - what is this "bit" then?
between +98%....99,9% ???  I have this system in my house, up to 12kW and I pay less than before when was common 9kW resistive element heaters.
I think that resistive electrical heating elements are not so high efficient as you described.
cheers,
khabe

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 01:34:07 AM
I dont know much about cavity principle but ... are you sure that common resistive electrical heating element can convert electricity to heat with a +98% efficiency ???
Then what about direct current heaters wheres 3 phase  electrodes are direct in water  and whats bit more efficient mode of water heating - what is this "bit" then?
between +98%....99,9% ???  I have this system in my house, up to 12kW and I pay less than before when was common 9kW resistive element heaters.
I think that resistive electrical heating elements are not so high efficient as you described.
cheers,
khabe

Hi, Khabe!
What kind of "electrodes" directly in water do you have? Are they not "resistive"?

A common heating elements are immersed in water, too. Due to an almost pure Ohmic impedance, they convert most of the electricity to heat. A bit is wasted on electromotive forces, inductive/capacitive losses, etc... A small part, that is..
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 08, 2008, 01:41:57 AM
FYI, there are several cavitation mechanisms... Which one are you referring to? Or, which one is OU?

How is your water heater powered?
Maybe it's just one of those old water heaters where electricity is wasted only to produce heat...
Why don't you change it with any of the FE heating devices widely known on the market? How about your Witts ultrasonic cavitation device?
What can be achieved with resonance? A Unity? This is known for many many years.....
I thought you said OverUnity...

Yes its an old water heater constructed by my dad 30 years ago and is also OU during the summer 'cause it runs on solar power and during the winter runs even on heated water from a furnace. so it is a combided device - electricity, solar, furnace. Happy now?
The Witts device is not "mine", i just came here in hope to find more info about it. And now that i clearly see how is the device supposed to work, i can say that this is preety advanced stuff.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: allcanadian on December 08, 2008, 01:54:53 AM
@spinner
Quote
BTW, a very common resistive electrical heating element can convert electricity to heat with a +98% efficiency. Can you do better?
Yes I can----- I can use a heat pump system and cut the electrical energy used in half to supply the same quantity of heat. Hmmmm, if as you state an electrical heating element is +98% efficient then how can a heat pump system do so much better?. This is because the heat pump system "moved" heat it did not supposedly generate it. Now ask your self one question---- where is the equivalency? Obviously an electrical heating element is "not" 98% efficient in electrical terms when half the input could deliver the same quantity of heat using a heat pump system----the proof is the electrical bills of everyone who has a heat pump system. What you fail to understand is the difference between transfering energy from one place to another and dissipating it completely in the media. A cavitation (implosion) produces a compression as an effect from the implosion, a compression produces heat, a compression must then expand relative to the media that surrounds it and in the right context pressure waves can be produced in such a way that the next implosion is reinforced by a reflection of the previous pressure wave resulting from the previous implosion. The effects are additive and are not dissipated completely lowering the power requirement from the input because the input does not drive the process directly it only maintains it. You are saying static conditions and dynamic ones must be equal when it should be obvious they simply cannot be.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 01:56:04 AM
Yes its an old water heater constructed by my dad 30 years ago and is also OU during the summer 'cause it runs on solar power and during the winter runs even on heated water from a furnace. so it is a combided device - electricity, solar, furnace. Happy now?
The Witts device is not "mine", i just came here in hope to find more info about it. And now that i clearly see how is the device supposed to work, i can say that this is preety advanced stuff.

Dann

Lol, you're "cheating" with the solar power OU... Ok.

Believe me, I'd like to see that "Witts device" working in reality exactly as it's seen on the video... But you already know what I think of it....
If you see it as a pretty advanced stuff, please, explain it to me.
Like I said, I see only a very good trick with an ultrasonic water humidifier...





Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 02:12:39 AM
@spinnerYes I can----- I can use a heat pump system and cut the electrical energy used in half to supply the same quantity of heat. Hmmmm, if as you state an electrical heating element is +98% efficient then how can a heat pump system do so much better?. This is because the heat pump system "moved" heat it did not supposedly generate it. Now ask your self one question---- where is the equivalency? Obviously an electrical heating element is "not" 98% efficient in electrical terms when half the input could deliver the same quantity of heat using a heat pump system----the proof is the electrical bills of everyone who has a heat pump system. What you fail to understand is the difference between transfering energy from one place to another and dissipating it completely in the media. A cavitation (implosion) produces a compression as an effect from the implosion, a compression produces heat, a compression must then expand relative to the media that surrounds it and in the right context pressure waves can be produced in such a way that the next implosion is reinforced by a reflection of the previous pressure wave resulting from the previous implosion. The effects are additive and are not dissipated completely lowering the power requirement from the input because the input does not drive the process it only maintains it. You are saying static conditions and dynamic ones must be equal when it should be obvious they simply cannot be.

Don't mess the heat pumps with a common electricity heaters. You have another source of energy with the first, but just a common electricity input with the later. Check out open/close thermodynamic system definitions.

What you fail to understand is that an "implosion" in cavitation is a just a consequence of a previous pressure compressions/"explosions", which are usually driven by a known energy source. And you have to pour great amounts of energy to produce an observable cavitation effect.

I'd like to see an reproducible experiment which shows an easy measurable water heating by "cavitation". Do you want to try?

Oh, don't mix cavitation with a sonoluminiscence or even sono fusion....
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 08, 2008, 02:21:42 AM
Lol, you're "cheating" with the solar power OU... Ok.

Believe me, I'd like to see that "Witts device" working in reality exactly as it's seen on the video... But you already know what I think of it....
If you see it as a pretty advanced stuff, please, explain it to me.
Like I said, I see only a very good trick with an ultrasonic water humidifier...


So solar power means cheating to you? Anyway i didn't even say that i have an ou device, but as you can see i have one, but does not use cavitation.
I cannot explain how the device works yet, i have to see some more info to be able to explain the effects of its operation. Maybe some of the other guys here would be able to explain the effects.

See whatever you want, it's your eyes and your brain cheating you  ;D

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 02:32:49 AM
...
See whatever you want, it's your eyes and your brain cheating you  ;D
Dann
Yes, possibly..

Or, maybe your eyes and your brain is cheating you?  ;D

We'll see.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 08, 2008, 03:01:12 AM
Dan  I don't think the way this works is common knowledge, but I do think we can see how this could work[Thanks A.C .Sparks Koen all] more so today than a few weeks ago
Abba rue's idea on trying to pick up the frequency is cool
We are learning a lot of ways to beat up water lately [The HHO guys] with frequency
Dan I really think this is going to happen and I think Spinner will love it
I have a son in law that is a scientist in  sound devices for mapping down into the earth under water
I Will  talk to him tommorrow to see if he can make any suggestions
Chet


 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 08, 2008, 05:54:21 AM
I use Firefox and have the "better youtube" add on.  This allows me to download any youtube video.  There are other ways to do this with other software. (free)  You can google and see what pops up.  I would really love to see an analysis of the sound freq. if possible.  This was a great suggestion, even if we can't make it work, good to try anyway.

Everyone has their opinions about WITTS and I think I have stated mine enough already.  But, and there is always a but, if this guy's device has even a 1% chance of being real, I feel we should look into it.  Even if only to stop others from going down this road if it turns out to be a dead end.  I can't think of a cheap way of replicating this device....can anyone?  I have no idea where to try to get a stainless steel sphere, or how to make one.  I am not convinced this is ultrasonics at work here.  Those transducers usually take a lot of input power and need more power for the control unit.  I have experience with ultrasonic impact grinders and ultrasonic rotary milling machines.  A lot of power is need to drive either one.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 08:10:40 AM
Hi, Khabe!
What kind of "electrodes" directly in water do you have? Are they not "resistive"?

A common heating elements are immersed in water, too. Due to an almost pure Ohmic impedance, they convert most of the electricity to heat. A bit is wasted on electromotive forces, inductive/capacitive losses, etc... A small part, that is..

Its pure electrode heating system I have. Self-made, of course. 3 titanium electrodes 12mm diameter direct in to water inside of boiler ( I have 2 m3 heat accumulator made from common steel)... electrodes are environed with outer screen (spec. steel)  ... extreme simple. Just right dimensions, in proportion. There is heat resistant plastic disc and  sleeves for insulating ...
and correct choice of materials. Star connected 3ph power line !!! Electrodes -> L1, L2, L3, Screen -> "0" and Flange -> Ground
Its safe, dont worry for my lfe  ;) or dont hope too much  8)
Also called as Ion_heat_system :o
Myself I do not like this kind of name :'(
cheers,
khabe
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 09:17:33 AM
Hereby one more picture. You see electrode heater in the foreground. My system is similar but accumulator is much bigger. Somet peoples do not use accumulator at all ...
I do because electricity bit cheaper at nights ans weekends,
khabe
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 08, 2008, 09:31:42 AM
@khabe

Very nice construction! Yes, Ion heaters - the current passes through water heating it directly...   
But...

!!! This kind of device is POTENTIALLY LETHAL !!!. Even if it's operation is guarded by a good Earthing and ground leakage disconnect circuits.
At this voltages, a few milliamps will probably kill you instantly!
If your heater neutral line gets  broken, the current seeks a new path...

Another serious health concern is the ionization of water... (check out the taste of the water coming out of your heater...)...
Then, electrochemical erosion of the electrodes (titanium, stainless steel)...  The water gets polluted with small but harmful heavy metals... :o

I would kindly recommend you to think about those issues... And you have a family...

Oh, I almost forgot... Why do you think this works better (more efficient) than common heating devices?
The power factor is worse, and it has additional electrochemical (nonreversible) losses....
Did you made any  el. power and heating capacity measurements?

Cheers!

Edit to add:
You're probably using a closed primary water circuit for a central heating and heat exchanger for a secondary  "potable" water... This way some of the problems mentioned above can be avoided... Still - safety/efficiency factors remain.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: froarty on December 08, 2008, 11:09:44 AM
maybe casimir plates formed inadvertently -pitting - the ultrasound would explain increased penetration but the real trick below I just posted on an HHO forum:
 skeletal catalyst converts hh to hydrino!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guys - everyone should start experimenting with skeletal catalysts - they can turn hydrogen into hydrinos which have hundreds of time more power in their covalent bonds. On October 25 th Rowan University confirmed Rayney nickel supplied by BLP is producing far over unity for the amount of hydrogen supplied. The theory is at byzipp.com/energy. I recommend simple inline filter where carttridge is replaced with skeletal catalyst powder and anything you can do to keep the hydrogen monatomic so it mixes inside casimir cavities that occur naturally in skeletal catalysts. Another possibly is using the powder as an enclosed paste for the hydrogen electrode to capture the hydrogen atoms before they have time to form bonds and incorporate into your existing rigs seemlessly.

Please report back to the forum your results so everyone can help us dial in
on the recipe- BLP wants to sell premixed skeletal catalysts but the theory
dictates that HHO kits can perform the same function!

there are numerous skeletal catalysts most of which have cavities and pores that provide increased surface area, The casimir effect requires metal pores where walls are less than 2nm apart -the mon-atomic hydrogen atoms must form covalent bonds while they are in the casimir cavity to produce hydrinos so getting a significant proportion of hydrinos will take some finesse. I would not be at all surprised if some of the claims previously labeled as fradulent regarding HHO are actually just fluke formation of hydrinos due to microscopic metal cavities associated with pitting. this represents a new chapter in chemistry/physics and the price to play is peanuts!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: khabe on December 08, 2008, 01:32:36 PM
@khabe

Very nice construction! Yes, Ion heaters - the current passes through water heating it directly...   
But...

!!! This kind of device is POTENTIALLY LETHAL !!!. Even if it's operation is guarded by a good Earthing and ground leakage disconnect circuits.
At this voltages, a few milliamps will probably kill you instantly!
If your heater neutral line gets  broken, the current seeks a new path...

Another serious health concern is the ionization of water... (check out the taste of the water coming out of your heater...)...
Then, electrochemical erosion of the electrodes (titanium, stainless steel)...  The water gets polluted with small but harmful heavy metals... :o

I would kindly recommend you to think about those issues... And you have a family...

Oh, I almost forgot... Why do you think this works better (more efficient) than common heating devices?
The power factor is worse, and it has additional electrochemical (nonreversible) losses....
Did you made any  el. power and heating capacity measurements?

Cheers!

Edit to add:
You're probably using a closed primary water circuit for a central heating and heat exchanger for a secondary  "potable" water... This way some of the problems mentioned above can be avoided... Still - safety/efficiency factors remain.

I told you before - I pay with this direct  3ph 12kW (18A per phase) electrode device less than I paid with 9kW 3ph common resistrance heater. It heats much faster up to needed degrees.
Its just is more efficient. I have +250m2 house - all keeped warm. I know what I paid before and what was need to pay when new heater built and installed. These money are the only measurements  ::)
Now I have one more novelty added - air/water heat pump converter. It keeps my system ca 50C...60C degrees. - winter time  "Ion-Heater" will just come to help.
Totaly I have lessened more than twice spendings for electric heat although now I use "lazy man ventilation" - windows little bid open even winter time - Im serial pipe-smoker  ::)
Before it was impossible because high costs.
I do understand you worry abour safety - I did also - but two years show me that no risk. I have dublicated Neutral and very thick additional grounding and good automatics ...
I have examinized my system - no leakages, no stray currents, no strange corrosions ... I even can touch metallic parts of my heater with my "piloman" :o
cheers,
khabe

I found more realistic figures about resistance water heaters:

 35 gal. or less   0.94%   
 36 - 45 gal.   0.93%   
 46 - 64 gal.   0.92%   
 65 gal.               0.91%   
 66 - 118 gal.   0.88%   
 119 + gal.   0.83%   
 
It depends about  Tank capacity ( system capacity also )
I have 2m3 Tank + circulating system

khabe
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 08, 2008, 05:31:04 PM
Khabe
Nice skills you have![not for everyone though]
Bill
 I appreciate your skepticism. I was sold on this only because of something user Feynman discovered about Thrapp and his people .
They hold patents on things we use every day, the laser thermometer being one of them.[it would present a huge credibility issue for them if they were also scammers]
In talking to a scientist in this field [underwater transponders] he asked if I could get a photo of the transducer.
  Do you have the ability to pull a shot of that transducer off the vid and post it here?
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: allcanadian on December 08, 2008, 06:07:46 PM
@Kahbe
Excellent job, in a world of want-to-be's and people who like to "talk" about things they will never do, it's nice to see a fellow inventor who actually creates what he envisions. That is the most important lesson I have learned here in the forum, everyone likes to talk but few will do anything more than that.
Regards
AC
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 08, 2008, 07:32:44 PM
@ Chet:

I downloaded the Thrapp video and I thought I had software to capture a still from it, but it does not seem to work.  I am now looking for some free software to do this and I will try to get a good shot of whatever that thing is in the center of the sphere.

If anyone can recommend some good free software for taking a still shot of a video (downloaded) please let me know.  I thought Camstudio would do it but it does not seem to.  Thanks.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: hansvonlieven on December 08, 2008, 08:18:01 PM
G'day Bill and all,

What I do when I need a still shot from a video is that I freeze the frame I want and then use the screen capture facility in my paint programme.

I use Paint Shop Pro.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 08, 2008, 10:30:30 PM
@ Hans:

Thank you.  I will check that out.  I owe you a beer.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 09, 2008, 02:16:34 AM
Are you guys talking about this pictures? Why do something that has already been done?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6208.new#new

I'll attach that here for you.

@ramset
You are right about Thrapp and his people and this is just another + to the sphere water heater device. But did you asked yourself why are so innovative and successful? It's 'cause they know something, something cruchial. And what is this? They know that human mind is infinite and they take that as a fact. So that means that you can create anything you can think of right? It's allso called following your dreams.
Now how many of you thinks this is BS? Those who did acheive their dreams will tell you it's true.
And now one for the sceptics  ;D   ...you are looking at your monitor right now... but isn't that a human creation and it was someone's dream - a human thought from a human mind?

...i know it's way offtopic, but i just could not avoid to share this with you all.

Tomorrow i'll try to get the picture of the frequency analized audio of the video about the spheric water heater.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 09, 2008, 04:13:49 AM
@ Dann:

Yes, I believe that is the device that Chet and Koen1 were speaking of.  Thanks!  I can't tell what it is...maybe I will see if I can zoom in a bit.  Nice job.  Thanks.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 09, 2008, 05:02:39 AM
Not sure how this will look on here but this is as much as I could zoom in on the device.  Appears to be a coil of tubing like in a water cooler, not exactly symmetrical.  Any thoughts as to what this is?  Beats me.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 09, 2008, 05:28:45 AM
Another shot:   (Thanks again to Dann for providing the screen shots of the video)

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 09, 2008, 05:39:29 AM
It has been already figured out what this is, you guys just did not looked ad previous pages... why repeat the same thing over and over?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 09, 2008, 05:46:19 AM
@Dann:

With all due respect, I went back and re-read the last 8 pages and I did not see where anyone figured out exactly what this was. (I thought I read every post the first time, but, I could have always missed something)  I think one person said it was an ultrasonic transducer, which I have never seen one that looks like this, and I think another person said it was a heating element like in a conventional water heater.

If you would not mind, can you point me to where this was already figured out?  If this is true, than I apologize to everyone for missing it and re posting photos, etc.  Thanks.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 09, 2008, 02:15:08 PM
Dan
Unless we can show it [heating water with no power after being started by a 9 volt battery] doing what Thrapp claims it does we really are only guessing .
 All I know about transponders you can learn from watching red October [and wiki]
I do however have a family member that can tell me a great deal.
I just saw the photo's[been getting ready to leave for a few days to see some customers, one is the boatyard with the transducers] and will show him ASAP
 Thanks Dan and Bill
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 10, 2008, 04:07:51 PM
maybe casimir plates formed inadvertently -pitting - the ultrasound would explain increased penetration but the real trick below I just posted on an HHO forum:
 skeletal catalyst converts hh to hydrino!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guys - everyone should start experimenting with skeletal catalysts - they can turn hydrogen into hydrinos which have hundreds of time more power in their covalent bonds. On October 25 th Rowan University confirmed Rayney nickel supplied by BLP is producing far over unity for the amount of hydrogen supplied. The theory is at byzipp.com/energy. I recommend simple inline filter where carttridge is replaced with skeletal catalyst powder and anything you can do to keep the hydrogen monatomic so it mixes inside casimir cavities that occur naturally in skeletal catalysts. Another possibly is using the powder as an enclosed paste for the hydrogen electrode to capture the hydrogen atoms before they have time to form bonds and incorporate into your existing rigs seemlessly.

Please report back to the forum your results so everyone can help us dial in
on the recipe- BLP wants to sell premixed skeletal catalysts but the theory
dictates that HHO kits can perform the same function!

there are numerous skeletal catalysts most of which have cavities and pores that provide increased surface area, The casimir effect requires metal pores where walls are less than 2nm apart -the mon-atomic hydrogen atoms must form covalent bonds while they are in the casimir cavity to produce hydrinos so getting a significant proportion of hydrinos will take some finesse. I would not be at all surprised if some of the claims previously labeled as fradulent regarding HHO are actually just fluke formation of hydrinos due to microscopic metal cavities associated with pitting. this represents a new chapter in chemistry/physics and the price to play is peanuts!


       Max planck stated that in our 3d that the smallest displacement possible was the diameter of a proton.  He didn't say the proton had to be round.  If the vacuum creates virtual pressure and gravity flows to mass from the vacuum where it disappears into the past then it is from this flow that all mass is defined.  Hmmm hydrinos are interesting.  The collapse of the cavitation bubble may create at some point a cavity that is condusive to altering the ground state of a hydrogen atom to one that is cooler than elemental hydrogen.  Mass to energy conversion resulting from distortion of the neucleus instead of fission and fusion of the neuc.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Hydro-Cell on December 10, 2008, 08:11:52 PM
hi guys,
i am currently working on a project using cavitation, i have seen that some of you want to try this experiment.

if anyone want one of these steel spheres let me know, if there is enough interest i may be able to get some sorted out.
i am a tool maker, and they wouldnt be to much trouble to make.

please pm me rather than post,

cheers
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: MeltDown on December 11, 2008, 10:41:09 AM
Not sure how this will look on here but this is as much as I could zoom in on the device.  Appears to be a coil of tubing like in a water cooler, not exactly symmetrical.  Any thoughts as to what this is?  Beats me.

Bill

It is a piezo electric transducer. There is another one in the side. One is a pickup and the other is a transmitter. It will only work to heat water in a isotropic storage tank - hence the round tank.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 11, 2008, 02:00:08 PM

The core pictured above, to me is similar to that of a microwave oven.

Could a 9v battery possibly be ramped up with with a voltage multiplier to accomplish the same/desired effect ?

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 11, 2008, 02:29:44 PM
HHO cell
Thanks great offer !!
Meltdown
 Thanks for that info ALL of it especially  the sphere part !! Keely had problems hooking things up to his machines to do work. I think this is all the work we need to do
Cap z ro
 Having only played with the MOT [microwave transformer] now ill have to take a look at the business end
A response by Tinsel Koala on another thread regarding how to go about finding the resonance of a fluid                                                       DISCLAIMER !! TINSELKOALA WAS ANSWERING A VERY GENERAL QUESTION ON RESONANCE IN FLUIDS, NOT ABOUT THE DEVICE REPRESENTED HERE  [Although I would love to here his imput on this]
"" Seriously, it would depend on the purpose and which resonance I wanted to excite.
Many so-called fluid resonances are actually acoustic resonances of the chamber containing the fluid...

Are we trying to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen using resonant oscillations from a TC? I don't know if that can be done, really. The bond resonance frequencies may be too high. But certainly the secondary discharge can dissociate water.

But to first order, if you are looking for acoustical or other mechanical resonances, you can do the same thing as with the rock, with a couple of appropriate piezo sensors. You can even do it with only one piezo, if you monitor the power to it, because when you hit a resonance you will generally see the driving piezo power dip.
For higher-frequency electrical resonances the same ideas apply, you just use different transducers, depending on your theory. You could stick plates in the water, pretend it's a capacitor, put it in an LC circuit and sweep the inductance. If you hit a resonance you'll see it in the power trace. You could wrap a sensing coil around the tank, feed RF into the tank with another coil"".
        Chet


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 11, 2008, 03:15:28 PM
   One other thing to consider is that water creates intermolecular electrical bonds due to the polarization of the water molecule.  This is why water is not a gas. The high voltage either produced by the plazma in the collapsing bubble or in Meyers case produced by the electrodes is enough to cause electrically induced vaporization that does not require heat input but just a strong field voltage gradient.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 11, 2008, 05:43:05 PM
All
 There are some techniques that were used by user fear jar, in the watercar forum, that user shecum[is that a nasty handle or am I just perverted] posted here
 http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6257.0;topicseen
 Combine some of fearjars techniques for beating up the water [using frequency] with Tinsel Koalas idea[posted above,NOTE DISCLAIMER ] and it could be a good start
   Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 11, 2008, 07:07:01 PM
It is a piezo electric transducer. There is another one in the side. One is a pickup and the other is a transmitter. It will only work to heat water in a isotropic storage tank - hence the round tank.


Thanks.  OK, here is what is probably a stupid question.  We can all heat water from ambient to boiling in less than a minute in our microwaves so.....has anyone looked at a microwave home water heater?  How would the efficiency of this compare with the standard resistance heating method?  I realize the cup of water is very small compared to 50 gallons of water but, once it is heated initially, just like the old system, it would only take a few zaps now and again to maintain the temperature level.  Of course, it would need to be encased in a Faraday cage but, that should not be a large problem.

As I said, probably a stupid question but I have always wondered why this was never done commercially.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 11, 2008, 07:32:40 PM
Re: Sparks

Inter molecular bonds in polar water. Cavitation bubbles in water tend to coalesce as a result. Add salt and all that changes. A water bubble gains a negative shell surrounding the polar inner bubble that retains a dipole. It becomes a water capacitor variable with heat even in vapor phase. Add non conducting oil in a vortex flow or ultra sound and the charge bias between the water bubble and oil builds a huge potential (Lorentz - Lorenze Equation). Discharge this across the water dipole at vapor phase implosion and an enormous plasma and fusion occurs. Because the polar water dipole in a vortex cavitation has a phase shifted dipole moment the proton bond with hydrogen nucleus is weaker and allows some hydrogen nuclei to fuse. Pistol Shrimp never figured this out and that is why we do not have a smoking gun.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 11, 2008, 08:14:14 PM
A water boiler already is a Faraday Cage so using a magnetron inside it wouldn't have that problem.
Also about the plasma type water heater mentioned earlier by "khabe":
The water line is what is used to ground your whole house wiring so you don't have to worry about getting shocked.
If the main ground to your house were broken the plasma heater in the water boiler would be your least worry.
Every tap in your house could be lethal if you touch it then.
The only way this could happen is if the water line going into your house actually broke off were it enters your house.
Then you wouldn't have any water running into your house.
So we could say the plasma water heater is about as safe as any electric heater could be.
Unless you have plastic water lines going to the water heater then it's a different story.
Then any type of electric water heater could be dangerous.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 11, 2008, 08:32:43 PM
@CrazyFox

    This information is very interesting.  Intuition is telling me that somehow this process was employed by Tesla who would locate the oil filled capacitor discharged by the spark gap in a defined geometric relation to the gap.  The transverse waves emitted by the gap are definitely at ionizing intensities and their effect on the capacitor metals themselves bear investigation.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 11, 2008, 09:35:00 PM
Thanks.  OK, here is what is probably a stupid question.  We can all heat water from ambient to boiling in less than a minute in our microwaves so.....has anyone looked at a microwave home water heater? 

Bill, this is certainly a very good (definitively not stupid!) question! Microwaves are primarily designed for heating water (!!!) – which is, btw, the main substance of (almost) all food.

Quote
How would the efficiency of this compare with the standard resistance heating method?  I realize the cup of water is very small compared to 50 gallons of water but, once it is heated initially, just like the old system, it would only take a few zaps now and again to maintain the temperature level.  Of course, it would need to be encased in a Faraday cage but, that should not be a large problem.
As I said, probably a stupid question but I have always wondered why this was never done commercially.
Bill

I think the power needed, overall energy efficiency and combined technical and safety problems are the main obstacle why we're not using high power microwave water heaters at the moment..

The common resistive element water heaters are by far the cheapest, less complicated, very reliable,... and when DESIGNED PROPERLY they still are the easyest way when it comes to wasting electricity for producing Heat.... After all, the calorimetric methods are built on it...

(considering the quality levels of energy sources / carriers, Electricity is considered as a High level of quality energy (one of the most »noble« and costly ones), while the heat is at the very bottom of that scale...
Yes, at the end of any energy conversion chain, there is only a heat (or cold)...)

Using Electricity for producing Heat is a kind of »blasphemy«...(LOL)). Would you agree?

So, efficiency problems (microwaves of any kind are somewhere at 50-70% (the best known) while the resistive ones are >95% (when designed properly!)).
Technical problems? OK, things like microwave leakage, very high voltages (proportionally raising with power for the magnetron which is really a »filthy« tube when it comes to unwanted EM radiation....), costly production, etc, etc...

Sorry, I haven't got any 'OU' time lately ( :P),  but I want to say that I'm seriously thinking about @khabe's ion heater... I know the principle for a long time, but I once dismissed it as a very problematic (hazardous) one...
I'd like to ask him some questions about his excellent work/device.... I believe he made a very efficient heating system!  Even though it »wastes« electricity.... ;D
 
Cheers!


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 11, 2008, 10:23:50 PM
A water boiler already is a Faraday Cage so using a magnetron inside it wouldn't have that problem.
Also about the plasma type water heater mentioned earlier by "khabe":
The water line is what is used to ground your whole house wiring so you don't have to worry about getting shocked.
If the main ground to your house were broken the plasma heater in the water boiler would be your least worry.
Every tap in your house could be lethal if you touch it then.
The only way this could happen is if the water line going into your house actually broke off were it enters your house.
Then you wouldn't have any water running into your house.
So we could say the plasma water heater is about as safe as any electric heater could be.
Unless you have plastic water lines going to the water heater then it's a different story.
Then any type of electric water heater could be dangerous.

@AbbaRue,
Yes, the metal housing of the water heater is a good Faraday's cage for the microwaves... The shape/volume of the cavity can be designed to suit the needs of a proper microwave "resonator"... But there are other issues....

OK, direct electrode ("ION water heaters") -  a design, which is (as far as I know) not legal / forbidden in Europe(?), due to high safety risk involved...

Quote
The water line is what is used to ground your whole house wiring so you don't have to worry about getting shocked.
If the main ground to your house were broken the plasma heater in the water boiler would be your least worry.

The water is a fairly good conductor, but it's not "generally" used as a grounding method for the safety of electricity distribution...
The REAL ground/ earthing is used instead.. Depends on the method, the Earth or Neutral potential line is used.

You mentioned a scenario, when ion type heaters generally fail - even if the ground/earth connections are "death proved" at your location, the failure at a neutral line (broken distribution/ transformer line,..) may produce a fatal shock to the user of water installations....

At that moment, ones totally depending on a safety disconnect electronic circuits... And those gizmo's need a few milliseconds to react (to disconnect the"live" wires...).
An electric shock of a several megaJoules intensity is experienced to anyone using the water installation...

What's the outcome? If you're thick-skinned, no prob..
How about your kids?

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 11, 2008, 10:38:38 PM
Spinner
In defense to user Khabe
I think laws govern sales to the public [at least in USA]
if a very talented and extremely skilled person such as Khabe builds a heater in his own home, it should not be a problem[as long as there are no problems ]
   Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 11, 2008, 11:10:49 PM
Spinner
In defense to user Khabe
I think laws govern sales to the public [at least in USA]
if a very talented and extremely skilled person such as Khabe builds a heater in his own home, it should not be a problem[as long as there are no problems ]
   Chet

Why khabe needs your defence??? ???
This is a joke, surely... I know khabe and I were always very close in our opinions...

Btw, do you know who were the people demanding that khabe & myself should be banned from this forum permanently...?
Who were the guys signing the petition a while back...? You don't know anything about it...? OK...
 ???

Oh, btw, the nautical sonar/depth transducers are totally innapropriate for any of the ultrasonic cavitation experiments....I'm sure you know why....
 ;D
Cheers!


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 11, 2008, 11:23:31 PM
Spinner
sorry if it sounded like [to me] you were saying what Khabe was doing was against the law
Also sorry If you think I was part of some secret mission to Ban you
Giving scientific examples is extremely important here, to balance the opinions.
 I personally don't believe in banning someone such as yourself[A schooled man in his field]
 I am really not that big on banning at all ,things work out here eventually ,and you never know what someone could contribute
Chet
PS could you explain how a piezo electric Transducer placed in a sphere[parabolic array] ,timed to a resonant pulse, is a waste of time?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 12, 2008, 12:49:23 AM

*enters thread with seasons greetings and offering complimentary gifts*
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 12, 2008, 12:50:53 AM
Spinner
...
PS could you explain how a piezo electric Transducer placed in a sphere[parabolic array] ,timed to a resonant pulse, is a waste of time?

Where or when I said it's a waste of time? Maybe I just said the process (cavitation) is quite inneficient?
Maybe I said it's a waste of time if one looks for the overunity based on a cavitation process?
I'm not holding anyone back... Please, find for yourself. Good luck.





Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 12, 2008, 01:16:28 AM
Thanks Spinner
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 12, 2008, 01:55:39 AM

*gifts chet with free massage coupon @ Happy Endings Salon*
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 12, 2008, 02:03:30 AM
Happy ending
Thanks Cap Z ro
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 12, 2008, 02:21:20 AM

Due to the fact that I do not check for messages on a regular basis I missed Chets PM.

I did reply...and user chet has been banned...as Stefan had secretly tasked me to seek out and remove disinfo agents, disruptive posters, and people who rub me the wrong way.

Update:

I just received a PM form Stefan stripping me of my powers, appointing chet as the new secret moderator...and relegating me to regular member status once again.

Chet...er sir, listen, I hope I wasn't out of line with that comment about your mother in my PM.

Regards...


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 12, 2008, 02:26:36 AM
     So far this thread has produced valuable information offered eg. casmir effect  and vortex fluid electrostatic dynamics.  Please respect the value of this information and the generousity of those persons posting.  Some of the information posted on this forum is freely offered and represents thousands of hours of a persons life in pursuit of this knowlege. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: MeltDown on December 12, 2008, 01:32:31 PM
     So far this thread has produced valuable information offered eg. casmir effect  and vortex fluid electrostatic dynamics.  Please respect the value of this information and the generousity of those persons posting.  Some of the information posted on this forum is freely offered and represents thousands of hours of a persons life in pursuit of this knowlege. 

Thousands of hours? Try 30 years.

Glad to see Cap-z-ro has a sense of humor. That is always welcome and if it isn't fun, we should not be doing it. As long as someone is beating another member with an applicable law of physics then it can only, should only, be construed as the banter that science and life are filled with. Without a little "spark" we can't light a fire.

I see the information I put forth in another thread regarding cavitation under the banned user name TheBuzz has started a little fire here and I am glad you are discussing it. It is in fact the basis of all free energy devices. I have been posting this information on other web sites as well and people are beginning to see the connection.

There is only way to create mass from energy and only one way to convert that mass into the atomic energy that forms that mass and that is the only way to produce a free energy device. They all use this principle - no exception.

That flat piezo found in the center of the round stainless tank is in fact a piezo device and can be found in one of those new hand held spot cleaners. Here is a related patent.

US Patent 5676015 - Cavitation controlled acoustic probe for fabric spot cleaning and moisture monitoring

Please keep it civil and sane for the benefit of the stated goal and intent of the website and that is the search for free energy. If a persons post are unrelated to that then that is how you know they are a troll.

So it is O.K. to talk about ramset's mother as long as you are talking about the neuro clusters at the base of her brain where he spinal cord splits the electron stream and produces a electrostatic cavitation enabling her brain to break the sub luminal barriers of space and time to connect to an entire universe with no propagation delay or signal loss. We call this form of cavitation Aharonov Bohm  effect and it is the basis of how the mind of a psychic works.

As the mind is developing during early childhood, abuse causes the child to develop neurons to connect and develop in that fight or flight brain stem region. The more abuse suffered, the better the psychic ability as a result of the increased electrical activity where the electron stream is split (cavitation occurs)  from the spinal cord. There is a conscience aspect as well as the child is always looking into the future to search for danger. The CIA has done a great deal of research on this subject.

The CIA under the guise of project MK-Ultra and later Project Monarch subjected children to a great deal of torture for the first four years of their life in order to develop these and other characteristics into several million children between 1947 and the present. It was Dr. Puharich that formed these programs on behalf of the US government.

You may remember the name Dr. Puharich as he held a patent on the first water car. His transformer used cavitation caused by the reluctance of the capacitive inductance of the end of the transformer that was not attached. The four little modulated bumps on the signal are four little cavitations.

It was the good Dr. Stiffler that came to this web site and taught you capacitive inductance with his loop stick antenna coil in the cold electricity thread with only one wire attached. Nobody seemed to notice he was teaching you the basic principles of how some of these devices work. Ron is a little sharper than he lets on regarding this subject.

I find the irony in Cap-z-ro's claim that he is psychic and yet he denies the relationship between free energy and cavitation while those thoughts are being formed in a brain that is cavitating at a high rate near the brain stem.

Cap-z-ro's behavior is consistent with a person that has suffered abuse in that he or she attacks in order to defend. It is a survival method as old as the universe and just as primitive. It something we all do from time to time triggered by different circumstances based in our past experience.

Cavitation is natures way of converting mass into atomic energy. If we pounded a copper probe into the two halves of Cap-z-ro's brain stem we could harvest a considerable amount of energy. It wouldn't be OU per se, but it would be OVER and then there could be UNITY.

Good luck with your research.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 12, 2008, 02:18:12 PM
 TheBuzz
 have a good life
 
 Thanks for sharing your theory

  Looks us up from time to time your guidance would do the world a lot of good
    Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: MeltDown on December 12, 2008, 03:11:15 PM
EDIT NOTICE  - Ramset posted something to the effect of let us know when you get out of charm school. This post was changed.

I have no beef with ramset or anyone else here but will leave my reply because it is salient to the subject of searching for free energy. I find the people as interesting as the science. They are related.
*****************************************************************

ramset, I am plenty charming.

The difference between you and Cap-z-ro is the difference between the survival technique you live in.

If you and Cap-z-ro were in the forest and you were attacked by a bear, Cap-z-ro would quickly locate a weapon in the form of a stick or a rock and attack the bear and you would lay down and play dead.

At the bottom of every page Hartman wrote "free energy will give you free-energy"

Hartman understands how people are attracted to the subject of free energy and brings them to places like this. It begins on the inside. When people go beyond their brain stem and let go of their survival based thoughts, then they are able to comprehend the significance of what I just posted.

Puharich based his whole life of science in understanding and harnessing cavitation. Take for example the patent where he keeps blood from clotting using an electrical signal. The electrical signal was produced in the brain and in the way I just described through cavitation. When the blood cells (a living being unto themselves) lose that connection to the universe they live within, they coagulate into a clot to enable survival of that universe.

Human behavior mimics this as well and it is based in the second most primitive priority a being has and that being survival. The most primitive and strongest motivator of life is propagation of the species. It is the reason you generally have an orgasm when you die.

And so you search to understand things like Meyer's little toroid, never noticing that one half of the transformer is electromagnetically shorted to the other side in order to produce a cavitation. A sudden change of speed and direction resulting in acceleration when that cavitation is transferred to the atoms in the water that acceleration breaks the electron bonds of the H2O molecule through electron cascade effect.

But you never get out of your survival thoughts long enough to notice or critical think.

A human brain has two halves. One half is logic, reason and accountability and the other half emotion. There is a time and a place for both and it should usually be balanced or tempered by the two halves. One cannot thrive and survive long term with out both sides of the brain.

Maybe I will come back and help you when you let go of your artificial world driven by a unrealistic need to survive and your minds can comprehend the technology and information being presented.

And so while Cap-z-ro attacks the bear and you play dead, I ask myself why do they fight imaginary bears?

Hartman gets it - "free energy will give you free-energy" It all begins within.

***************************
EDIT - On second thought, ramset would play dead until the bear ate Cap-z-ro, tame the bear and take it to a zoo for children to study. He has a loving nature and it is always present in his posts where he tries to connect people. He should be a global moderator on this site.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 12, 2008, 03:20:43 PM
After 30 years, and still the same delusions? Man, your brain must be cavitating....

Btw, thanks for discovering the Great Truth about "all the FE devices origin"....
Yes, your theory explains gravity (overbalanced) wheels perfectly...


If I use your own words- you may now Buzz-off, Piss-off, Melt-off, etc...etc..

( I'm just joking!... But who really cares?... :P)
Cheers!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 12, 2008, 03:41:28 PM
TheBuzz so you could contribute in a moderated forum such as
DR Stiffler
Feynman
Gutluc
have here?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 12, 2008, 03:47:43 PM

Look at the last two posts MeltDown (me) made and the post spinner just made and ask yourself: "What has more value in the search for free energy?"

You can have one or the other, but you can't have both. Feel free to express yourself to Hartman in a PM with your thoughts on that matter.

I have no interest in posting anything in a forum that allows this type of psychotic behavior. Why this person was not banned years ago is an unexplainable mystery and robs the credibility of all of us, this forum and the free energy movement.

Quote
The ban on user TheBuzz is lifted again and I hope that there will
be no more namecallings and that the discussion will
be ontopic and respectfully.

Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.

Oops... I promise I'll behave.. I swear I was just joking...
Anyway, I was always a better listener than talker....

The Buzz, feel free to express yourself and your theories.
I won't mess with your posts again.

Psychotic behaviour...   :D
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 12, 2008, 03:52:23 PM
Spinner
'Oops.. I promise ill behave'   [NICE}

 ' psychotic behavior'         [NOT NICE]
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 13, 2008, 04:40:29 AM
I respond to the part that had any value.

I have not seen an overbalanced wheel tested or verified.

I am not saying that it is impossible anymore than I am saying that a permanent magnet motor is impossible since they are basically the same thing bearing the same challenge - how to switch the gravity or magnets.

The only thing I could add to that is I suspect you would need to mathematically use irrational numbers through gears or linkages of some some sort since if you used rational numbers, you just started chasing the hump around a free energy wheel. In other words, the mechanical puzzle can never resolve mathematically.

Not like we have not seen that before huh?

Spooks do not care about ideas, Buzz.  They do care about proof, device that show you got the goods.  So, share your thoughts and theories at will - and have no fear that they will bring retaliation. Thoughts are free - you only have problems when you prove them.

Cavitation is interesting, but not as interesting as what causes it and what is causes.  One may know that caviation causes anomalies, but if you can not build to that thought, then it doesn't help to know.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 13, 2008, 02:19:18 PM
OH...  We have to get THEBUZ  Moderator privileges on his own thread such as Stiffler Gutluc And Feynman
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 13, 2008, 03:40:08 PM
     When we consider that the Sun is a contracting or densification of reality one needs to ask what came first the plasma or the fusion?  Either way if the aether is a scource of pressure and the Sun is contracting this causes a cavitation within the aetheric pressure field.  Gravity then becomes a flow of aetheric pressure filling the void of cavitation resulting from the  forming mass.  This happens on a relativistic level also as the neucleus takes the place of the Sun.  Every once in a while the neucleus will mess up and we get some neutrons tossed about and say oh my radioactivity.  Imagine putting an antennae inside a proton.  That would be some radioactivity for ya.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 13, 2008, 07:12:42 PM
Buzz

Thank you very much for the explanation.

By all means, tell people "how to do it" if you want.  I recommend no more than experiments to prove it on public forums, then gather those interested into a private forum for the proof part.  No sense becoming a martyr for people that don't give a rats ass about you.  However, explanations do not carry the same energy as other means of teaching, so I urge you to use your best judgment.   Some will not believe no matter what you do to prove it, so let them think whatever they want and do not waste your time with them.

We are talking about the same or very similar things with a different perspectives.  The end result will be the similar as there is more than one road to get there and many great things have been developed with different perspectives on how the universe works, so it is not always necessary to know how it works if one knows that it does.

This is great.  Now many people can teach many others, and together we can all drive the spooks crazy.  ;)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 13, 2008, 07:21:43 PM
@Sparks

Only a few inventors were privy to this plasma concept. Viktor Schauberger, Samuel Clemens, and Marconi apart from Tesla. The idea could not be comprehended by others of their day. The thermo-electrostatic oil shear combined with the water capacitor in the oil water emulsion is a tremendous source of power as demonstraited in the Richard Clem Device. When scaled up and put in tandem with a superconducting motor/generator of the Lorentz field coil type (American Super Conductor) a very attractive energy option will be available. I am an analyst of this kind of power. Rf field MHD flying machines and  submarines are another focus of my analysis. Unfortunately, the government influenced by corporate greed, tries to dead file such research under the guise of National Security. That works until the competing world powers duplicate or recalculate the seed idea to maturity. The usual time required from seed idea to maturity is about a year. Much "Classified Information" has this same time line to disclosure.
One overriding question is.....if we are so damn smart, why is the world so screwed up?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: jwk on December 13, 2008, 09:06:06 PM
Way to ruin an interesting thread.  >:(




Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 13, 2008, 10:34:29 PM

Actually I find the whole thread very interesting and thought provoking.

I wood like to add that in my mind it appears things on this planet are influenced by convergent forces from within and without.

Regards...
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 14, 2008, 01:40:18 AM
This is an unusual situation in that I don't really have to build a device since every free energy device is the testbed.

Take for example the Papp engine. Where is the cavitation?

The high voltage arc is a cavitation and when that gas in the cylinder is cavitation with an arc, it transmutes. They have video of the process which is fairly well understood.

there are tons of examples out there. What people need to learn is what cavitation is and the various forms it takes. In the past they have created all kinds of silly answers for how these devices work and that disinfo. makes them impossible to understand and replicate.

Not all arcs are cavitations.  It must be a quenched arc - abruptly switched on and off.   You will not get the goods with any ol' arc.  I have found that it takes a lot of air to equal what a magnet can do...then there is what the arc is connected to.  Not just any ol' circuit will work.  Coils of high self-inductance are required in some devices - just an arbitrary mass will not work.

One problem is that most purported OU devices use "things" that the builder does/did not fully understand and therefore they have "issues" - Sweet's VTA for example, Bearden's MEG, SM's TPU - even Tesla had issues with his magnifiers.  When time of day becomes an issue, you need to take a good look at the universe.

A second problem is that most purported OU devices are not well documented.   
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 14, 2008, 02:57:25 AM
     Ionization of a gas can lead to a plasma that becomes selfconfined.  The  magnetic fields associated with the electron flow about the ionized core and the loss of Brownian interatomic field polarization can cause the ions to organize into a plasma.  Tesla was good at this.  I believe he was good enough at building selfconfined plasma to make either a plasmafield about a space or a directed plasma field death ray.  The plasma can be caused to grow such that the radiation from this field results in ionization of gas at the end of the plasma tunnel and adoption of the electron mass into the confining current.  Any number of frequencies could be employed to cause a longitudinal wave through the plasma to emit a frequency that would promote ionization of the gas at the end of the tunnel.  Or in Hutchinson's case delamination of metals etc.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: jwk on December 14, 2008, 12:55:17 PM
As always, out come the trolls.

I was one that came up with the information after 30 years of research. What have you done besides made 3 posts under that user name in the last year?

I just laid out what makes all free energy devices work and some of the methods used. Maybe you should take up knitting. This is a technical discussion area, not a sewing circle or a troll zone.

Cavitation may well produce interesting results, but if it is as you say then surely after 30 years of research and the knowledge of all those great minds that have gone before us...wheres the result ?

It's not here yet and theories abounding, especially ones that don't appear to have any experimental data to back them up,  get in the way. imho. Maybe im wrong, perhaps you have built a proof of concept device already ?

As for what i have done, i don't see any point in shouting about unfinished work, when i have a result ill let you know if your interested.


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 14, 2008, 01:15:49 PM
Cavitation may well produce interesting results, but if it is as you say then surely after 30 years of research and the knowledge of all those great minds that have gone before us...wheres the result ?

It's not here yet and theories abounding, especially ones that don't appear to have any experimental data to back them up,  get in the way. imho. Maybe im wrong, perhaps you have built a proof of concept device already ?

As for what i have done, i don't see any point in shouting about unfinished work, when i have a result ill let you know if your interested.

Jwk? Mr. Keely?  ;)

Ok, The Buzz's "Cavitation" is still the second best "all truth" FE disclosure theory, right after the Lee-Tseung theory....

Don't expect a prototypes or even valid experiments... Results don't matter, silly you...? The thing is still in it's infancy, the discoverer is seriously thinking about it only for the last 30 years...

Patience... We have a tremendous luck that the discoverer is here with us. And, he will enlighten us. Blessed be....
 ;D
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 14, 2008, 02:21:57 PM
     Consider a lightning bolt.  Watervapor is heated during the day by absorption of infrared wave emission from the Sun.  It forms a bubble of steam.  This bubble expands into the upper atmosphere where ultraviolet light causes the top of the bubble water vapor to become ionized.  This results in a surface charge developing on the skin of the bubble.  As the day progresses the upper atmosphere cools and compresses the bubble.  The surface charge developed on the ionized cloud tops is now approaching Earth as the bubble is compressed and flattened.  The capacitor finally shorts out and a massive current ensues with Earth acting as an electron donar and conductor of electrons as the ionized compressed cloud tops exchange charge and revert back to water vapor.  The peculiar thing about after a lightning bolt and the light and the sound right behind that is a wave of cold.  Almost like the lightning causes a negative heat wave.  Perhaps it is the cold air of the upper atmosphere finding a wormhole in the collapsing bubble.  Or the plasma current has some kind of thermal deal going on.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 14, 2008, 03:30:54 PM
TheBuzz Siad he could use his ' theory of cavitation' to explain the myriad of  ou devices Clem ,PAP,etc etc
If you don't believe in these devices[and other as yet unnamed atleast by thebuzz]] ! ??? what can be said ?
      Chet
   
PS I like the' tool box'
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 14, 2008, 04:39:44 PM
Close - The switching produces many cavitations. I know what you are trying to say though.

Try this - When an arc collapses, then the universe pushes back from all directions and slams energy and mass together at higher than ambient pressure. The mass then explodes back out at light speed and knocks electrons free from the ambient (electron cascade effect) and converts mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

So from a practical application sense, your point is right on the money. Clapping that cavity many times, produces the goods.

Tesla made an electromagnetic quenching spark gap to accomplish that goal. Tesla was so smart and his technology so simple. Reducing something to it's most simple form is the beauty or art of a science. He used the circuit to quench itself using the resonance it created itself. Simplicity is a hallmark of nature.

If Tesla were alive today, he would still toss the resistor you handed him in the trash and be winding coils and producing switching the way he did back then. He always took time to produce a beautiful prototype filled with curves and beauty, but it is natures way.

Tesla expressed intelligence found only in artifacts or text reminiscent of the ancients that were not exactly from this part of the universe. None of really are, we are all just carrots in someone else's garden.

Yes, our understanding overlaps and we are speaking of the same thing from a different perspective.

Tesla's AC versions were self quenching.  DC version had to be quenched - the electromagnet was his tool of choice judging by his images, though he did try air and other means.

Some have gotten interesting results slamming magnetic fields or rotating them, but I haven't seen this done in a controlled way.

Quote
So from a practical application sense, your point is right on the money. Clapping that cavity many times, produces the goods.

You have to clap it at the right rate though.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 07:37:34 AM
Grumpy,

I might add to that have another look at Meyer's transformer and compare the two.

Anyone with transformer experience would look at Meyer's transformer and say he built a transformer designed to work against itself.

The first time I looked at it I figured he probably wound the secondary on top of the primary as that is how old disruptive discharge transformers work. After seeing Thane's work I need to revisit Meyer's toroid which I have wound different ways about 4 times now.

Thane's work is very interesting because so many old free energy devices used a similar method. Maybe this one will get documented and we can build upon it.

Does Meyer's transformer look like a saturable reactor?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 15, 2008, 03:03:42 PM
     Meyer copied Tesla's input circuits but Tesla would use motor coils for his series diresonant circuit.  Faraday tells us that between any two fields of different magnetic density a voltage will manifest.  Spherics posted on this forum and relayed information about SM's rediscovery of the effect when he sent a signal through two audio transformers that had slightly different saturation parameters.   By controlling the saturation parameters of the chokes feeding the capacitor a very short shock wave or kick appears across the capacitor.  Look at the chokes as turbines with flywheels attached.  When pressure is first applied to the turbines there is no water flowing.  But there is pressure to inertia conversion.    The line pressure drops but the flywheels do there thing.  Very little if not any current flows from the line yet the current induced by the collapse of the chokes magnetic fields slightly out of phase charges the capacitor. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 15, 2008, 03:30:20 PM
Ok, having been savagely offline by a severe flu,
I am now finally back and guess I've missed something...

Scanning the past pages it seems that Buzz who claims
to know all there is to know about cavitation OU has
confirmed that Thrapp is using not only one but two
piezoelectric ultrasonic transducers in his sphere heater.
Great.

So now let's take it from the top then,
we use 1 spherical container,
2 piezo ultrasonic transducers,
and then what?
How do we replicate a Thrapp/Davy-like heater
using two transducers and one sphere?
Once we know that, we can try to replicate,
and we can see for ourselves how much input
produces how much output.

Come on Buzz, seeing that you know so much about how this works,
explain it to us laymen and tell us how we can build one? ;)

Formulae and equations that show how the claimed energy equates
to lost mass is all nice, but the real proof of the pudding is still
in replicating such a device including its OU performance.
So let's do it then?

Regards,
Koen
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 03:54:37 PM
No but then neither does Thanes. A saturable reactor is usually wound like half a mag amp.

Meyer's Transformer looks to me to reflect a unipolar wave back and forth between the primary side and the (choke) side. The pick up for precise timing of a sharp pulse.

Or... and more plausible, the high side goes high and the ground being pulled lower which most of his notes indicate he was doing. I wound one to do that yesterday and it actually worked OK as those experiments went. I need to put a few hundred more winds on the big choke to see if I can pull the B- lower though. I think I read the the B- voltage had to be greater than the B+ in one of his early patents. I don't trust patent drawings on something like that due to the sensitive nature of the technology.

But then I am one of those nut jobs that thinks 911 was an inside job and Stan's brother is really Stan. Someone gave me his phone number and told me to call him but I never did. He called him though and thought it was Stan too.

You see that thing in the news about Bush going to Bagdad to bid farewell and the reporter throwing his shoes at Bush? Almost got him too. Smart thinking on Bush's part since I guess if he wanted to bid farewell, nobody would be happier to see him go that the Iraqis. :-)

A picture is worth a thousand words  - that's funny!

Like everything else, there is more than one way to get cavitation.  Meyer's way can't be the only way.  Meyer's stated he imparted universal energy into the water or what became of the water and there are probably several ways to do that.  I can't see youtube vids, but I have heard that Meyer's device was not pouring the gas off like you see in HHO cells.   This is what I would expect - few bubbles - if he is indead using what he calls universal energy.

You mentioned earlier that the "aether" is moving faster than earth, and that it is not the source of extra energy.  If matter is composed of aether, and excess energy comes from matter, then doesn't the excess come from the aether in a round-about-sort-of-way?  Also, if the aether is "moving" or "changing" then isn't it dynamic? If it is dynamic, what keeps it "changing"?

Meyer's transformer sounds like a "Smith coil" - anyone have a picture of Meyer's transformer?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT:

Looking at the diagram of Meyer's transformer - I see he knew about unipolar field - that sure got my attention.



Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 15, 2008, 04:15:37 PM
Koen
I don't know if its just me !!
You sound very sarcastic?? Glad to see your feeling better
Grumpy and Sparks and TheBuzz are discusing Thane and Meyers Presently
Very interesting stuff!!
Chet
PS I am Very interseted in the sphere also. There is another thread where this is being discused now. I will post the link [BY HHO CELL Good stuff]
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 15, 2008, 04:31:23 PM
     Unipolar magfield coupling.  Some force always desaturates a choke coil.
Like in cook coils or hubbard coils or flyback transformers or automobile ignition coil transformers or Leedskalins keeper sliding.  We may pileup the blocks and take a microsecond.  But what force knocks the wall over in a nanosecond.   I like sawtooth wave input.  Tight couple to the ramp and loose couple to the slam.  Work going in and more free work when you shut the voltage OFF.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 04:37:10 PM
So which version of the MEyer transformer are we talking about - 2 windings or 5 windings?

If Meyer's had the burst wave - then he may be correct about what he called "universal energy".

I see in other diagrams that he just shows a trigger transformer with a common ground - probably the little 3-prong type.

As for all his talk of "resonance" and calling the water cell a capacitor - I recommend that everyone take this with a pinch of salt.  He indicates that "resonance" was the condition that rpoduced the most output.  He talks about the water capacitor resonating but says you can increase the surface area to increase the output or increase the pulse rate.  Also, notice that he applies burst of pulses and then a pause, and that the repetition rate is low  kHz, but the pulses are very short.



I think I know what he is really doing and it is much simpler than anything I have heard to date.  Won't have time to try anything until next weekend.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 05:03:41 PM
I never said anything about matter being made of Aether.

Correct.  I did not mean to imply that that you said this.

Let's talk about unipolar fields since that is important and everybody seems to gloss right over that.

Tell me everything you know about that.

Well, I jsut recently found out that they can exist and there apparently is little info available on unipolar fields, electric or magnetic, so I know very little.

Some theories allow electric and magnetic unipolar fields, but magnetic unipolar fields are not "required" - of course this leaves a big "what if" hanging around that is never addressed even in theories.  Electric monopolar current is just standard electric current.

Following is what I think is correct - largely assumptive:
1. Magnetic monopolar currents exist in a closed medium of high magnetic permability.  An open core will not produce these as the space outiside the core is dielectric and can only conduct dipolar currents - so closed core.  This may be incorrect as monopolar currents may exist within the core before the path is closed.

2. Magnetic monopolar current is momentary or unstable (even "dangerous") - hence they are induced by an impulse at the intial rise fo the pulse and to a much lesser degree at the fall - this could be backwards as everything between electric and magnetic seems to be backwards.

3. Repeated pulsing - producing MMC - may cavitate at a certain rate of pulsing and this is very interesting.  It may build to one hell of a level of energy at the correct rate.

4.  MMC's may attract conductors and magnetic objects, and this may actually be the cause of something associated with the MMC, but I am laying out enough for you to get my drift, so I'll leave that out of this so we can just focus on cavitation.

There are maybe a handful of people on this rock that even know what I just said - for them - this Bud's for you!  For everyone else - stay out of it - I'll probably be phone tapped shortly.

EDIT:

The more I read about Meyer, the more he sounds like many others researchers - cryptic and paranoid.  I don't place too much faith in the core and transformer since he was able to get the goods through other means.  Impulses = yes, fancy transformer = optional.

scrounging for some stainless now.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 15, 2008, 06:15:10 PM
The concept of a mmc is not that hard to grasp.  Take a long solenoid coil and form it into a torroid.  The B poles disappear.  The torriodal core can then be variably saturated inducing a kinda peristalsic magnetic current.  Isn't that how they build particle accelerators?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 15, 2008, 06:48:34 PM
  You take a mwtube and get rid of the 60hz voltage multiplier circuit and use an efficient kicker things get exciting.  I did a water to plazma conversion with a couple of paper clips and a bottle cap of water.  The hydrogen production is the least of your worries.  The blue color of the plazma tells you that electrons have exceeded the speed of light through the water vapor.  This only supposed to happen in heavy water surrounding a fission core.  You can get the same effect with 30kvpulsed scource some iron wire and a hunk of plastic.  Earth just loves to give up it's charge to a selfconfined plasma field.   Arc of the covenant kinda shit.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 07:38:42 PM
Maybe we just need to pulse the water capacitor cell like Stan did with groups of short pulses followed by a break.   Looking at patent 4798661 -there isn't much more than that too it.

Another perspective is that I always see people placing the water capacitor tubes both in a tank of water.  It appears to me that the water is only between the walls of the tubes as there would be no action outside the tube as you want what is going on between the plates.

Not sure what stan is doing with the homemade resistor thing that he describe like a leaky capacitor - stainless plates separated by an insulator and then he adds conductive stuff to the insulator.  He calls it a current limiting resistor for "inhibiting electron leakage".
=========================================
EDIT:

Reading more of this patent and we see that Stan is bullshitting us on the resistor and it's purpose.  He is bleeding off excess energy.  

Anyone else see it?

Quote
The next expediency in the sequence for inhibiting electron leakage is the current inhibitor resister 60 as shown in FIGS. 1 and 5. The circuit 60 comprises a simple resistor of the commercial type or specially made for the particular application. The resistor is variable to provide fine tuning of the electron inhibiting. In that the each pair of plate exciters are connected separately, a resistor 60a xxx 60n is connected to each of the plates having the negative voltage connected therto. In this embodiment the inner plate of the exciters 50a xxx 50n. In that the inner plate had been normally connected to ground, the resistive element is now connected between the inner plate and ground.

As known in electrical art the resistor will provide a complete block to electron leakage--current flow. However, since the resistor 60 is connected from ground-to-ground there is no real affect on the voltage; and since there is no connection with the positive side there is no voltage drop.

The electron leakage resistor will again raise the upper limit of 8.5 volts amplitude before breakdown as shown at L-5 of FIG. 8. In the generation of the hydrogen and oxygen gasses to an infinite limit, as yet not fully appreciated, the upper level of amplitude of the voltage is removed with the utilization of the electron inhibitor of FIG. 7.


You do not need plates and a partially conducting insulator to block electron leakage.  He is dumping the excess lest the water go off - which might hurt - this palte resistor thing is to bleed off his "universal energy".  If he does not, the water will only hold so much of it and then it will be like he set off his gtnt right inside his water cap - ouch!   

I bet it scared the crap out of him when he popped a few off before he found out what was going on - LOL!

I have heard what I think was this sort of thing going off - very loud cracking pop - scared me good as was totally unexpected.

I got you now Stan. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 09:24:29 PM
Oh Grumpy, what am I going to do with you. What do you mean you can't watch videos?

Water resistor is used to prevent amp flow. Since the water is pure, then electrons can't transfer but voltage can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7lL6HW7Ydg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7lL6HW7Ydg)

No YouTube for me: dial-up at home - video sites blocked at work.

In patent 4,798,661 - part numbers "60a xxx 60n" and fig 7 is the cross-section of the resistive element.

The "resistor" is two plates with an insulator between and he says he added conductive stuff to the insulator (epoxy?) - this makes a leaky capacitor.  See, this leaky capacitor will leak different types of current to ground where they are safely dissipated.  If not, and you allow too much energy to build up, it will eventually balance itself.

Quote
In this embodiment of the current inhibitor connected to the inner plate having the negative voltage applied thereto, comprises a stainless steel sandwich 70/74 with a resistive material there between. The stainless steel is a poor conductive material and hence will restrict to some extent the electron flow. Other poor conductive material may be utilized in lieu of the stainless steel. The electron inhibitor 70/74 is connected in the same manner as resistor 60--between the inner plate having the negative potential connected to it and ground.


Can't use magnetic material - he does not mention this directly but he says the plates are stainless, which can be non-magnetic.  If you use a magnetic material then the excess energy will create eddy currents and a lot of heat - the excess may not bleed off any more and boom.

Stan was a great BS-er.  Must have taken him months to describe things so colorfully.

When operating, only a little bit of bubbly will come off - the "real deal" will be there though.  When you set the "real deal" off, you get one hell of a cavitation - called a detonation.  This ain't ordinary gas - this has some "kung pow" to it.

It is probable that the engine will run better after some use of the Meyer's cell as it becomes saturated with the gas.  Might even be a little eratic at first.

I bet the water coming out of Meyer's exhaust was far less than there should have been with HHO or conventional electro-gas.  anyone got the poop on that detail?  I mean Meyer's didn't have a faucet running at the tailpipe.

Buzz, whatcha think?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 15, 2008, 09:29:46 PM
ON vids
Public library ,university ?
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 15, 2008, 09:39:32 PM
I can view vids, just not on video posting sites like YouTube.


My last half-dozen posts sketch out the details enough that any redneck with a few beers can "Git 'er Dun".  May take some time to get the pulsing right with the burst null burst null stuff.  Might be easier than we think.

Important part is that cavitation does play a role and water is just a tool - not the sole source.  Glycerine would probably work - just not nearly as well.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 15, 2008, 11:40:17 PM
Buzz
Nice build skills[on your Thane mini replica] looks MINT!!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts gentlemen
I feel [as I should] absolutely privileged to listen in on your discusion
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Koen1 on December 16, 2008, 12:44:49 AM
Koen
I don't know if its just me !!
You sound very sarcastic??
Well a bit yeah...
Buzz has been saying he's got what 30 years ? of experience with cavitation OU related
research, right? ...haven't heard him describe a clear setup we can build to get OU yet...
if he did, then maybe someone could point out where because I clearly missed it.


Quote
Glad to see your feeling better
Thanks :D
Quote
Grumpy and Sparks and TheBuzz are discusing Thane and Meyers Presently
Very interesting stuff!!
yes I read a bit of it just now... still don't really see
the cavitation there but I'll read some more and see if it's in there...
Anyhow, seems Buzz/Meltdown is only barely more behaved than before he got
blocked... just aching for a ban it seems... ;)

Quote
PS I am Very interseted in the sphere also. There is another thread where this is being discused now. I will post the link [BY HHO CELL Good stuff]
oh cool :) thanks! ;D
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 16, 2008, 12:55:18 AM
I specifically wove "cavitation" into my part of the discussion.

On the Meyer's cell, I have searched all day and have not found  single build that looks "correct".  Lots of HHO and electrolysis going on, but no explosive energy stuff that Meyer spoke of.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 16, 2008, 03:22:03 AM
THEBuzz and {koen}
THE STAKES seem VERY high in this game
Does it have to be a game?
How about an experiment?
EVEN A LITTLE ONE?
chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 16, 2008, 05:58:53 AM
Buzz

Meyer talked about driving his buggy across the USA using only 22 gallons of water - this is not HHO - it is not electrolysis.

I think he got a little electrolysis as a side-effect of the process and used that to explain everything so no one could copy his work and no one has.  Many people have created a lot of HHO, but not what Meyer had going.

The water is just a collector.   I have heard and felt the "boom" of the real stuff - it ain't HHO - it is not even related.

Stick with electron explanations if they suit you.   You said that aether is in motion - I say cavitate it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 16, 2008, 03:37:11 PM
Cavitate aether??? I think you fell down a dark aether rabbit hole and can't find you way out. Heeeey Grumpyyyyyy!   Walk towards the sound of my voice!

If it can vary in density - cavitate it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 16, 2008, 03:42:48 PM
      The aether got pressure.  We are just little critters down near the bottom of a gravity well.  The folks looking for intelligent life always looking for water critters.  Like something in this Universe can't retain intelligence in any other form then a chemical bag hung on some calcium deposits that needs to constantly keep its shit together running around killing other shit and drinking water for energy.   Nature sucks including the retarded animals in control of our children's future.  If the NWO is making underground cities.  Give me a ticket down cause the surface is getting pretty fucked up.  Maybe they will feed their slaves better than the crew running capitolism.  Abolish outright slavery but let the bankers enslavement continue.  These mofers buy and sell your future like it was cheap costume jewelry.  Make you work most of your life away so you can have a roof over your head while they get drunk and chase ass.
      @Grumpy

  You talking about heavy hydrogen h3?  Star fuel?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 16, 2008, 06:56:47 PM
So it is pay up time Grumpy. Describe exactly how you would extract energy from the aether through cavitation or any other means. If you can't describe that then all you are doing is burying cavitation information that is useful and I am going to come at you like a pack of spider monkeys. :-)

You already know so posting it here will only feed the trolls.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 16, 2008, 10:54:39 PM
TheBuzz said
 I will do my best to describe the science and save the devices for later.

I suppose it would begin with the assumption that all there is, is energy. If I had to make a guess, I suspect that half the energy in the universe is in the form of mass. Mass is energy that is compressed, spinning and polarized.

Explaining how energy is compressed into matter is probably best done by taking a field trip to the website of Milo Wolf http://quantummatter.com/articles/see_an_electron.html

and looking at a image of the galaxy we live in.

http://www2.lns.mit.edu/~LQS/Milky_Way_galaxy_sun05.jpg

Our universe is made of fractals and surely the reason that if you expand Mandelbrot's equation out to the size of the universe, you begin to see images of snow covered mountains, trees and other things we see everyday. If you truly want to know the shape of the universe, look in a mirror. Edgar Cayce and the law of probability should be required reading for anyone wanting a better understanding of the cosmos.

Free energy:
The term free energy creates a reaction with an educated person since it implies energy from nothing. This of course is impossible and silly and so the reaction is justified.

A better term would be "economic free energy". Since a gallon of water contains the atomic energy equivalent, equal to the chemical equivalent of millions of barrels of oil, the gallon of water would represent economic free energy.

The best term would be mass to atomic energy converter. Since all free energy devices do just that. Energy does not come from nothing - no exceptions.
 
Zero Point:
Notice nowhere in that simple equation E=MC2 is there anything that represents aether or zero point? I am going to stick with my own experience and some of the best scientific minds on Earth. Of course there is a zero point and of course there is less than a zero point. It would be impossible to have a black hole without less than zero and so everything in between exists as well. It has nothing to to do with free energy.

Aether:
The aether field was measured and observed by Dayton Miller using light-beam interferometry in the early part of the 1900s to measure an Earth-entrained aether drift.

Many scientist assumed and wrote of the existence of the aether field which included Crookes, Lodge, Faraday, Michelson, Moorley, Miller, Tesla, Reich and even Einstein.

Einstein later denied the aether field and this is confirmed in a letter he wrote to Shankland thanking him for disproving Miller. In the letter Einstein acknowledged that the existence of the aether would invalidate special relativity.

"Dear Dr. Shankland:
I thank you very much for sending me your careful study about the Miller experiments. Those experiments, conducted with so much care, merit, of course, a very careful statistical investigation. This is more so as the existence of a not trivial positive effect would affect very deeply the fundament of theoretical physics as it is presently accepted.

You have shown convincingly that the observed effect is outside the range of accidental deviations and must, therefore, have a systematic cause. You made it quite probable that this systematic cause has nothing to do with 'ether-wind', but has to do with differences of temperature of the air traversed by the two light bundles which produced the bands of interference. Such an effect is indeed practically inevitable if the walls of the laboratory room have a not negligible difference in temperature.
It is one of the cases where the systematic errors are increasing quickly with the dimension of the apparatus.

Congratulating you and your colleagues on your valuable contribution to our knowledge,

I am with kind regards,
A. Einstein" (31 August 1954)

(contained in Shankland, Applied Optics 1973, p.2283)

Dayton Miller did 10,000 hours of observation of the aether on a mountain near Ashland Oregon. His observations concluded the field moves at 24.5 kilometers per hour across the planet, concentrated between -100 meters below the surface and +300 meters above the surface and departs the planet in the direction of the constellation Leo. It tends to flow around objects like mountains but also flows through them to some extent.

My own thoughts on this are that given the fact that aether has been proven to come from space and return to space reveal that it is sourced by a larger body such as the solar system or the Milky Way Galaxy or perhaps any large body of mass. Daton Miller's experiments indicated that there was an aether drift that also flowed from the Sun.

No boat plies the water as fast as the wind that blows upon the square sail. The aether drift therefor is moving 24.5 kilometers per hour faster than our solar system.

Regardless of what the aether is, it can be said with relative certainty what it is not. Is is not a source of free energy. Mass to atomic energy conversion and the aether drift are two entirely two different subjects.

Converting energy into mass:
Milo Wolf did excellent work describing the science behind energy to mass conversion using a inbound longitudinal wave superimposed over an outbound longitudinal wave. His website is filled with information on the wave structure of matter. http://www.quantummatter.com/

So now that one has a basic understanding that mass is concentrated energy, how it got that way and the state that it exists we look at the opposite of that process.

Converting mass into energy (cavitation):
I have done some research on converting mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass which is the opposite of Milo Wolf but his wave matter structure helps to understand the process of cavitation which destroys that wave structure releasing the atomic energy of the mass.

If you go to Wiki and look up cavitation it begins:

"Cavitation - "Cavitation is defined as the phenomenon..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavitation

Next we look up phenomenon:
http://www.answers.com/topic/phenomenon
"An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the senses.
An unusual, significant, or unaccountable fact or occurrence; a marvel."

So it is fairly common usage and definition of the word phenomenon that it is something we observe but can't explain.

Wouldn't it be silly to suggest that cavitation can only occur in a liquid? I have heard a sonic boom referred to as a cavitation plenty of times because it is. The emitted light can be observed on the rotor tips of a helicopter through night vision equipment, etc.

So to produce a cavitation, we move energy or mass through an ambient medium such as a gas, liquid or solid faster than the atoms of the ambient medium can react and in the process drag a pocket (cavity) into that medium.

The ambient medium then collapses that pocket or empty space like a trillion atom smashers all pointed that the center, the pocket slams back together with the pressure of the ambient medium.

This results in the formation of electron clusters. Electrons do not want to stay clustered (Columb's law) and so they explode back outward with the pressure and speed of atomic energy and knock other electrons free from the ambient medium and produces electron cascade effect.

"Nobody ever thought of using an accelerator before." - Stan Meyer

The energy we place into the process is focused on a much smaller area (the center of the cavity) and when the atomic energy was released from the mass, the energy released included our original input energy that created the cavity and any energy that was released when some of the mass was converted into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

Thermodynamics:
The laws of thermodynamics do not apply to this process. The first three were written by men describing fire and steam engines. Men that had never seen a telephone or an automobile, airplane or even perhaps an electric light. That should relegate thermodynamics to it's proper role in this discussion.

The law of force F=MA:
The law of force has three exceptions, one of which is if the mass is moving at or near the speed of quantum entanglement.

Definition of ambient medium (states of matter):
Solids, liquids or gases.

I do not consider a plasma a state of matter since it is a fact that matter is transmuted in a plasma. Matter that is changing is not in a state.

If you look up the definition of plasma:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/state

...and you look at definition 5:
5.  Physics The condition of a physical system with regard to phase, form, composition, or structure: Ice is the solid state of water.

The definition implies a stability or form. Matter that is changing at quantum speed does not fit that definition and only serves to relegate the other states of matter to an undefined meaning.

So I feel that a better way to define a plasma is "matter in a state of change."

So in a nutshell...

    * Free energy devices can only do one thing - convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass and cavitation is required to accomplish that.
    * Any mass can be cavitated in any state.
    * Plasma is not a state of matter, it is matter in a state of change due to the fact that it is a cavitation.

You show me a free energy device that is not an energy receiver and I will show you where a cavitation is taking place.

References organized chronologically:
Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments: A Fresh Look by James DeMeo, Ph.D.
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
Greensprings, PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA.
Tel/Fax: 541-552-0118
E-mail to: info(at)orgonelab.org
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller2.htm

Milo Wolf - Quantum Matter
http://www.quantummatter.com/
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 17, 2008, 01:01:47 AM
@ chet:

As I said over on my topic "Free energy Overunity we need a definition" I think that 0 Cost Energy defines what I am looking for.  Not energy out of nothing.  Not violating laws of physics, just 0 Cost Energy.  A lot of devices that work, and are proven to work, fit into this category neatly. (solar, wind, river turbines, earth batteries, geothermal, etc.)

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 17, 2008, 05:22:47 AM

This results in the formation of electron clusters. Electrons do not want to stay clustered (Columb's law) and so they explode back outward with the pressure and speed of atomic energy and knock other electrons free from the ambient medium and produces electron cascade effect.


You use the term "ambient medium" a great deal.  Pretty sure the AM is not particle-based.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 17, 2008, 04:40:54 PM
      In a spark gap there builds up around the cathode a zone of free electrons due to the ionization of the electrode metal.  The shape of the electrode will determine the geometry of this region.  As the voltage increases across the electrodes the gas between this zone and the anode ionizes.  The free electrons from the gas  are then drawn towards the anode and will neutralize the anode voltage unless caused to "miss" it.  Presuming that a method is used to deflect electrons from the face of the anode is employed: then divergent currents of electrons flow into the circuit with increased velocity gained negotiating the gap.  The ionized neuclei of the gas will experience inertial gain in the direction of the cathode where it displaces the electron buffer zone developed around the cathode.  The electrons are then displaced and absorb the inertial gain of the neuclei.  They become acclerated and form a superconductive cloud of electrons from cathode to anode skin.  A massive current is then allowed to flow across the gap with very little resistance.  The scource voltage and external circuit being the only limiting factor.  The electron field is linearly accelerated in the gap and radiant energy flows from the spark gap.  Transverse emwaves and all sorts of heat and secondary radioactive emission from electron bombardment of the anode electron collection metal.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 17, 2008, 06:20:15 PM
Buzz,

Are you familiar with Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter?  I'm willing to discuss this device from various perspectives as it is 100+ years old and open-source.

Supposedly there is a true gain in energy in the magnifying coil (the third one).

How does this device operate from the persepctive of cavitation? 

What is the mechanism of gain?

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 17, 2008, 08:50:02 PM
Physics students at Max Plank University or the University of Washington it is universal that the average person in conversation with a physics major is going to get lost quickly. It is an age old dilemma to express concepts in terms everyone can understand. For my part, I think it a waste of time. Reason: There is just so much time in a day and unless one has an immediate application, in my case the Clem Engine, the time spent could be better given to visual representations less equations in unending strings. I am just now involved in such a project for presentation to a publisher and as an aid in showing how the device works. Even a working machine shown to experts is not going to resolve the dilemma.
Case in point is the Clem Engine shown to Bendix Corp engineers during shaft output torque testing. "Must be atomic in nature with all that excess heat". I am talking about a working machine and a non intuitive device. An that is the problem. If it does not make sense to the common person.....well, it must be a fraud or magic.
The best thing to do in the Clem Car is to say .....Get in, buckle up, and shut up!




      In a spark gap there builds up around the cathode a zone of free electrons due to the ionization of the electrode metal.  The shape of the electrode will determine the geometry of this region.  As the voltage increases across the electrodes the gas between this zone and the anode ionizes.  The free electrons from the gas  are then drawn towards the anode and will neutralize the anode voltage unless caused to "miss" it.  Presuming that a method is used to deflect electrons from the face of the anode is employed: then divergent currents of electrons flow into the circuit with increased velocity gained negotiating the gap.  The ionized neuclei of the gas will experience inertial gain in the direction of the cathode where it displaces the electron buffer zone developed around the cathode.  The electrons are then displaced and absorb the inertial gain of the neuclei.  They become acclerated and form a superconductive cloud of electrons from cathode to anode skin.  A massive current is then allowed to flow across the gap with very little resistance.  The scource voltage and external circuit being the only limiting factor.  The electron field is linearly accelerated in the gap and radiant energy flows from the spark gap.  Transverse emwaves and all sorts of heat and secondary radioactive emission from electron bombardment of the anode electron collection metal.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 17, 2008, 09:34:04 PM
Grumpy, I missed your question.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tmt.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tmt.htm)

Buzzer sound - Sorry, that constitutes an energy receiver. I stipulated that at the end of my cavitation diatribe.

The cavitation is taking place in the Sun?

I am familiar with Meyl.

Magnifier is not "really" a reciever.  See, the part called the "transmitter" is converting energy from one form into another.  The part called the "reciever" converts the energy back to the original form.  connect the two together and it's an "energy magnifier" - not an energy reciever - so you can discuss it - or not.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 17, 2008, 10:01:30 PM
    If the ambient medium or vacuum whatever exists as electron-positron pairs then massless space would be full of something to work with. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 17, 2008, 10:30:33 PM
@ THEBUZZ

Salt water (1% to 3% by weight) in the Clem Engine converts water mass to energy. If the polar ethanol is used, the ethanol reforms and x amount of mass converts to heat and light energy. However, no radiation with ethanol and a lower operating temperature is achieved. Both external heat and ethanol need to be added from time to time. Conservation of energy in action. The thermal characteristics of ethanol less any surfactant (shell) are far smaller than salt water. I have not researched surfactant shell configurations for ethanol to improve dielectric bubble capacitance that may or may not enhance ethanol for mass conversion. It too may provide nuclear fuel with proper configuration and run at a lower temperature. My analysis of the Clem Engine was confined to the elements presented and deduced based upon Clem's life style. Sulphco, Inc has a process to catcrack sour crude oil using water cavitation in oil to separate sulfur from the sour crude. The sulfur forms beads and is filtered out. Clem had contact with refinery people at the Bar/Cafe he went to after work. This seed idea has, after years of maturing, become something that could turn the energy world upside down.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 18, 2008, 05:58:33 AM
O.K., I bite. I honestly don't know much about the device. I just Googled that and scanned what Naudin had wrote, pasted the link in.

From what I do remember about Meyl, he produced two longitudinal waves with a common ground plane in the form of a copper wire.

Since particles are held into a lump using two scalar waves, I would assume that they are de-spinning that scalar wave of the mass. Where is the mass being converted? I would assume on or in the capacitors above the coils. I also assume the parametric wave associated with the pancake coil has an acceleration property to it similar to the mechanical action of a bull whip.

What best defines my knowledge of this particular device is what I don't know since this is one I have never looked at it closely.

One thing is for sure, whether it is a receiver or a mass to atomic energy converter, the OU comes from somewhere and some magical buzz word like zero point or aether does not explain anything.

Let's hear your thoughts since you brought it up. Don't worry Grumpula, the trolls have already been fed.

What is a longitudinal wave - to you?

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 18, 2008, 10:36:03 AM
The way I understand Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter is:
You build 2 identical units and use one as the transmitter and the other as the receiver.
The antenna of each one is build to function as the plate of a capacitor.
That is why he used spheres so they could interact with each other better at a distance.
Two spheres will always be parallel to each other in space. 
If you used flat plates that were exactly parallel to each other that would work even better.
Somehow energy is collected from the space between the two plates as you transmit and receive.
The measurements show that there is more energy coming out of the receiver then what was transmitted.

This is how I understand the essence of the device anyway,
don't think anyone else has ever put it this way before me. 

I wonder if the larger the plates the more energy it would collect? 
If someone has 2 identical ignition coils or flyback transformers maybe they could test this.
Use Naudins circuit setup. 

At the following site you can see what I am talking about.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lmdtem.htm 
The "longitudinal waves" setup uses coils separated by capacitors.

 Now if we tuned the two circuits to a Rife frequency that kills cancer cells,
then a person could sit between the plates and cure the cancer while generating electricity. ;D ;D ;D

 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Paul-R on December 18, 2008, 03:53:45 PM
A Tesla coil produces a longitudinal wave, a solonoid coil produces a transverse wave.

The difference between pulling on a rope and shaking a rope.
What a fantastic metaphor.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 18, 2008, 05:24:11 PM
    The Earth acting as an inductor and the atmosphere as the dielectric in a resonant circuit is a cool idea but how would one first create a waveguide and secondly damp such a wave to say charge a battery bank.  My little transistor radio runs off a piece of copper wire attached to ground but hell to pickup any kind of meaningful power we gotta go with one big old piece of wire.  The only way I can see is get some kinda magnetic hurricane going that creates magnetic currents inside the Earth so we dont need such a big piece of wire. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 19, 2008, 03:29:20 AM
@Sparks

The Cern experiment is about to find out how magnetic reconnect with the magnetosphere causes uncontrolled plasmas outside the ring accelerator. At the resonant frequency of the earth (16-60 KHz) a conduit is provided by the atmosphere. and magnetic vortexes form along the path of the pulsed ring accelerator (eddy currents) that will shut down the accelerator from plasmas created.
You might try to pick off power at the earth's resonant frequency with a large magnetic loop. Caution: Lightning can come from the ground or above and fuse your receiver. Cern may want to magnetically shield (contain the pulsed field) to prevent stray uncontrolled plasmas from forming. A harmonic resonance with the pulse frequency and the earth's resonant frequency my have dire consequences in the form of a worm hole. A wave guide would only be effective in the microwave end of the spectrum. One other problem is the resonant frequency not being constant so you would have to track the drift with automatic fine tuning. Marconi and Tesla failed to figure the magnetic reconnect in their world transmission scheme. Plasmas would have fused their equipment at some point.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 19, 2008, 06:17:48 AM
A Tesla coil produces a longitudinal wave, a solonoid coil produces a transverse wave.

The difference between pulling on a rope and shaking a rope.

Since a pancake coil is a capacitor on the side of opposite polarity and magnetic field producing a parametric wave, I assume that is how we get there using that as the primary. To me anyway.

With a longitudinal wave only the medium expands and contracts - no electrons move across vast distances - hence the superliminal velocity that Tesla measured.

If the medium is capable of changes in density then it can be cavitated.  This is exactly what Tesla did with a massless medium that is not constrained by laws that require mass.

One other thing about longitudinal waves - the magnetic field vanishes.

In the Tesla Magnifier, both the earth and the atmosphere became conductors for this massless longitudinal wave.  All the talk of bouncing stuff off the ionosphere and conducting waves through the earth is BS.  If you have a working magnifier, you can pull and large amount of conventional electricity right out of the empty space adjacent to the extra coil of the magnifier - if you cannot then it is not tuned properly - period.  Many tune them for long sparks - not a one tunes for the real deal.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 19, 2008, 06:22:16 AM
    The Earth acting as an inductor and the atmosphere as the dielectric in a resonant circuit is a cool idea but how would one first create a waveguide and secondly damp such a wave to say charge a battery bank. 
...

The earth is a dielectric - big secret, by the way.

The "waveguide" is created because an electric line of force can not end in space and must end on a conductor - there is your waveguide.  The energy is not dumped through the wire but around it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 19, 2008, 04:08:28 PM
   Tesla wanted to produce lightning strikes to create a pole from which he could radiate energy.  In accomplishing this lightning strike efficiently he drew on a scource of energy which is the dielectric polarization of I would say everything.  By causing a resonant current to travel between his elevated terminal and his ground terminal I believe he was able to have the dielectric field flux surrounding his top load capacitor feed into his circuits.  When his elevated terminal becomes relative to the dielectric field potential surrounding it there is a flow of energy into the circuit.  The input to this resonant secondary is not conveyed by tight inductive coupling to the primary in any way.  Therefore the secondary resonance is allowed to gain momentum independent of the exciting scource.  The frequency of this secondary resonant circuit was controlled so that transverse waves were minimized requiring the frequency to be quite low.  Between 6to20khz.  The cavitation seems to occur in his top load capacitor plate which at Wardenclyffe takes on the form of a hemisphere.  I really don't think he wanted to pull a giant spark out of the neighborhood.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 19, 2008, 10:00:13 PM
    I believe the magnifying transmitter was a means to an end.  The secondary of the transformer resonates at whatever wave length he wants to radiate as a longitudinal wave in the Earth.  The system runs with gain with input at the split capacitor plates.  One the top load and the other that big steel thing underground.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 19, 2008, 10:58:54 PM
@Sparks
Magnetic reconnect from the magnetosphere and the dynamo in the earth's mantel effects all electromagnetic and RF propagation. This is no secret during a Sun Spot flare (CME). A tuned or resonant system at the resonant frequency of the earth using a conducting magnetic loop should be able to pick off usable current using Tesla's formulas. A little large and large load cell (stacked capacitors) to store the energy. It is simply too cumbersome to construct and not reliable due to drift.
Atmosphere and oceans, thought to be a dielectric, are not. MHD of atmosphere and oceans in fact discharge huge amounts of current to earth ground (more correctly to lower potential). Artemus, the Swedish chemist and Noble Laureate, has much to say about MHD and the oceans as a charging system. The ocean Gyres with salt water produce huge currents.....but just try to show it on a meter. As fast as the current is created it is discharged leaving a small residual charge that can be measured. The earth system is too dynamic. Example: One could run a cable between poles of the earth and tap the potential .....ridiculous!
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 19, 2008, 11:29:30 PM
@CrazyFox

       Earth has been dealing with cme on a regular basis for a long time.  Nasa has a great video of a cme of large intensity hitting the Earth.  It was of the South Pole and showed up the perpectual plasmic whirlwhind  at the South pole.  I definitely believe there is an MHD current inside the Earth that is supported by the solar wind and creates the plasmasphere which collects the suns cme which runs the MHD .....   This structure as you stated determines the electromagnetic parameters of the cooking rock.  When a big cme hits Earth it pops power company transformers cause the impedance of the core is altered and the eddy currents go over the top and cook the primaries.  I can't imagine what would happen if Cern is pulsing away and a cme changes those coils impedance.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 20, 2008, 06:08:09 AM
I doubt you are contradicting yourself, rather I just don't understand what you are saying.

I understand the Earth's atmosphere to be dielectric, the earth to be one plate and space to be the other. A bit like an inside out Leyden jar. Is this what you are saying?

You are being deliberately obtuse.

"Soil" is a polar dielectric not a conductor - look it up.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 20, 2008, 03:27:55 PM
Well your user name certainly fits. No, I am not being deliberately obtuse, it is just something I have not studied.

Are you being a pointed object that causes me pain? Hartman doesn't want me to call people the "P" word anymore. ;-)

So anyway... is there a cavitation in the magnifier? Could Tesla have filled his dome with a gas such as hydrogen, helium  or nitrogen? I hear Tesla liked to play with tubes of high pressure nitrogen.

My name fits perfectly - that is why I use it - I am honest and true to myself.

There is cavitation at the spark gap.  Then, all of Hell break loose in the extra coil where the magnification occurs.  This is where the shockwave in the medium occurs - no electrons - no particles - mass of coil appears to facilitate converted but is not consumed.  Are you familiar with the work of Richard Quick and Richard Hull with Tesla Magnifiers and 2-coil Tesla Transformers?

The top terminal is a capacitor terminal - no gas - no cavitation here - it is coupled to the reciever(s) via a non-ionic field - no ionosphere involvment.  The very deep and expensive ground connection is coupled the same way  but through the earth and the earth can store a lot of energy.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 20, 2008, 06:01:25 PM
Thanks Buzz - we are not different at all.

Pull all of the electrons out of something and it will come apart - at least in theory.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 20, 2008, 06:07:50 PM
Interesting stuff. I made a note of Quick and Hull and I'll have to look more closely at that in time. As for the coil not being consumed, probably true but something is. Since there is so much atomic energy in mass you could never measure the loss, hence the Einstein quote in my tag line.

Nothing is consumed, only converted.   It just appears to run with gain because we do not see the entire picture.  The universe works on these principles.  I guess they may be called "creative forces".
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 20, 2008, 07:44:45 PM
Ouch!!
Sorry about the delay
600 ft driveway and the #&%@@# payloader won't start!!
Another foot of snow coming tonight
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 20, 2008, 09:40:49 PM
@TheBuzz

Cavitation occurs in the helical channels toward the center of the Von Karmen Vortex formed at the case and channel boundary. Vapor phase transition to cavitation ideally should occur at midpoint in the helical channels. A constant blue glow comes from that area along with considerable heat that is dissipated in the oil downstream to the nozzles. To much salt water and it won't work but just a small water to oil ratio in the emulsion works well. The working fluid (emulsion) will become caustic and Sol Gel ceramic coating over nickel plating on base metal of aluminum/nickel/bronze is advised. Sodium Hydroxide (Hydroxyl) is formed over time from dissolved Tritium. This aids in further fusion reactions in the mass part of the equation.
The Houston Chronicle on line may have more on cavitation from the science editors desk archived?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: CrazyFox on December 20, 2008, 09:53:01 PM
@Sparks


Cern eddy currents are on the fringe of this cavitation topic. Cern may well become toast if they can not control external of the ring plasmas. Super conductors can handle a huge surge but they would be well advised to install magnetic shielding to prevent the reconnect with the fields mentioned. CME are not all alike either and that discussion goes of topic.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 12:02:53 AM

I read most of the threads posted here...as I'm sure many othere do.

I cannot help notice your incessant reference to the 'trolls'...who I assume are the same members who 'you' began insulting upon your entrance on this forum.

The same members who you repeatedly try to blacken with your muck, by aspersion, with cryptic references to the 'trolls that hound you so'.

Give it up...share your info...and stop whining like a petulant adolescent...and most of all --- move-on-with-your-life.

You are smart enough to follow all that right ?

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 12:06:33 AM
CAP
You know what they say about ASS U ME ??
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 12:47:58 AM

Hey, happy groundhog day rset,

Should we all then assume that anytime anyone here uses the word 'assume' they can expect to be regaled with a similar follow up posting from yourself ??

Or do you save it just for me...or for some reason unknown to me, is it that you feel that you must stand up and defend the buzz ?

Oh, and by the way...if, down the road, something ever comes between you and the buzz, always remember, I am a confirmed hetro...if you get my drift.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 12:59:29 AM
Hey Cap
your Drift Is swinging in the wind
 Lets be NICE and professional
There are experiments going on here, not just talk[verbal vomit] take a seat
Produce or reduce [your unsolicited contribution]
Thanks
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 01:38:15 AM

You appear to be not much better than buzz...with these attempts to lower my profile.

Like you tried before renmember...when I thought we straitened things out in private.

It appears your complicity was merely to escape a 'profile lowering' situation...something I have a feeling you are quite familiar with.

So spare everyone the sanctimonious soapbox show of disapproval...and mind your own business.

If you wish to be led around by your nose by someone releasing tidbits of information to have everyone hanging on his every word to feed obvious ego issues...which became glaringly apparent when he entered - then do so, as was intended.

Meanwhile, the world is in an energy crisis while this guy is playing mind games...because make no mistake that is what they are...we've seen it go on here before.

And mind games are apparently what you and the buzz are all about...now I hope you are you happy you pounded on my door this evening.

So have a good life.

Do not...bother addressing me again in the future...you had your one chance with me...now its adios.


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 02:07:24 AM

YES HE IS A SWEET GUY
but somehow I feel slandered almost, ATTACKED vulnerable [almost]
Cap do you ever do ANYTHING besides TALK??
Ever clear off the bench and EXPERIMENT??
Come on LETS EXPERIMENT
The Buzz has laid a good foundation ,lets give it a go
 Chet

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 02:22:39 AM

Of course not...not directly anyway.

But thats the beauty of it isn't it ?

Stick to your knitting if you wish to be tolerated here...because that is your position here, given your record of conduct.

Not to mention that you are withholding possibly useful information, just so that you can be the center of attention...you already showed us that you are willing to sacrifice your integrity for notoriety.
...


I do not like being this harsh with people, but sometimes the gloves must come off.

Normally I do not stick my nose in research threads...for reasons of common sense.

However, I will not remain silent when someone starts a thread and decides to cast aspersions in the direction of myself and other members previously wronged by the thread poster.

And I will not react in kindness to anyone who thinks they are going to bully me or challenge my right to stand up for myself.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 02:45:45 AM
Cap  are you with us?
you seem off on a tangent?
What are you trying to say"?
 ?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 03:08:18 AM

Note that he chose to soil Bills thread with his revisionist vitriol...and not the one that HE started.

Its the thread on polarization...where he plans to disseminate little bits of information over many pages of attention seeking, keeping the entire forum on the edge of their seats.

Note also, that he was banned for acting like a troll, because he is a troll...a troll that knows some things - or knows someone who does.

If the troll persists, I will remove the luster from his thread by paste my relevant posts on hid thread.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 03:42:54 AM

The claiming high moral ground publicly does not mean ownership.

In other words, a troll previously banned for trolling, insinuating that others are trolls in order to create disharmony, is quite apparent to anyone who can read.

Regards...
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 21, 2008, 05:32:56 AM
@ Cap-Z-ro

Stay the fuck out of this!

Is that clear enough for you?

Let me rephrase - shut the fuck up! - dipshit!

================================

Buzz

Sometimes I see it.  Sometimes I just can't reach it.


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 02:25:03 PM

" @ Cap-Z-ro "

@Grumpy


"  Stay the fuck out of this! "

Stay the fuck out of what ??
I guess what you are saying is that I should just roll over while some troll, previously banned for abusing various members, continues his abuse through inuendo and cryptic reference ?

You may be willing to overlook the fact he is baiting the members he previously abused, but that is okay, because you were not the victim, right...we've seen that game all too often on this planet.

But to have the temerity to expect his targets ignore the baiting is either ridiculous, arrogant, or a little of both.

If you don't have the spine to stand up for yourself that is your problem...don't think for one second that you are going to bully me into thinking that its my problem.
 
Maybe you should take some of your own advice...and mind your own business.

If, in all the kerfuffle your nose was dislodged from the snuggely warm confines of buzz's butt crack, then I sincerely apologize.


"  Is that clear enough for you? "

I believe the question really is...is that not clear enough for you ??


" Let me rephrase - shut the fuck up! - dipshit! "

I now see why you defend the abuser...you are an abuser yourself.

Hurl one more unprovoked insult my way, and you will reported like your abusive cohort...and hopefully banned.

So far as I have seen, neither of you have contributed anything other than your surly and abrasive dispositions to this forum.


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 21, 2008, 02:31:46 PM
     When there isn't anything else around but protons and neutrons then I would imagine they would organize with magnetic dipole moments being the determining parameter.  Then when the electron current is relaxed they first create a pressure on the lattice.  Enough pressure to squeeze a couple of protons together and pop a neutron?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 21, 2008, 06:23:29 PM
" @ Cap-Z-ro "

@Grumpy


"  Stay the fuck out of this! "

Stay the fuck out of what ??
I guess what you are saying is that I should just roll over while some troll, previously banned for abusing various members, continues his abuse through inuendo and cryptic reference ?

You may be willing to overlook the fact he is baiting the members he previously abused, but that is okay, because you were not the victim, right...we've seen that game all too often on this planet.

But to have the temerity to expect his targets ignore the baiting is either ridiculous, arrogant, or a little of both.

If you don't have the spine to stand up for yourself that is your problem...don't think for one second that you are going to bully me into thinking that its my problem.
 
Maybe you should take some of your own advice...and mind your own business.

If, in all the kerfuffle your nose was dislodged from the snuggely warm confines of buzz's butt crack, then I sincerely apologize.


"  Is that clear enough for you? "

I believe the question really is...is that not clear enough for you ??


" Let me rephrase - shut the fuck up! - dipshit! "

I now see why you defend the abuser...you are an abuser yourself.

Hurl one more unprovoked insult my way, and you will reported like your abusive cohort...and hopefully banned.

So far as I have seen, neither of you have contributed anything other than your surly and abrasive dispositions to this forum.




What have you contributed, besides piss in the wind?

I wish I could be banned from this forum, then I could get more work done!

If you pulled your head out of your own ass-crack you'd see that what Buzz and I are discussing is how OU devices really work, but you are to caught up in your own pathetic drama to see past the sphincter your head is immersed in.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 07:33:25 PM

" What have you contributed, besides piss in the wind? "

By that you mean, other than good will, informative threads and post.

Well let see then...at least I contributed an anomalous circuit which charges a battery without a detectable outside source.

Additionally, in my spare time I applied for, and was granted Canadian and US Patents, for which I provided the specs and the artwork.

And Just to see your piss blow back in your own face, what have you contributed here oor anywhere...other that your complete lack of couth ??

The answer would be absolutely nothing, right.


 "I wish I could be banned from this forum, "

At this point, many of us probably wish that also.


" then I could get more work done! "

I have my doubts you would know what actual work is.


" If you pulled your head out of your own ass-crack you'd see that what Buzz and I are discussing is how OU devices really work, but you are to caught up in your own pathetic drama to see past the sphincter your head is immersed in."

Yeah...its all about you and tyhe Buzz isn't it ?

Maybe if you hadn' had your own head up there, you would see what else the 'Buzz' was mixing into your "discussion" for other members...but we know that would never happen don't we ?

Because you are only concerned about your own selfish needs...which at the moment are the crumbs of "information" he drops on your head to keep you around.

And maybe if you had closed your yap once and a while throughout your "life", maybe then you would have heard what happens when you piss into the wind.

So far I haven't seen anything come out of either of you that I hadn't pondered despite my limited background.

Hey...why don't you junior scientists just resume your circle jerk and pretend the rest of us don't exist...wait, never mind, you're doing that already.

Maybe you guys could try closing the loop, by sticking your heads up each others back passage, farting intermittently, to see if you can find some form of resonance.

Don't forget let everybody know how much you enjoy the Hershey kisses while you are 'working things out'.

If you don't currently have your head up your ass, it can only be that it won't fit with both feet in your mouth.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 07:47:18 PM
Give TheBuzz moderator privilages [PLEASE Stefan]
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 08:32:19 PM

Stefan, or any other moderator with a clear mind would never grant special privileges to someone recently banned for abusive conduct through the use of multible monikers...especially when he continues to insult and bait the members he previously abused.

These 3 stooges cannot rewrite history...especially their own.

They are abusers, and the more they persist, the more clear that will become.

For those who didn't notice the genesis of this bash fest...below is a couple of examples of Buzz referring to those he was banned for abusing as trolls, back on page 23.

" Let's hear your thoughts since you brought it up. Don't worry Grumpula, the trolls have already been fed. "

" Hartman felt the way to stop troll activity and my poor reaction to it would be for me to start a new thread and then lock it. "

This Buzz character has also accused or implied other members had stolen intellectual property.

If any other useless twit here thinks we/I do not have the right to address these personal attacks, step up and we will deal with it here and now.

Put up or shut up!

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 08:39:15 PM
CAP I don't know what you do for a living
But you would make a great wife For someone
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 21, 2008, 09:53:23 PM
CAP I don't know what you do for a living
But you would make a great wife For someone

Yep, this is pure "ramset science"...


@Cap-Z-ro
Please, leave this thread... It's not healthy to be here.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 10:22:12 PM
You had nothing relevant to say so you though you would digress with something stupid to ease your foot out of your mouth ?

Lets review your conduct toward me then...since you chose to step up.

The first I recall was back you made a snide remark when I called a subsequently banned user for abusive conduct toward one of the passive members here...something I let pass.

Next the Buzz enters abusing many members including me with insults, viciously attacking one member in particular.

When myself and a few others spoke up, you decided to take a few shots at me...for calling him a 'troll'...which is exactly what he was - and summarily banned.

When I pointed out the error of your ways, I thought we came to an understanding...else I wouldn't have let you off the hook so easily.

Before you know it the troll is reinstated after dropping a few crumbs of knowledge...and what does he start doing /

He mixes in with his crumbs, insinuations that the very people he was banned for abusing were trolls.

Ramset who hangs on his every word somehow miss the troll references that irked him previously...but jumps me for defending myself against Buzz's troll comments.

So, either he is a hypocrite...he is stupid...or he is in league with Buzz to purposely create disharmony on the board...in any case he isn't coming off looking too good.

Divide and conquer has been played since the beginning of time...and this little drama has been a useful distraction at the very least...and a minor victory for those who feed on discord.

By the way neither of you three stooges who have challenged my contribution here have mentioned anything positive you have contributed to this forum.

So...what have you all done lately...or at all ?
...



Missed your post while doing mine Spinner


" @Cap-Z-ro
Please, leave this thread... It's not healthy to be here. "


I know what you mean...I have had to do this on other boards from time to time.

Sometimes you just have to drag them around in their own dirt for a while...they get the message in the end.

Even the stupid, dense as they are, do not like to look stupid...so when their own words are used to make them look stupid, they eventually back off.

I don't abuse people, I don't take a position unless I am 100% sure of my facts, and I don't bull shit, so I don't have level headed people attacking me.

And I don't end up eating my words like the 3 amigo's should be doing...instead of making fools out of themselves.

So...when I do get attacked, I know exactly where its coming from.

Regards...
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 21, 2008, 11:05:02 PM
Cap-Z-ro

Anomalous circuit - whoop-de-doo.  Search the web - They are a dime a dozen. 

Do you know how or why it works?  Can it be scaled up?   

Bedini charges batteries too - don't see him lighting the whole city yet.

If your circuit is such hot stuff, why isn't everyone getting on board?

Oh you have a patent?!?! whoop-de-doo... Can you afford to defend it in court?  Can you afford to go after someone in China that builds and sells devices that use your technology?  Thought not.  Patents are for large corporations with the muscle to back it up. 

Let's part on a civil note Capt.  Develop your circuit and patented device and let Buzz and myself get back to trading cards.


As for my contributions - if you followed my posts for the last year you would see that I have explained how to build something that does more than just charge batteries.  Sorry if you missed it.

Buzz,

Tesla's use of the pancake explained in simplest terms: compression
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6348.msg145171#msg145171

The magnifying coil is similar but much better.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 11:20:28 PM

Nothing huh ?

Thought as much..all mouth...as predicted

Ever think of changing your user name from Grumpy to Abusive...do it...its perfect for you.

Go back in your hole and roll around in your own misery...you are nothing but a lout and a loser who can do nothing but talk...and abusively at that.

Pfft...
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 11:41:50 PM
THEBUZZ SAID
I suppose it would begin with the assumption that all there is, is energy. If I had to make a guess, I suspect that half the energy in the universe is in the form of mass. Mass is energy that is compressed, spinning and polarized.

Explaining how energy is compressed into matter is probably best done by taking a field trip to the website of Milo Wolf http://quantummatter.com/articles/see_an_electron.html

and looking at a image of the galaxy we live in.

http://www2.lns.mit.edu/~LQS/Milky_Way_galaxy_sun05.jpg

Our universe is made of fractals and surely the reason that if you expand Mandelbrot's equation out to the size of the universe, you begin to see images of snow covered mountains, trees and other things we see everyday. If you truly want to know the shape of the universe, look in a mirror. Edgar Cayce and the law of probability should be required reading for anyone wanting a better understanding of the cosmos.

Free energy:
The term free energy creates a reaction with an educated person since it implies energy from nothing. This of course is impossible and silly and so the reaction is justified.

A better term would be "economic free energy". Since a gallon of water contains the atomic energy equivalent, equal to the chemical equivalent of millions of barrels of oil, the gallon of water would represent economic free energy.

The best term would be mass to atomic energy converter. Since all free energy devices do just that. Energy does not come from nothing - no exceptions.
 
Zero Point:
Notice nowhere in that simple equation E=MC2 is there anything that represents aether or zero point? I am going to stick with my own experience and some of the best scientific minds on Earth. Of course there is a zero point and of course there is less than a zero point. It would be impossible to have a black hole without less than zero and so everything in between exists as well. It has nothing to to do with free energy.

Aether:
The aether field was measured and observed by Dayton Miller using light-beam interferometry in the early part of the 1900s to measure an Earth-entrained aether drift.

Many scientist assumed and wrote of the existence of the aether field which included Crookes, Lodge, Faraday, Michelson, Moorley, Miller, Tesla, Reich and even Einstein.

Einstein later denied the aether field and this is confirmed in a letter he wrote to Shankland thanking him for disproving Miller. In the letter Einstein acknowledged that the existence of the aether would invalidate special relativity.

"Dear Dr. Shankland:
I thank you very much for sending me your careful study about the Miller experiments. Those experiments, conducted with so much care, merit, of course, a very careful statistical investigation. This is more so as the existence of a not trivial positive effect would affect very deeply the fundament of theoretical physics as it is presently accepted.

You have shown convincingly that the observed effect is outside the range of accidental deviations and must, therefore, have a systematic cause. You made it quite probable that this systematic cause has nothing to do with 'ether-wind', but has to do with differences of temperature of the air traversed by the two light bundles which produced the bands of interference. Such an effect is indeed practically inevitable if the walls of the laboratory room have a not negligible difference in temperature.
It is one of the cases where the systematic errors are increasing quickly with the dimension of the apparatus.

Congratulating you and your colleagues on your valuable contribution to our knowledge,

I am with kind regards,
A. Einstein" (31 August 1954)

(contained in Shankland, Applied Optics 1973, p.2283)

Dayton Miller did 10,000 hours of observation of the aether on a mountain near Ashland Oregon. His observations concluded the field moves at 24.5 kilometers per hour across the planet, concentrated between -100 meters below the surface and +300 meters above the surface and departs the planet in the direction of the constellation Leo. It tends to flow around objects like mountains but also flows through them to some extent.

My own thoughts on this are that given the fact that aether has been proven to come from space and return to space reveal that it is sourced by a larger body such as the solar system or the Milky Way Galaxy or perhaps any large body of mass. Daton Miller's experiments indicated that there was an aether drift that also flowed from the Sun.

No boat plies the water as fast as the wind that blows upon the square sail. The aether drift therefor is moving 24.5 kilometers per hour faster than our solar system.

Regardless of what the aether is, it can be said with relative certainty what it is not. Is is not a source of free energy. Mass to atomic energy conversion and the aether drift are two entirely two different subjects.

Converting energy into mass:
Milo Wolf did excellent work describing the science behind energy to mass conversion using a inbound longitudinal wave superimposed over an outbound longitudinal wave. His website is filled with information on the wave structure of matter. http://www.quantummatter.com/

So now that one has a basic understanding that mass is concentrated energy, how it got that way and the state that it exists we look at the opposite of that process.

Converting mass into energy (cavitation):
I have done some research on converting mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass which is the opposite of Milo Wolf but his wave matter structure helps to understand the process of cavitation which destroys that wave structure releasing the atomic energy of the mass.

If you go to Wiki and look up cavitation it begins:

"Cavitation - "Cavitation is defined as the phenomenon..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavitation

Next we look up phenomenon:
http://www.answers.com/topic/phenomenon
"An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the senses.
An unusual, significant, or unaccountable fact or occurrence; a marvel."

So it is fairly common usage and definition of the word phenomenon that it is something we observe but can't explain.

Wouldn't it be silly to suggest that cavitation can only occur in a liquid? I have heard a sonic boom referred to as a cavitation plenty of times because it is. The emitted light can be observed on the rotor tips of a helicopter through night vision equipment, etc.

So to produce a cavitation, we move energy or mass through an ambient medium such as a gas, liquid or solid faster than the atoms of the ambient medium can react and in the process drag a pocket (cavity) into that medium.

The ambient medium then collapses that pocket or empty space like a trillion atom smashers all pointed that the center, the pocket slams back together with the pressure of the ambient medium.

This results in the formation of electron clusters. Electrons do not want to stay clustered (Columb's law) and so they explode back outward with the pressure and speed of atomic energy and knock other electrons free from the ambient medium and produces electron cascade effect.

"Nobody ever thought of using an accelerator before." - Stan Meyer

The energy we place into the process is focused on a much smaller area (the center of the cavity) and when the atomic energy was released from the mass, the energy released included our original input energy that created the cavity and any energy that was released when some of the mass was converted into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

Thermodynamics:
The laws of thermodynamics do not apply to this process. The first three were written by men describing fire and steam engines. Men that had never seen a telephone or an automobile, airplane or even perhaps an electric light. That should relegate thermodynamics to it's proper role in this discussion.

The law of force F=MA:
The law of force has three exceptions, one of which is if the mass is moving at or near the speed of quantum entanglement.

Definition of ambient medium (states of matter):
Solids, liquids or gases.

I do not consider a plasma a state of matter since it is a fact that matter is transmuted in a plasma. Matter that is changing is not in a state.

If you look up the definition of plasma:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/state

...and you look at definition 5:
5.  Physics The condition of a physical system with regard to phase, form, composition, or structure: Ice is the solid state of water.

The definition implies a stability or form. Matter that is changing at quantum speed does not fit that definition and only serves to relegate the other states of matter to an undefined meaning.

So I feel that a better way to define a plasma is "matter in a state of change."

So in a nutshell...

    * Free energy devices can only do one thing - convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass and cavitation is required to accomplish that.
    * Any mass can be cavitated in any state.
    * Plasma is not a state of matter, it is matter in a state of change due to the fact that it is a cavitation.

You show me a free energy device that is not an energy receiver and I will show you where a cavitation is taking place.

References organized chronologically:
Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments: A Fresh Look by James DeMeo, Ph.D.
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
Greensprings, PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA.
Tel/Fax: 541-552-0118
E-mail to: info(at)orgonelab.org
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller2.htm

Milo Wolf - Quantum Matter
http://www.quantummatter.com/
 
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 12:27:01 PM by TheBuzz »  Report to moderator    Logged 
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 21, 2008, 11:43:34 PM
Nothing huh ?

Thought as much..all mouth...as predicted

Ever think of changing your user name from Grumpy to Abusive...do it...its perfect for you.

Go back in your hole and roll around in your own misery...you are nothing but a lout and a loser who can do nothing but talk...and abusively at that.

Pfft...

I am not the least bit sorry that I pointed out that your circuit and patent are worthless and that you have wasted a great deal of time and money.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 21, 2008, 11:48:10 PM
Buzz Said I suppose it would begin with the assumption that all there is, is energy. If I had to make a guess, I suspect that half the energy in the universe is in the form of mass. Mass is energy that is compressed, spinning and polarized.

Explaining how energy is compressed into matter is probably best done by taking a field trip to the website of Milo Wolf http://quantummatter.com/articles/see_an_electron.html

and looking at a image of the galaxy we live in.

http://www2.lns.mit.edu/~LQS/Milky_Way_galaxy_sun05.jpg

Our universe is made of fractals and surely the reason that if you expand Mandelbrot's equation out to the size of the universe, you begin to see images of snow covered mountains, trees and other things we see everyday. If you truly want to know the shape of the universe, look in a mirror. Edgar Cayce and the law of probability should be required reading for anyone wanting a better understanding of the cosmos.

Free energy:
The term free energy creates a reaction with an educated person since it implies energy from nothing. This of course is impossible and silly and so the reaction is justified.

A better term would be "economic free energy". Since a gallon of water contains the atomic energy equivalent, equal to the chemical equivalent of millions of barrels of oil, the gallon of water would represent economic free energy.

The best term would be mass to atomic energy converter. Since all free energy devices do just that. Energy does not come from nothing - no exceptions.
 
Zero Point:
Notice nowhere in that simple equation E=MC2 is there anything that represents aether or zero point? I am going to stick with my own experience and some of the best scientific minds on Earth. Of course there is a zero point and of course there is less than a zero point. It would be impossible to have a black hole without less than zero and so everything in between exists as well. It has nothing to to do with free energy.

Aether:
The aether field was measured and observed by Dayton Miller using light-beam interferometry in the early part of the 1900s to measure an Earth-entrained aether drift.

Many scientist assumed and wrote of the existence of the aether field which included Crookes, Lodge, Faraday, Michelson, Moorley, Miller, Tesla, Reich and even Einstein.

Einstein later denied the aether field and this is confirmed in a letter he wrote to Shankland thanking him for disproving Miller. In the letter Einstein acknowledged that the existence of the aether would invalidate special relativity.

"Dear Dr. Shankland:
I thank you very much for sending me your careful study about the Miller experiments. Those experiments, conducted with so much care, merit, of course, a very careful statistical investigation. This is more so as the existence of a not trivial positive effect would affect very deeply the fundament of theoretical physics as it is presently accepted.

You have shown convincingly that the observed effect is outside the range of accidental deviations and must, therefore, have a systematic cause. You made it quite probable that this systematic cause has nothing to do with 'ether-wind', but has to do with differences of temperature of the air traversed by the two light bundles which produced the bands of interference. Such an effect is indeed practically inevitable if the walls of the laboratory room have a not negligible difference in temperature.
It is one of the cases where the systematic errors are increasing quickly with the dimension of the apparatus.

Congratulating you and your colleagues on your valuable contribution to our knowledge,

I am with kind regards,
A. Einstein" (31 August 1954)

(contained in Shankland, Applied Optics 1973, p.2283)

Dayton Miller did 10,000 hours of observation of the aether on a mountain near Ashland Oregon. His observations concluded the field moves at 24.5 kilometers per hour across the planet, concentrated between -100 meters below the surface and +300 meters above the surface and departs the planet in the direction of the constellation Leo. It tends to flow around objects like mountains but also flows through them to some extent.

My own thoughts on this are that given the fact that aether has been proven to come from space and return to space reveal that it is sourced by a larger body such as the solar system or the Milky Way Galaxy or perhaps any large body of mass. Daton Miller's experiments indicated that there was an aether drift that also flowed from the Sun.

No boat plies the water as fast as the wind that blows upon the square sail. The aether drift therefor is moving 24.5 kilometers per hour faster than our solar system.

Regardless of what the aether is, it can be said with relative certainty what it is not. Is is not a source of free energy. Mass to atomic energy conversion and the aether drift are two entirely two different subjects.

Converting energy into mass:
Milo Wolf did excellent work describing the science behind energy to mass conversion using a inbound longitudinal wave superimposed over an outbound longitudinal wave. His website is filled with information on the wave structure of matter. http://www.quantummatter.com/

So now that one has a basic understanding that mass is concentrated energy, how it got that way and the state that it exists we look at the opposite of that process.

Converting mass into energy (cavitation):
I have done some research on converting mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass which is the opposite of Milo Wolf but his wave matter structure helps to understand the process of cavitation which destroys that wave structure releasing the atomic energy of the mass.

If you go to Wiki and look up cavitation it begins:

"Cavitation - "Cavitation is defined as the phenomenon..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavitation

Next we look up phenomenon:
http://www.answers.com/topic/phenomenon
"An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the senses.
An unusual, significant, or unaccountable fact or occurrence; a marvel."

So it is fairly common usage and definition of the word phenomenon that it is something we observe but can't explain.

Wouldn't it be silly to suggest that cavitation can only occur in a liquid? I have heard a sonic boom referred to as a cavitation plenty of times because it is. The emitted light can be observed on the rotor tips of a helicopter through night vision equipment, etc.

So to produce a cavitation, we move energy or mass through an ambient medium such as a gas, liquid or solid faster than the atoms of the ambient medium can react and in the process drag a pocket (cavity) into that medium.

The ambient medium then collapses that pocket or empty space like a trillion atom smashers all pointed that the center, the pocket slams back together with the pressure of the ambient medium.

This results in the formation of electron clusters. Electrons do not want to stay clustered (Columb's law) and so they explode back outward with the pressure and speed of atomic energy and knock other electrons free from the ambient medium and produces electron cascade effect.

"Nobody ever thought of using an accelerator before." - Stan Meyer

The energy we place into the process is focused on a much smaller area (the center of the cavity) and when the atomic energy was released from the mass, the energy released included our original input energy that created the cavity and any energy that was released when some of the mass was converted into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

Thermodynamics:
The laws of thermodynamics do not apply to this process. The first three were written by men describing fire and steam engines. Men that had never seen a telephone or an automobile, airplane or even perhaps an electric light. That should relegate thermodynamics to it's proper role in this discussion.

The law of force F=MA:
The law of force has three exceptions, one of which is if the mass is moving at or near the speed of quantum entanglement.

Definition of ambient medium (states of matter):
Solids, liquids or gases.

I do not consider a plasma a state of matter since it is a fact that matter is transmuted in a plasma. Matter that is changing is not in a state.

If you look up the definition of plasma:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/state

...and you look at definition 5:
5.  Physics The condition of a physical system with regard to phase, form, composition, or structure: Ice is the solid state of water.

The definition implies a stability or form. Matter that is changing at quantum speed does not fit that definition and only serves to relegate the other states of matter to an undefined meaning.

So I feel that a better way to define a plasma is "matter in a state of change."

So in a nutshell...

    * Free energy devices can only do one thing - convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass and cavitation is required to accomplish that.
    * Any mass can be cavitated in any state.
    * Plasma is not a state of matter, it is matter in a state of change due to the fact that it is a cavitation.

You show me a free energy device that is not an energy receiver and I will show you where a cavitation is taking place.

References organized chronologically:
Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments: A Fresh Look by James DeMeo, Ph.D.
Director, Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
Greensprings, PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA.
Tel/Fax: 541-552-0118
E-mail to: info(at)orgonelab.org
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller2.htm

Milo Wolf - Quantum Matter
http://www.quantummatter.com/
 
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 12:27:01 PM by TheBuzz »  Report to moderator    Logged 
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 21, 2008, 11:53:58 PM

" I am not the least bit sorry that I pointed out that your circuit and patent are worthless and that you have wasted a great deal of time and money. "


Oh...but you are sorry...very sorry...that statement was about as senseless a response as any I have ever seen online.

That, and ranset's re-posting of his guru's long winded post, is the signal that both of you have now come to the point where you have run out of things to say...and are regretting opening up your big mouths...at least that is progress...of a sort.
 
Your mothers will be so proud.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 12:03:50 AM
capzero said
So far I haven't seen anything come out of either of you that I hadn't pondered despite my limited background 
  Cap you must ponder an awful lot
 you are also either lying for your own benefit or are completely delusional[in regard to your above quote
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 22, 2008, 12:06:48 AM
@ Ramset:

Please refrain from spamming this topic with long posts that have already been posted.  If you wanted to ref. that post, all you needed to do is to post a link, like this: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6192.150.

This will help keep the topic less cluttered.  Thanks, I appreciate your cooperation.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 12:41:54 AM

Ramset...

Face it, you have already been outed as an abuser and a hypocrite or worse.

You are getting so desperate that you are resorting to spamming the board to take the focus off your dysfunctional conduct.

Your problem...you don't have a clue how to conduct yourself in public...and couldn't care less.

Otherwise you wouldn't be dragging out this public display of your rude and boorish personality.

I am most certainly not enjoying this any more than you are...and I take no pleasure in this dressing down...the best thing for you to do right now would be to apologize and drop the ball...an apology is not expect, nor would it be worth anything at this point...however, yourselves a favor, and drop it.

As for the future...just pretend I'm not here.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 01:06:43 AM
Spamming??
trying to get a Topic  [that the person who posted , hardly nows anything about]
BACK ON TRACK [Is that spamming??]
What is going on here?
You guys hate this man

He comes here with a real theory [that seems to make a lot of sence]

Speaks with great knowledge and good teaching skills

Finds men of like mind and instead of listening and learning and appreciating you want to fight
Towards what end?? winning [what ?]

 PLEASE go away Cap Z ro [Stop interupting this thread with petty nonsence]

[Cap you take a PETTY sentence and try to make it sound lie somebodies killing someone]

I have heard things and seen members I never saw before in this thread [Brilliant men]

 This world needs ideas not Ego's

These men bring fresh meat for all to share

Stop living in the right here right now world and let learned men talk

Maybe youll learn something
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 22, 2008, 01:17:45 AM
@ Ramset:

Chet, yes, posting that the way you did, for whatever purpose is spamming.  If you did not know this than I am sorry.  That's what the link posts and/or the quote function is for.  If you want to get "back on topic" you then just make a relevant post of your own, or, post a link to a previous post you think some might have missed, which happens. Reposting for reposting's sake offers nothing to advance a topic, it just clutters up a thread.  I am trying to explain this as politely as I know how.  Thanks.

Just for the record, I do not hate anyone.  I have refrained from posting here as I have had nothing to add, which is what I usually try to do.  If I have nothing to add to advance a topic, I think it is better to remain silent.  This is just my opinion.

Bill
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 01:18:48 AM

Listen pal I was personally invited into this thread by innuendo...so forget trying to run that game...and here I am...you must enjoy my company...as bad as it makes you look.

You can dismiss, and try as you might to turn this around, but it just won't work...haven't you heard...you can't shine shit.

You are making yourself out to be a pig headed idiot.

Hey...but don't let me stop you...be my guest.

I await your next grasp at an imaginary straw.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 01:38:05 AM
Bill
 wiki's
Spam is the abuse of electronic messaging systems to indiscriminately send unsolicited bulk messages
 AKA advertising
 a word I've seen used in this FORUM many times, always derogatory
Never the way it was used today
that is why i thought you were being mean
sorry Bill
where can I find this Hip definition that I really am unaware of?
   Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 01:45:38 AM

You are making yourself out to be a pig headed idiot.


You are the only pig headed idiot on this thread, so why don't you go back to jerkin' off to comic books, shut up, and stop being angry at the world because you are a worthless loser.

You are as intelligent as a flushed turd.

============================

The "MR" forum is public.

Cap-z-ro and friends can keep this place and keep takin' it in the arse for their energy needs.   They seem to like that anyway.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 01:48:25 AM
" It is impossible to have a technical discussion here at overunity.com. "

It sure is ain't it...specially when you keep insulting people while you are having your "technical discussion".

Or would that "technically" be called multi-tasking ?

With every desperate flailing of arms, I can just imagine the guffaw meter going through the roof going on in the background...and everyone wondering just how silly the next reply will be.

==========

Sorry Grumpy/Abusive...but I missed your post or farewell, or whatever it was


Its funny how your last post is you, dead on...

" You are the only pig headed idiot on this thread, so why don't you go back to jerkin' off to comic books, shut up, and stop being angry at the world because you are a worthless loser. "


On the way out, you already established as the loser when you challenged me on my resume...and I actually had pretty good one...while you had what ?

Nothing is what you had in your hand...and your head too as it turned out.

If you are leaving, goodbye...if not, just stay out of my face...people like you take all the joy out of life.

 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 22, 2008, 01:50:33 AM
Chet:

Check Stefan Hartman's reply to Gabbydewilde on the Lead Out theory topic.  (buried somewhere in the millions and millions of posts....) He was doing the same thing.  Reposting stuff both he, and others, had posted before.  Stefan asked him to stop "spamming" that topic.  I am sorry wiki does not keep up on these new terms, ha ha.  That is where I got it from.  I had no intention of being mean.  Possibly it should just be called reposting?

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 01:56:09 AM
" It is impossible to have a technical discussion here at overunity.com. "

It sure is ain't it...specially when you keep insulting people while you are having your "technical discussion".

Or would that "technically" be called multi-tasking ?

With every desperate flailing of arms, I can just imagine the guffaw meter going through the roof going on in the background...and everyone wondering just how silly the next reply will be.

This is all you have left?  SPAM? 

I really wish you were smarter, but your just another dumb ass.

Still waiting on royalties for that patent or are you wiping yourself with it?  At least it is good for something.  I would expect the rough texture to create cavitation across your skin and make it shine like the sun.  (all puns are intentional)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 02:03:13 AM
Bill
Thanks for the explanation
I guess theses things evolve
   Chet
Buzz there's a good crowd here, a lot of good people
 lets not tuck tail
How can we talk to Stefan about this?
There are things being discussed here that have never been spoken of 
People need to here this 
And recently there has been a lot of interest
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 02:11:08 AM

And you have accomplished what in your life, with a sense of humor that reflects your grade school level of maturity ?

You were the stooge who accused me of being a know nothing and a do nothing...when in the end you were describing yourself.

That...would be a tough one to get off of you...those are the ones that stick to you...like tying a can to yourself.

Sorry Abusive...but you got a lot of egg on your face...you know what they say - make egg nog.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 02:24:46 AM
Cap
 so this is like a chat room to you
If this was your website ,you would allow people to act the way you are?
A really big event comes to your site and this would be acceptable to you?
You would throw Tesla out of the house [laughing all the way]
It ain't about you bud never was
This thread is ROCKIN in spite of you
The counter tells the tale
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 02:28:23 AM
And you have accomplished what in your life, with a sense of humor that reflects your grade school level of maturity ?

You were the stooge who accused me of being a know nothing and a do nothing...when in the end you were describing yourself.

That...would be a tough one to get off of you...those are the ones that stick to you...like tying a can to yourself.

Sorry Abusive...but you got a lot of egg on your face...you know what they say - make egg nog.

What have you accomplished?  Not a damn thing.  You have nothing but smack to talk.  You can charge a little battery - big freakin' deal. Anyone can charge one for free with a couple of metal plates and a little knowhow, so stop basking in your self-glorification - you ain't got squat. 

Hell, you don't even know what a damn battery is or how one works, but you sure as hell think you know everything because you got yourself a patent and a battery charger.

As for the patent - so what.  Have you broke even on what it cost you yet?  Thought not. 

Give up dude, your just a loser, and that the way it will always be. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 22, 2008, 03:07:30 AM
The thing I dont get about Tesla is the placement of the spark gap.  We have all these transverse emwaves emitted from a spark gap,  I read somewhere a long time ago that a radio signal starts off with a magnetic field disruption also but that falls off quickly and your left with just the electrical wave duplicating the voltage distribution along the antennae. Perhaps by putting the capacitor in the field of the magnetic wave there is some sort gain from the capacitor metals themselves.  Sort of like a radio receiver powering the transmitter in a linear rise in amplitude?  Something like putting a bunch of photovoltaic cells staring at a plasma arc which powers the arc.  The energy of course coming from the ionization of the gas in the pinch zone.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 03:14:11 AM

Grumpy/Abusive...you are still what you try to project on to me...a loser.

I actually got off my ass and invented something...and it is you who has done squat.

You made a challenge on accomplishments when you had none yourself...and ended up looking stoopid...standing in the dark with empty out turned pockets.

Earth to ramset...Buzz is no Tesla...and yes I would throw him out if he had a foul mouth...but that could never happen, because people with great minds do not lower themselves to such mindless vitriol.

And Buzz makes another plea for decorum laced with troll reference...thats just too much.

Unless I miss my guess, this 'thread is rockin' because everybody vis waiting to see how bad you 3 are going to look in the end...and how long you will hold up in front of the mirror.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 04:33:46 AM
Grumpy/Abusive...you are still what you try to project on to me...a loser.

I actually got off my ass and invented something...and it is you who has done squat.

You made a challenge on accomplishments when you had none yourself...and ended up looking stoopid...standing in the dark with empty out turned pockets.

Earth to ramset...Buzz is no Tesla...and yes I would throw him out if he had a foul mouth...but that could never happen, because people with great minds do not lower themselves to such mindless vitriol.

And Buzz makes another plea for decorum laced with troll reference...thats just too much.

Unless I miss my guess, this 'thread is rockin' because everybody vis waiting to see how bad you 3 are going to look in the end...and how long you will hold up in front of the mirror.



This latest post shows that your ignorance has no boundaries and that your self-glorification is also limitless. 

Most of the things I have invented are filed under "proprietary" - they give a nice check for this but no patents.  ;D  The best deal is to invent something classified - nice supplement to the income this way.

Your still a loser and a poser, but keep trying - you're getting better at it.

I have a foul mouth and you haven't thrown me out...that's not very fair
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 05:11:54 AM

Its a little late for that...but hey, any port in a storm I guess.

All of a sudden you remembered you invented all these things huh ?

The only thing you are capable of inventing is another way to make yourself look stupider.

Before you go there...Al Gore already invented the internet.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 07:31:37 AM
Its a little late for that...but hey, any port in a storm I guess.

All of a sudden you remembered you invented all these things huh ?

The only thing you are capable of inventing is another way to make yourself look stupider.

Before you go there...Al Gore already invented the internet.

What is the number for your patent?  Put up or shut up.

Ed Grey's device - how does it work?

Sweet's VTA - what are the operating principles?

Bearden's MEG?

Come on asshole, step to me so I can whip your pathetic ass.

Tesla's magnifier - 1000 gain - how does it function?

Gunderson's ring uses magnetic currents - can you even spell that?  Huh dipshit?  Do you even have a pulse?  You look like cannon fodder!  You probably can't spell that either.

Are you a real troll or just led around by your short wave nose - huh loser?  Are you the mindless puppet that you pretend to be?  You can protect yourself from that, but I would rather see you exploited - pimped - like the little  you are.

You're losing ground with your hollow responses.  Don't they train you for this sort of shit?  Maybe you slept through your standard ops training because you are a natural born loser and they put you out in the field as proof that anyone can do it, but you fall short - as usual.

Get up loser, I ain't done with you yet!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 22, 2008, 07:35:01 AM
Come on fellows, can we please get back on topic?  Thanks.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 07:47:36 AM
Back on topic?

This "subject" has been kicked off several forums to date.  It a bit "uncanny".

All of the so called anomalies are related.  To Hell with it now.  Anyone who deserves to know will figure it out themselves - trolls can't stop intuition.

(Still waiting for that patent number, you could have made up a few by now.)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 22, 2008, 07:57:26 AM
Back on topic?

This "subject" has been kicked off several forums to date.  It a bit "uncanny".

All of the so called anomalies are related.  To Hell with it now.  Anyone who deserves to know will figure it out themselves - trolls can't stop intuition.

(Still waiting for that patent number, you could have made up a few by now.)

@ Grumpy:

With all due respect, I really have no idea what you are talking about.  What anomalies?  Possibly I missed something, it happens.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 22, 2008, 11:48:59 AM
Oh guys, if u only could respect each other... and a bit of self control wouldn't harm...

Since this topic is about cavitation, i thought to throw in some info, so if anybody is interested, here is a pdf about "magnetostriction vibrators". I know this is not directly linked to cavitation, but some interesting info may be found in here.

ps: don't throw bickering BS at me, i'm imune to that kind of virus  :P

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 01:33:05 PM

You can just smell the desperation in the air...but this stuff is dry, like a popcorn fart.

Firstly though..I received this PM from a "recently new member"...possibly another Buzz moniker....the style fits.

Here it is...

" Don't answer unless you want, but what exactly are you trying to
achieve in the cavitation topic? Most everything you write sounds
like it's a been written by a redneck idiot. You're probably not, so
what are you trying to achieve? How does this help any of us?

Just curious ....

tak "


...Not worthy of comment.



And Grumpy/Abusive has regressed to spamming to cover up the fact that when challenged to produce his resume, he had none.

I believe he said something like "I have explained how a lot of things work on here".

Now all of a sudden he remembered all these "important" Patents he has secured.

Usually when someone gets caught making conflicting statements in ant form of debate...the onus is on them to clear the matter up before the "debate" can proceed.

So...we all await the proof of Patents from Grumpy/Abusive.

The trouble with bull shitting is its hard to keep your story straight...unless you are veeery careful, or have a reeeally good memory.

And Grumpy/Abusive has neither...nor does he have any self respect.

I don't expect we will see any proof...as there is none.

But we will likely see more spam/distraction...to get past his latest blunder.

Or we may see more Buzz word twisting by the Buzz moniker...who I truly believe is here to disrupt.

And ramset and Grumpy were stupid enough to get caught up it his drama...unless they are all the same person...and we've seen that before in every forum on the net.

If not, then 2 members have disgraced themselves among their peers.

By the way...the use of the word 'stoopid' is for effect.

It seems the Buzz character is able to spell but cannot read...like the horse Mr. Ed.

Ok everybody...all together now...

Buzz is a horse of course, of course,
Unless the horse is the famous Mr. Buzz

Repeat chorus



Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 22, 2008, 02:14:31 PM
    @Crazy Fox


   I find this link interesting.  The small light device is most likely a stun gun rolling plasma vortices down the rails.  Tesla's mentor was Crookes.  In the shear plane of the plasma vortices we find input from the electrostatic parameters of the space encountered.  This supports the fusion.  Heating is not the only way to produce neculei collisions.  What does a vortex have.  A cavity right down the middle.

                                http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/tornado/fusion/Tornado_and_Ball_Lightning_to_Controlled_Nuclear_Fusion.html

    And for the Steven Marks people crop circles are thought to be formed using plasma vortices accompanied by a 5000hz shrill noise.  Acoustic waves confining the plasma vortices.  GK also mentioned that jet engines selfdestruct when the cavity in which the supersonic fluid expands is resonant at 5000hz. 

     A plasma will absorb microwave frequency also and support a highly disruptive dielectric current capable of cracking water or burning most anything there is without pollution as the molecules are stripped to an ion level and reassembled back to ground state.  Why the fuck are we still burning oil when we could be detonating waste?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 22, 2008, 04:07:04 PM
Sparks
Detonating waste ,sounds like back to the future [Flux capacitor]
Chet
PS Quite a bit of treasure you posted there
 Great Link
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 22, 2008, 04:21:54 PM
@sparks

Great post!

"A plasma will absorb microwave frequency also and support a highly disruptive dielectric current capable of cracking water or burning most anything there is without pollution as the molecules are stripped to an ion level and reassembled back to ground state."

- looks like the humanity have some cleaning to do huh?

"Why the fuck are we still burning oil when we could be detonating waste?"

- ...cause of guys like Bush maybe? Perhaps they are the ones who should do the cleaning... lol... but if you think positive, we may be the ones who are going to profit by doing the cleaning...

Dann

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 22, 2008, 04:22:53 PM
@Ramset

            There are companies out there now selling this technology.  Basically a plasma arc oven with garbage dumped into the gap.  The hydrogen produced and heat from the process is recycled back to generators that sustain the plasma arc and export the extra juice.  A step above the steam boilers.  Now if they were set up for human or animal waste we could get alot more out of our crops then some heat and a pile of smelly stuff.  The companies should cooperate with the fusion reactor people and get this show on the road before we all choke on fossil fuels.
@maddan
      Bush's investment in dead people 2 billion a week now.  Fucking dick with ears running around shoving it up everyones ass.  Bush's investment in new energy technology.  Suppression.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 05:02:51 PM

Latest smear from the Buzz disrupter...

" Also, the "secret plan" is to ignore the person causing all the problems that has the fixation on homosexual based erotic thoughts. He made all kinds of untrue assertions about me and I just ignore it too."


The thread was going back on topic...but that is not what this agent of disinformation is here for.

What he is here for is just what you see in his post above...conflict.

Who is the target of the latest baiting ?

Who knows and who cares.

Leave this troll to pleasure himself...he has stood for nothing but conflict since his arrival.

And he has produced none of the useful information which he alludes to.

Time for a permanent ban on this troll...so things can return to normal around here.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 05:26:59 PM
Since the topic is cavitation and how that is used to produce OU, and cap-z-ro claims to have an OU device, I would like to know more about that.

Basically my cavitation theory is being discussed and tested. So my objective is to find a device that is clearly OU that violates me theory. It isn't about a belief or being right, it is about being correct regarding the science.

So since Cap-Z-ro has made a claim, claimed he has a patent and would probably know something about his battery charger thing, maybe he could post a patent number so we can get started.

We can talk about the magnifier at the other forum since it seems to upset Cap-z-ro. Anybody got a patent number?

Cappy has no patent and no working charging circuit.  He is just creating chaos - like the little puppet he is - the master tells him when to piss, and when to wipe his ass - unfortunately the order for that last one has never been given.  Smelly little boy.  You got to piss in the tall grass to run with the big dogs, Cappy,.

Looking over Cappy's last pissings - we see that he fingered Buzz as having the "goods" or knowing someone  that does.  He got that right, but should be reprimanded by the Master for stating it.  So, he know and he is deliberately trying to keep information out of the public ear.  He sucks at this more than most other things so it gets out anyway.

Cappy - Even as a "troll" you are a pathetic loser.  Can't you do anything right?

Still waiting for that patent number - if it exists. 

Hows that charging circuit?  Yes, I know it sucks, but thought I would ask anyway.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 22, 2008, 06:31:31 PM
Dann,

Where is the pdf?


Whooops... looks like it's time to change my old keyboard...
Thx  for noticing that. Here is the pdf about "magnetostriction vibrators"

http://www.tdk.co.jp/tefe02/e171.pdf
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 07:50:34 PM

Well...it must be obvious to everyone after these last "posting", that there are at least 2 left who have no interests other than abusive behavior.

Time for a reset here:

Buzz enters the site abusing various members...and one harmless member viciously.

Buzz gets banned for abuse

Kernels of info he dropped gets him reinstated by request of the same 2 who thought they could get by abusing me.

Buzz once again resumes abusing the same members using the baiting and cryptic tactics of the common net troll.

When I pointed that out to him, I was attacked for calling him what he showed he was...a troll.

That "misunderstanding" was clarified with my attacker...or so I thought.

Buzz continued his abuse...this time actually accusing his victims of attacking him...and calling them trolls repeatedly.

When I pointed that that he was accusing his victims of being trolls...that same member attacked me once again...obviously the word troll was now OK...just so as long as it was NOT being applied to Buzz...the one actually behaving like a troll.

Next Grumpy/Abusive attacks...all 3 abusers accused me of all kinds of things...and challenging on what 'I' contributed to the forum.

Upon revealing that I was indeed a contributor of a anomalous circuit...and that I owned a Canadian US Patent...not on my circuit by the way.

That being the 3 amigo's were asked what they have done on the forum or in life...if anything.

You guessed it...none of them had anything to present...other than a mumbles sentence from Grumpy/Abusive...it went something like this..' um-er-well...I explained how a lot of thing work on here.'

Later on...after a few beers or similar intoxicant he remembers that he has a number of important Patents...which he gets paid for?

Now that means the Grumpster/Abuser is a liar...or has a bad memory.

I'm betting on the former.

All 3 amigo's make pleas to get back on topic.

I watched as few members were doing just that.

Next thing you know Buzz enters again throwing more gas on the fire...as a troll is want to do.

In turn...or as directed, Grumpy/Abusive enters the ring after tagging the Buzz.

From what I recall skimming his post, he kept alluding to someone in the background "pulling my strings" and there is some sort of disinfo cabal out to derail them on their imaginary 'mission of hope'.

The most basic form of distraction is to accuse you adversary of having your faults and shortcomings...its called projection.

Among professional prevaricators its derisively called the 'hey look at what he did' method...generally used by low IQ liars.

So far...1 down and 2 to go...or is it just the one.

According to a PM I received...that member received a PM to the affect that Buzz was an alias of Grumpy/Abusive.

I don't know that to be true...but I will be looking at the writing styles more closely...they are both on the same intelectual lever for sure...low brow.

For my role in this mess, I offer sincerest apologies to Bill the thread creator and those who attempted to salvage the thread.

If these people were interested in the welfare of this forum, they would not have reignited the fire when it had subsided.

If this was my forum Buzz and Grumpy/Abusive would be gone...the other one, I would let stay, since he has apparently caught on to the game Buzz is running here.

There is no hope of redemption for Grumpy/Abusive...who could very well be the Buzz...because any one with half a wit would see what Buzz is up to.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 22, 2008, 07:52:14 PM
   The way I look at a dielectric current is a movement of voltage from field a to field b.  Like the stuff that an emwave in a vacuum runs.  A transverse wave traveling through a vacuum propogates a massless current (real fast too) that propogates a magnetic current that propogates an electric current etc.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 22, 2008, 10:29:15 PM
Crappy Cappy,

You fail to produce he patent you claim to have, perhaps you can't find it on your messy desk.  Your office does have a clean desk policy - I suggest you start following it.

Your circuit is worthless and nothing more then a typical carrot dangled by a troll in a frail attempt to garner information from the gullible.  Seen it done hundreds of times - share something worthless in hopes that some fool will share the goods with you, then get pissed when your fraud is discovered.  You should really go back through training again as you are a piss-poor troll and a waste of tax-payer's money - after all, I do expect to get my money's worth out of pricks like you, so get with the program will ya?

You should read your field manual - it states clearly that you are not to ever state that the victim of your suppression "knows something" - but you are a loser and I hope your superiors break it off in you.

For all you know I am your boss, and I'm trying to decide if you got what it takes to be a troll, so far you are coming up short, so I suggest you catch up or it's off to field duty for you.  If I catch you lookin' at  again - I'll fire your ass - go that?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: jwk on December 22, 2008, 10:43:31 PM
Sheesh and i thought i was dissapointed the first time.

WAY TO RUIN A THREAD

All of you continuing this BS.

This thread was interesting and usefull untill theories abound and abuse starts. It's always the same. Everywhere.

Threads with 'theories' in should be clearly marked and not allowed anywhere else. I don't mean to be rude and i am not picking anyone out by this. All antagonists in this thread are being as daft as each other.

As an aside, you are also putting off new members from joining in and sharing ideas on this forum. That is a shame.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 22, 2008, 11:03:56 PM

This Grumpy/Abusive character is mostly an interloper on other people's threads...gave up initiating his own...likely due to lack of interest.

He and Buzz have shown their propensity for abuse over rides the interest of the membership regarding this thread.

Every time  things start to run smoothly again, the come in with the flame thrower.

His posts are increasing in intensity...indicating great frustration...yet his ego will not let him stop.

In his mind Grumpy/Abusive desperately hopes that the more bombastic his posts are the more people will forget that he got caught bull shitting about his imaginary money making Patents. 

So far he showed that he is abusive, crass, and a liar...so far.

There is a time to hold and a time to fold...the trick is to know when.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 23, 2008, 12:25:24 AM
You guys just can't leave the hate aside, can you? I thought we would have a constructive conversation, no matter who is right or wrong and share some ideas that would lead us somewhere...

@TheBuzz

What is a highly disruptive dielectric current? - It's literally the BS that is goin' on in this thread  LOL
OK, now the real thing. I don't know if the term "highly disruptive dielectric current" would be exact. I see it similar as sparks mentioned, but i would say that this is just the green thing that Tesla observed (radiant spark). If you ask me, it's all about high voltage and minimal (or no) current. If anyone has a better explanation, i'm all ears.
Some examples:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVTM_c6Qy08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWOst4VwwEU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw  - Peter Lindemann about plasma ignition

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 12:36:47 AM
Hey Dan
Its Chet
So what do you think ?
Are these some wild and CRAZY guy's or what?
Did they hang Buzz n Grumpy yet?[been at work]

Anyhoo about that THRAPP invention [The water sphere, that must work on cavitation?]
seems like a lot of pieces coming together
would be nice if they let Buzz have a few last words
I'd like to hear his take on how he thinks it could happen
 Chet
Dan just saw your post [keep low bud]
Dan NICE VIDS

Grumpy posted some green plasma shots he did years ago [in heydudes thread]
I cant remember his comments
 Maybe he'll get some last words too?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 01:03:28 AM
This Grumpy/Abusive character is mostly an interloper on other people's threads...gave up initiating his own...likely due to lack of interest.

He and Buzz have shown their propensity for abuse over rides the interest of the membership regarding this thread.

Every time  things start to run smoothly again, the come in with the flame thrower.

His posts are increasing in intensity...indicating great frustration...yet his ego will not let him stop.

In his mind Grumpy/Abusive desperately hopes that the more bombastic his posts are the more people will forget that he got caught bull shitting about his imaginary money making Patents. 

So far he showed that he is abusive, crass, and a liar...so far.

There is a time to hold and a time to fold...the trick is to know when.

Regards...

Good grief Crappy!  You can't even insult me correctly.  I'm starting the think you are either a wanna-b-troll or a training-pants troll - which is it? 

Have they ordered you to wipe your little arse yet?   That is the least they could do.

You are a liar until you crap out that bogus patent number - or vomit it out - that's the only way you can produce it.

Still waiting for you to charge my batteries - loser...ROFLMFAO!!!!!

Interloper on other threads - I don;t bother to even read most of them.  So, once again you prove your incompetence.

Keep at it all you want, wanna-b-troll - they won't hire a loser like you - you ain't got the stuff - ROFL!!!

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 23, 2008, 01:34:05 AM

A newbie enters throwing gas.

The newbie goes by the name MaddDann.

The same initials of Buzz'z previous alias MeltDown.

Coincidence...I don't think so.


Well...that just about wraps things up folks.

Buzz's cover is blown...he is a troll and here to cause strife, nothing else.

Likely one of those socially dysfunctional paid spooks here to throw everyone off something someone is getting close to.

Too bad for the 2 members he took down with him...but it was their abusive nature that was their undoing.

Regards...


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 23, 2008, 01:51:07 AM
A newbie enters throwing gas.

The newbie goes by the name MaddDann.

The same initials of Buzz'z previous alias MeltDown.

Coincidence...I don't think so.


Well...that just about wraps things up folks.

Buzz's cover is blown...he is a troll and here to cause strife, nothing else.

Likely one of those socially dysfunctional paid spooks here to throw everyone off something someone is getting close to.

Too bad for the 2 members he took down with him...but it was their abusive nature that was their undoing.

Regards...





Since I don't have an alias to talk to myself with, this is how I cover Buzz's attempt to bury my post.

They...trolls, hate when the damaging posts remain on top where people are more likely to read about them.

Regards
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 02:06:34 AM
Dan
As I recall the green light was attributed to the copper
Shame about the attacks on you
I guess you can only have one opinion around here?
This is way past Crazy!!

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 02:21:02 AM
Buzz
 I know you did the lightbulb/ water/ electrolysis /polarity thread
Parden me if Im stumbling here ,this information you are presenting is VERY interesting
and How can A light be used to separate out electrons [if that is what you are saying]
Geesh I feel like Im typing in a fox hole
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 02:22:21 AM
I'm not Maddan and this is what they try and bury. It appears to be the secret to Meyer's electron extraction and what makes it work based on the reaction to navel intel's attempt to bury it under pedantic banter. I've been able to learn a lot from them based on how they react.

Once again, cavitation only this time from a H2 to H1 transmute. The gas must pull electrons out of the water and convert them to photons just like Meyer stated in his lectures.

The implications of my explanation are far more catastrophic, but this approach is safer so I'll adopt it.

"Disruptive dielectric current" is something that will not be discussed on a troll-ridden forum, maddan, but I'll say that any disruptive discharge produces a ddc.

========================================

Is the troll still around?  I can't smell his stench - maybe he got the order to wipe - finally - LOL!

NI?  Isn't that interesting?

Keep it up.  We are driving them ape-shit.  The least they could have done was use better trolls - these guys do not have a single brain cell between them - they must share a single one.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 23, 2008, 02:22:28 AM

Well...looks like I over estimated intelligence of ramset...or is he a Buzz alias also ?

By now I would have thought maybe someone would have PMed him and told him how bad he is looking...could it be that due to his abrasive personality no one here respects him ?

If someone I respected told me that I would be out of here in a flash...discounting the PM I got from Tak22 - likely another Buzz alias.

Conversely I have had 2 members express support.

I really find it hard to believe that anyone could fail to see that the Buzz/MeltDown character and MaddDann are the same poster.

Since the troll set this up a while ago its hard to tell who's whom anymore.

Man...there sure are some pretty messed up people in this world.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 23, 2008, 02:24:11 AM
@Chet

I think that anyone that really does enjoy this thread and is willing to share ideas, should just keep on doing that. And other guys that doesen't really know why are here, well just find what you enjoy and go do that... is that simple...

@Cap-Z-ro

LOL ... u made me laugh so much... thx for that!


@TheBuzz

"I think it is important to notice that the electrode is made of copper and copper oxide is green. So I am not disagreeing with you just saying I don't know and the electrode material will change the color since it is being vaporized."

- Well, i'm not sure of that, but if you look at the second and third video, seems like no copper is involved near the spark. Anyway, the color doesn't really matter and is probably defined by the matter in the environment, it's the effect that matters right?
This is the site that i got the second vid. from: http://capturedlightning.com/

...looking forward for your comments guys.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 02:25:07 AM
for the fast pulse:

transmission line pulser - at least two gaps - similar is used for UWB radar.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 02:48:49 AM
Cap
 if you look to the right [members online]you will see all the people you are accusing of being buzz including Tak22
you really need to stop this
And let this thread continue
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: tak22 on December 23, 2008, 03:50:41 AM
@ All

I'd been getting value for my time and interest in the cavitation discussion until
the mud slinging and accusations started to beat the life out of a fairly decent
discussion.

It was not my intent to be dragged into this debacle, but Cap-Z-ro seems intent
on it. So for the record, here's my one and only post for this topic.

I sent this PM to Cap-Z-ro asking what he was trying to achieve here ...

Quote
Don't answer unless you want, but what exactly are you trying to
achieve in the cavitation topic? Most everything you write sounds
like it's a been written by a redneck idiot. You're probably not, so
what are you trying to achieve? How does this help any of us?

Just curious ....

tak

No reply, which is fine with me, but then he plops my PM into a post
and adds this ....

Quote
Firstly though..I received this PM from a "recently new member"...
possibly another Buzz moniker....the style fits.

Considering I've been here for going on 3 years it's highly unlikely that
I'm a Buzz construct, and 98% of the time I'm fairly nice.

I was going to ignore this, but Cap-Z-ro just couldn't leave it alone and
posted about me again ...

Quote
If someone I respected told me that I would be out of here in a flash...
discounting the PM I got from Tak22 - likely another Buzz alias.

And so I say again, I'm no alias/stooge of anyone, I can quite easily stand on
my own and say: Piss off Cap-Z-ro!

tak
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 03:52:51 AM
Buzz
A glass tube and a filament[conductor]
maybe he used something off the shelf?
where are the pics of this?
Chet
Tak22 I have seen your posts before and you stood in my mind as a good guy
Thankyou for clarifying that
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 23, 2008, 03:54:30 AM

Cap
 if you look to the right [members online]you will see all the people you are accusing of being buzz including Tak22
you really need to stop this
And let this thread continue


No ramset...you need to give your head a shake...you disgrace yourself more with each post.

If you don't give it up and get on with your "important discovery"...I will be here with a bucket, and every time you crap I will catch it and dump it over your head.

Do we need to do another recap of your behavior ?

I don't want to have to go back and repost it...but I will if I have to.

Before this is over you will think twice before attacking anyone here again...because I will be back with a review of your history for any interested party to discuss with you.
=========================================================


To whom it may concern:

By way of background..when I was young I received a goodly amount of physical and mental abuse.

I'm not a kid any more...so thats not going to be happening anymore,

Ever since I became capable of defending myself I always make it a point to ensure that anyone who tries to impose their will on me, will have no such interest when its over.

I have dressed down abusers on other forums before...and this is no different...its not that hard if you rely on truth, fact, and stick to relevant points...kryptonite to abusers.

Abuse is something you can't hide on the net...so the strategy is to bury in under text...which is why it needs to be laid at the feet of the abuser constantly...until learn to they back off.

Eventually they all become tired of seeing their disgraceful conduct resurfacing over and over...modify their conduct accordingly...and hopefully fall back in line...humbly...or simply leave.

I kind of stepped in here after the fact...when I read the unprovoked vicious attack by the Buzz on a harmless long time member here it sickened me.

The Buzz character will not be pulling that shit on here anymore...because I don't want to see it...nor do I want to see any more of it from these 3 or 4 or how ever many there are.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 04:01:32 AM
Cap your point is made
 PLEASE STOP NOW 
PUT DOWN YOUR SWORD
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on December 23, 2008, 04:18:45 AM

@Tak22,

If it is true that you have been here, then I sincerely apologize for making that connection...I will ignore your retort.

You had the same relative number of posts another Buzz's alias...and who knows how many alias's he has.

It is interesting however, that you sent that PM to me - the one who was attacked.

I wondered if you sent a similar PM to the aggressors.

That made me a little suspicious.

Which is what made me suspect you were just another alias in Buzz's bag.

Bottom line I guess is, that PM was nothing that couldn't have been done out in public.

Regards...

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 04:30:13 AM
Well maybe tomorrow will be a better day[or not]
Have a good night Cap z ro
 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 06:00:25 AM
Buzz
This is your theory, the onus is on you [you seem quite prepared]

From what I have seen [before seeing your theory]
people were trying to explain it but not putting the right words/thoughts together

You have given a sense were there was none
and your theory of cavitation fits

It fits in nature and that is the most important fit
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 23, 2008, 03:25:12 PM
     I was reading somewhere that the liquid properties of a plasma allow magnetic hydrodynamics to go to work.  Now considering we are dragging this electrical current through the weak magnetic field of the Earth perhaps there is gain in the mhd current of the plasma from this motion.  The sudden collapse of these mhd currents  (magnetic monopole radiation of sorts) causes the field lines to reconnect releasing the stored kinetic energy of the plasma transport itself.  If there is a fraction of a joule gain and this is repeated at highfrequency then our resonant storage tank starts to fill up.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 03:49:40 PM

What is a highly disruptive dielectric current? - It's literally the BS that is goin' on in this thread  LOL
OK, now the real thing. I don't know if the term "highly disruptive dielectric current" would be exact. I see it similar as sparks mentioned, but i would say that this is just the green thing that Tesla observed (radiant spark). If you ask me, it's all about high voltage and minimal (or no) current. If anyone has a better explanation, i'm all ears.


I have produced and posted arcs of various colors - red (only across PVC), orange, green, blue, and white.   Initially, I thought the color was material related.  Ruling this out, I suspected that it was frequency related and this still stands as probable.  During the course of these experiments, I started thinking that Bedini was full of it. 

Since then I have noticed unusually powerful discharges from extremely small caps ("small" based on capacitance) that have large surface area (3 feet of coax for example) - there is no way that a cap this small can produce the discharges I have seen - no way - they are like a crack of lightning.  In all of these experiments the caps were impulse charged - a single sudden pulse.

I now believe that Bedini is actually correct - capacitors can hold more than we have been taught they can - I just can't prove it yet.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 23, 2008, 03:50:29 PM
Sparks
That sounds good REAL GOOD!
gotta go to work
Later
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 05:26:27 PM
Nature is what lead me to it Ramset. I know that nature is simple and repeats itself from the smallest to the largest. So I spread out every free energy patent I had collected over decades on the floor and started walking around looking for a pattern. Cavitation is the pattern I found.

Nature only knows one method to convert energy into mass and to convert mass back into energy from what I can determine.

I don't know every detail of every free energy device but once the basic principle is known, people can find the different methods used to accomplish it.

Placing three coils or inductors in series is one method. The phase change makes the third coil no longer able to see the first. The inductors do not collapse at the same time and so an electromagnetic cavitation takes place. Thane Heins toroid is using this method, Hubbard, Cook, probably the magnifier, etc.

Pulse a gas under a vacuum with high voltage and electrons are removed from the gas when it transmutes is another method used in many devices such as the Methernitha, Papp engine, probably Meyer, etc. I feel this one could be dangerous - don't play with it unless you are well trained.

Cavitate a fluid and some of the fluid is converted into atomic energy contained in the fluid such as the Clem engine and others.

What all the devices have in common is they produce acceleration which is a result of cavitation.

This is what all free energy device have in common and is what I have been saying for a year now on several different web sites. At first I hinted at the connection and I was ignored. I wanted someone else to figure it out and release the information. Later I started spelling it out in black and white and I was attacked for it. That is confirmation from the spook community that occupy and run many of these sites.

What never happened in all that time, with hundreds of posts, is not one person ever pointed at a validated free energy device that proved my theory wrong.

Many books have been written on the subject and not one of those books ever showed anybody how to invent a free energy device and the real principle that makes them work. If they did, free energy devices would be everywhere.

I didn't need to invent a device to prove the theory, plenty of people already did. What the inventors didn't do is either understand or explain how the device worked so they could be easily replicated.

The moment you invent a device and publicly prove it, you are going to get placed under an illegal secrecy order to protect the oil companies and Jewish central bankers that control the money rackets across the earth. You lose the device and the rights to it.

You must find a qualified patent attorney and still the corrupt government is not going to allow you to sell it.

I feel the best way is to produce a set on instructions so detailed and complete that anyone can follow it. Then thousands of people will be able to overwhelm the corporate ignorance and mind control embedded in academic science to prevent people from freeing themselves from that tyranny and destroying their careers if they do.

It all begins with a thought, everything does. This is the reason thought integrity is so important. Good examples of the insanity that results from a lack of thought integrity such as projection are all around you. Stick to the truth of the science and ignore the crazies and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

On the Magnifier - correct - the third coil does not see the first coil and the second one just drives the third.  It does not involve LC resonance like everyone thinks it does, but let them think that.

Researchers in cavitation, and there are not many, have witnessed sonoluminescence and electrical discharges.   

The underlying process for cavitation is "polarization" - a troll let that word slip too - funny that by screwing up they have given more credibility to your theory  - LOL!!!.  The "molecule is deformed and polarized with all of it's kinetic energy being transformed into polarization energy".  Google this quoted text - it will bring up "Cavitation By F. Ronald Young" and this text is on page 345.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 23, 2008, 05:33:58 PM
 ???
Nature is what lead me to it Ramset. I know that nature is simple and repeats itself from the smallest to the largest. So I spread out every free energy patent I had collected over decades on the floor and started walking around looking for a pattern. Cavitation is the pattern I found.
So, cavitation is the answer to  any FE patent/device? OK...
Quote
Nature only knows one method to convert energy into mass and to convert mass back into energy from what I can determine.
If you think about Einstein's famous formula - there are a few mechanism allowing to convert mass to energy. Care to name one technically viable which does the opposite? (energy to mass conversion).
It shouldn't be difficult... m=E/c2.
Quote
I don't know every detail of every free energy device but once the basic principle is known, people can find the different methods used to accomplish it.
Placing three coils or inductors in series is one method. The phase change makes the third coil no longer able to see the first. The inductors do not collapse at the same time and so an electromagnetic cavitation takes place. Thane Heins toroid is using this method, Hubbard, Cook, probably the magnifier, etc.
This is a novel electrotechnics. Electromagnetic cavitation?  ROTFLMAO! ;D
Quote
Pulse a gas under a vacuum with high voltage and electrons are removed from the gas when it transmutes is another method used in many devices such as the Methernitha, Papp engine, probably Meyer, etc. I feel this one could be dangerous - don't play with it unless you are well trained.
Methernitha community? Papp noble gas engine? Meyer OU electrolysis?
Do you people ever check a certified history behind all those fascinating claims? Or, your 'knowledge' is mostly based on an articles coming from a different "fringe science" sites?
Why there is no replications? Why science community neglects all those revolutionary achievements?
Ah, the conspiracy... I got it.
Quote
Cavitate a fluid and some of the fluid is converted into atomic energy contained in the fluid such as the Clem engine and others.

What all the devices have in common is they produce acceleration which is a result of cavitation.
Gee.  You've just made the cavitation phenomenon more important (and fancy) than, e.g., radiation. Congrats!
Quote
This is what all free energy device have in common and is what I have been saying for a year now on several different web sites. At first I hinted at the connection and I was ignored. I wanted someone else to figure it out and release the information. Later I started spelling it out in black and white and I was attacked for it. That is confirmation from the spook community that occupy and run many of these sites.
WHICH FE DEVICES??? THIS IS JUST YOUR FANTASY! YOU'VE POSTULATED YOUR OWN THEORY, FOR A NON EXISTENT THINGS!!
Btw, who are the spooks?
Quote
What never happened in all that time, with hundreds of posts, is not one person ever pointed at a validated free energy device that proved my theory wrong.
There are no FE devices (yet), ergo "your" theory is a fiction.
As long as your theory is dealing with a fictional devices, don't expect a great interest and valid answers...
Quote
Many books have been written on the subject and not one of those books ever showed anybody how to invent a free energy device and the real principle that makes them work. If they did, free energy devices would be everywhere.

I didn't need to invent a device to prove the theory, plenty of people already did. What the inventors didn't do is either understand or explain how the device worked so they could be easily replicated.
:o
Quote
The moment you invent a device and publicly prove it, you are going to get placed under an illegal secrecy order to protect the oil companies and Jewish central bankers that control the money rackets across the earth. You lose the device and the rights to it.

You must find a qualified patent attorney and still the corrupt government is not going to allow you to sell it.

I feel the best way is to produce a set on instructions so detailed and complete that anyone can follow it. Then thousands of people will be able to overwhelm the corporate ignorance and mind control embedded in academic science to prevent people from freeing themselves from that tyranny and destroying their careers if they do.

It all begins with a thought, everything does. This is the reason thought integrity is so important. Good examples of the insanity that results from a lack of thought integrity such as projection are all around you. Stick to the truth of the science and ignore the crazies and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.
Forget about conspiracies, etc.
Who would prevent you of using the FE device for yourself? Or, publish it on a net worldwide in a "blitzkrieg" fashion?

Excuses, excuses....
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 07:27:27 PM
A "spinner" is a type of sail - yet another nautical term... It just has to be US naval intelligence, an oxymoron if there ever was one. Notice how they travel and post in a pack?

You're right Grumpy, they are amateurs in every sense of the word but before they lose their contracts, let us have our fun with them? I'll have to share a funny NIS story with you privately some time. This wouldn't be the first time I had a laugh at their expense.

"Sloop" was probably already taken, as was "Junk".

You know, the "other guys" are much better.  They are quite successful at infiltrating public and private forums with ease - never even a hint of their true identities.  No reason for a visit unless you got the goods and prove it - This is why they always pressure you to "prove it".

Now that one is ineffective, another steps in.  He was obviously not informed that the "conservation law" does not apply here since we have not requirement for net charges.

Hmm.  I'm not banned yet - I must be doing something wrong...  ROFLMAO!!!

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Freezer on December 23, 2008, 07:37:19 PM
Awesome lecture by stan meyer, if you haven't seen it already.  This guy is/was brilliant..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyqQ-jXePO0&feature=channel_page
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 09:00:43 PM
You nailed it Grumpy. They can't step in without proof that you have the goods and is why they try to bully people into posting pictures of a device. That and they can learn about you from what else is in the picture, especially if you bought the camera with a credit card since they encode the camera info. into the picture.

I don't have to build a device, so many others have. :-)

Hey grumpy, ever noticed that the tube on top the Methernitha Swiss ML has a pick up coil wound of loose steel inside and then it is surrounded by a thick tube?

People say that is a valve tube but I find that unlikely since the diodes can be clearly seen on the sides of the center post.

The inner tube has a gas in it under vacuum - there is your acceleration. The thick tube surrounding it is to shield the radiation.

Also, if you find the right photo, you can see the U shaped magnets are wired together at the top which splits magnetically the electron stream. Again a cavitation and we call that form of cavitation Aharonov Bohm effect.

Ever notice how on the smaller older units there is that bar magnet with a bunch of winding on the end? - Same thing - splitting an electron stream.

The Swiss ML appears to use two cavitation (acceleration) techniques.

Funny thing is, for 100K (after taxes) I would have just shut up and taken up golf as plainly stated on other web sites. Instead, they spend a small fortune on amateur Mossad and NIS spooks that can't keep a cover even while hiding behind a computer. Please stop wasting our tax dollars?

The few pictures that I post are heavily reduced - I doubt much is left to help anyone.  I don't post vids.

On the Testatika, they found it could not be stepped up to (I think) 20 Kw.  This made me suspect that  some sort of assisting material (as in active) is used.

don;t settle for a measly 100k - maybe 100k a year, but not a one-time payment.  I think they have a policy to not offer payments these days, as someone else comes up with it and they would have to pay everyone and that would get expensive and also is harder to cover.   Fear is cheap and since they have the goods themselves, they don't need anyone around to either spoil it or explain it.  Do you ever hear of people with the goods being "recruited" - not at all.  Ain't gonna happen unless they need you.

AB effect also has "potential" as the cause for the cavitation or is is the potential that is cavitating?   See all of the hoopla over that?  Even scientist have to put up with the crap slinging.

Here is a bone for the spooks - just not right to have them read all of this stuff and not have anything to add to the report:

Steel wire is also a collector or converter of cavitation energy - depending on how you look at it.  Not the same as copper, a bit different form of conversion going on.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 23, 2008, 09:44:48 PM
@TheBuzz
When You mentioned 3 coils connected in series I immediately thought of the following article:

 Posted on page #1 of the   Single circuits generate nuclear reactions   thread.

2) A magnetic version of the before mentioned discharge device I build using the know nuclear magnetic resonance phenomena, all atoms have a nuclear precesion known as the Larmor precesion frequency, his value for a magnetic field of 0,5 Teslas is about 21 MHz, this suggest than if we create a magnetic circuit tuned to this frequency by the quantum relation E = h * f , the nucleons proton-neutron area break and there is a nuclear desintegration and energy liberation

 I test a common iron rod and place 3 coils, one for the polarization field of 0,5 Teslas, another for generate the resonance at 21 MHz and a third for get de power, in my firsts tests I get about 10 KW with the starting polarization and oscillator using less than 100 watts, and autopowered devices to 220 VAC, 50 Hz and 110 VAC, 60 Hz, I see the frequency output is the tuning difference between the resonance Larmor frequency and the external oscillator, thats say if the nuclear resonance is in 21 MHz and the oscillator was at 21,001 MHz the output power frequency is in 1 KHz , I see in this magnetic circuit there is a desintegration of the Fe atom in a isotope for a delay of time for reciver his initial state
 This method is used in medicine but not used for energy generation and too many more single than the here shown system use Uranium , this is an ecologyc device and low cost in comparation to that, I wait upload this to the before web site I mentioned

This circuit is clearly a cavitation device using 3 coils.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 23, 2008, 10:24:47 PM
@spinner
A clearly proven Canadian invention that is OU is the "Argon Discharge Tube" .
At least 3 patents have been filed on it and I have personally built and proven it.
The problems with this device are trying to find a way of converting the output to an easy to use form.
And the reason it is hard to replicate is because one needs a vacuum pump and argon gas to build it.
My bigest problem was maintaining the vacuum. 
The longest I could keep it running was for about 30 min. Then I needed to run the vacuum pump again.
Even though it is clearly an Over Unity device it doesn't appear it will ever be practical.
I think this is one thing that we also need to consider as the reason some OU devices never made it to the market.

The cold fusion setup (JLN Labs) spent a lot of time on is clearly an OU device as well.
I replicated it as well and seen what appeared as OU though I don't have the test equipment to verify it.
But my test setup consumed an inch of tungsten rod in about 10 min. of running.
At $3  a rod this is clearly not the answer to an alternate energy source.

But to sum it up the principles learned from these devices needs to be considered.
I have no doubt that these devices are Over Unity but I also have no doubt that they consume something.
I firmly believe that all OU devices consume something so the conservation of energy is intact.
The awsome reality of it is, quoting from an old physics text book from the 1950's 
"One teaspoon of coal consumed by nuclear fusion can produce as much energy as 500 train cars of coal burned."
I can power the rest of my life with a lot less then 500 train cars of coal.
One teaspoon of carbon is about what goes into a 1.5 Volt AA carbon battery.
Powering the rest of my life on ONE AA battery sounds pretty good to me.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 23, 2008, 10:40:06 PM
Quote from AbbaRue below:

"One teaspoon of carbon is less then what goes into a 1.5 Volt AA carbon battery.
Powering the rest of my life on 2 AA batteries sounds pretty good to me."

Check out my topic "Joule Thief" where I can power a 40 watt 48" tube from a single AA battery. See page here:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6123.330

At the rate we are going over there, I will be able to light my home on dead AA batteries for free. (maybe)

I know this is not exactly what you meant but, at least we are trying to go in that direction.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 23, 2008, 10:54:16 PM
@TheBuzz

"I had an old bedini magnet wheel with the magnets on the flat face side (8 coil unit) and I want to see if I can get Thane Hein's thing going on a much more easy to replicate small coil form."

- That would be really great! Looking forward for that.

I can only say that i agree with your theory so far.

@Grumpy

- Your experiments looks very interesting. All of what you wrote only confirms what Bedini talks about (overcharged caps and batteries, no heat when charging a battery,...) but this just can't be the electricity that we use every day, so it has to be the beast that he calls negative energy - radiant energy.

@spinner
@AbbaRue

I find the MAHG even more interesting http://jlnlabs.online.fr/mahg/


Maybe any of you guys could point me to the info about the speed of propagation of magnetic flux in different (ferromagnetic) materials? Anyone saw some chart like this before? Thx


Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 23, 2008, 11:04:13 PM
I just wanted to say my idea of an Over Unity device is really a device that taps into an alternate source of energy.
From all the posts I have read I believe that is the idea of most people on the forum.
I don't think very many people here believe the excess energy comes from nowhere.
So an Over Unity device is a device that uses a small amount of energy to open a portal to another source of energy.
What ever the source. Fuson, Vacuum energy, Aether energy, MHD, Electromagnetic radiation.
We know the Atom is OU, and it's the very fabric of the Universe.
So to the Nay Sayers, please stop insulting our Intelligence by saying Over Unity devices don't exist.
The very fabric of the Universe proves you wrong.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 23, 2008, 11:39:20 PM

@Grumpy

- Your experiments looks very interesting. All of what you wrote only confirms what Bedini talks about (overcharged caps and batteries, no heat when charging a battery,...) but this just can't be the electricity that we use every day, so it has to be the beast that he calls negative energy - radiant energy.


pictures of the results were posted several months ago

It is not the same as what we use everyday, but they are both different states of energy - which implies that one can be converted between the different forms of energy.

Maybe dielectrics can be polarized in different ways, or super-polarized by impulses.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 23, 2008, 11:40:09 PM
@Pirate88179
I'm following the Joule Thief thread too.
Sorry I was editing my post while you were placing yours.

@madddann
I think your right the MAHG looks like it may have lots of potential.
But it's a difficult unit to build too.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 24, 2008, 12:49:03 AM
@Grumpy

"Maybe dielectrics can be polarized in different ways, or super-polarized by impulses."

- This does not sound new to me, a few times i heard of something like using dielectrics (plastic) as a conductor in combination with "radiant energy" and similar stuff like plastic as a core like in this old E. V. Gray videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQHUZITimUI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAThfMVKFGk

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 24, 2008, 02:13:59 AM
Wow
This is great!!
 Refreshing !!
Thanks guy's
Thanks for the privilege to listen and learn
 To hear ideas I would never have heard
 My cup runneth over
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 04:18:03 AM
Awesome lecture by stan meyer, if you haven't seen it already.  This guy is/was brilliant..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyqQ-jXePO0&feature=channel_page

     Problem with Stan Meyer is he had a shitload of  "iron"  in the fire.  What is very obvious from his work is that voltage is where it is at.  And we don't need to have charge carriers to move it around.  Voltage makes mass do things and it doesn't have to be limited to popping electrons from one atom to the next.  I took the wire that goes to the crt in a yardsale pcmonitor and attached it to an iron coil.  Then extended the iron coil ends down through a block of pvc and then powered up the old monitor.  Instant ozone generator then these two flares coming off the ends of the wire started lifting a piece of paper towards them.  The ends of the wire were around 15kv over ground.  There was no obvious anode or cathode just these two little flares.
I stuck my paw in there after making sure I was insulated from Earth.  Damn little flares were sucking the heat right out of my hand 6" away from where the light dropped off.  I have never sensed cold coming from inside my hand.  Plenty of sensing cold coming into my hand but never being generated by my hand.   Now most of us exchange heat with the field in the infrared spectrum.  I got an idea that a plasma is a heat sucker innner.  Imagine being able to convert a wide spectrum of electromagnetic waves into electron acceleration.  I believe the same thing went on when I microwaved a paperclip with a couple of drops of water nearby.  Damn plasma started suckingup microwaves.  Hell space is filled with microwaves.
Cosmic background radiation.  I gotta get me a thermocouple and see how cold it gets near those little birkeland currents I had going. 

   Modify:   Remember Grumpy said something about coils freezing the ground. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 24, 2008, 04:32:36 AM
Sparks
That was wild!!
Goose bumps wild!
You Got Sum Balls!!{A manly comment/compliment where I come from]
WHAT A GREAT TIME TO BE ALIVE!!
  Chet


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 06:25:42 AM
     Problem with Stan Meyer is he had a shitload of  "iron"  in the fire.  What is very obvious from his work is that voltage is where it is at.  And we don't need to have charge carriers to move it around.  Voltage makes mass do things and it doesn't have to be limited to popping electrons from one atom to the next.  I took the wire that goes to the crt in a yardsale pcmonitor and attached it to an iron coil.  Then extended the iron coil ends down through a block of pvc and then powered up the old monitor.  Instant ozone generator then these two flares coming off the ends of the wire started lifting a piece of paper towards them.  The ends of the wire were around 15kv over ground.  There was no obvious anode or cathode just these two little flares.
I stuck my paw in there after making sure I was insulated from Earth.  Damn little flares were sucking the heat right out of my hand 6" away from where the light dropped off.  I have never sensed cold coming from inside my hand.  Plenty of sensing cold coming into my hand but never being generated by my hand.   Now most of us exchange heat with the field in the infrared spectrum.  I got an idea that a plasma is a heat sucker innner.  Imagine being able to convert a wide spectrum of electromagnetic waves into electron acceleration.  I believe the same thing went on when I microwaved a paperclip with a couple of drops of water nearby.  Damn plasma started suckingup microwaves.  Hell space is filled with microwaves.
Cosmic background radiation.  I gotta get me a thermocouple and see how cold it gets near those little birkeland currents I had going. 

   Modify:   Remember Grumpy said something about coils freezing the ground. 

coils freezing ground was likened to an unusually potent electrostatic cooling effect - Tesla reported this as well.

Keep your damn hand out of the damn field - or you will pay a damn permanent price for it.

Like I said - iron ain't like copper - it converts it differently.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: BEP on December 24, 2008, 02:27:49 PM
Stay away from thermocouples. After all, they ARE made of conductors.

Problem is that leaves you with a non-contact thermometer. I think Rat Shat has one for a few tens of dollars.
Just remember using one is not accurate unless you consider emissivity of the measured surface.

Sticking your hands in it? Gonna be typing with a pencil between your teeth soon, Aren't ya?

If you continue that testing method best to use a nonessential part of your body. I'll let you determine what that part is  :o

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 24, 2008, 02:45:37 PM
Great input guys! Thx for sharing! Are we talking here about something like negative resistor? Looks like this cooling effect of the plasma is also used by some inventions in the alternative medicine field. The cooling effect could help stabilize an inflammation in the body.
Now think of having such a tech installed in your car instead of the air cooling system ... lol...

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 24, 2008, 03:28:42 PM
Buzz
Gas filled tubes
They were all the rage back in the day
even lately big ones are the rage [cfl etc]
Your Theory/ Concept of what Meyer was really up to?, I believe is unique
And makes this MUCH MORE INTRIGUING
  Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 05:32:52 PM
    Grumpy is right.  Tried same experiment with copper.  No go.  I think it has something to do with iron retaining diamagnetic information between pulses.  Must be why they use iron receiver antennaes on low freq.
  Thanks for the warnings on the pulsed paw problem.  I'll stick to flurescent bulb handling for field observations.

      I have a plasma cutter it has no problem cutting stainless steel.  While an oxyacetelyne rig has to melt it away.  I don't think it has anything to do with the temperature.  The plasma current just disrupts the electric field of the metal alot easier than randomized heating effects.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 24, 2008, 05:33:38 PM
@Grumpy

"Like I said - iron ain't like copper - it converts it differently."

- You mean that with iron the cooling effect is more intense than with copper right? If i'm not mistaken here, this is why Bedini says that with the "negative energy" or "radiant energy" you have to think backwards. How?

Lets see... i'll just share my theory so you guys can correct me if im' wrong or comfirm something in base of your experiments... it goes like this:
voltage and current are two opposite things, if we have one, we don't have the other or better said, the amount of one is counter proportional to the amount of the other. Is there any conclusion that we can come up with? I would say there is. Now this is what the school teach us: P=U*I (P is the power that we know of today and use it every day, it's based mostly on current - high current low voltage).
Now i would say that this is what the school does not teach us (this is also why i hate school - they tell you only one part of the story lol) and i put it like this: -P=U/I (in this case -P is the "negative energy" or "radiant energy" or call it whatever you want - black energy, black matter... now this is the mysterious thing that is bugging scientists until today. This energy is based mostly on voltage - high voltage low current)
Once we know that, the perpetual motion is perfectly achievable. Just look at the nature, isn't it perfect? I think this has to be the system of nature, what do you guys think about that?
And now we can also know the properties - behavior of materials when used in combination with "negative energy" - "negative electricity" (i'll just use the term "negative" to define it from now on). So the properties - behavior of materials are just opposite than when used with normal electricity, but some materials might be almost equal for both - minimal inverse charachteristics. So if a plastic is a dielectric with normal electricity (high current), it is a conductor for "negative electricity" (high voltage). If iron has a resistance for normal electricity and it heats up, it has a negative resistance for "negative electricity" and it cools down.
Hope you got the idea. Now the only thing that we don't know is where is the point between voltage and current where normal electricity is equal to "negative electricity"? This point is probably different for every kind of material - the closest thing that i can think of is breakdown voltage of materials, but when using "negative electricity" we should be talking about "breakdown current" of materials (yeah, something i came up with ...lol).
This theory is the result of the inspiration you guys gave me (thx all!), so i don't say it is right or wrong, but it would be fun to find out how much of this stands up and then correct the mistakes, once we understend all of this,... well you know what would this mean...
I guess now it's time for little experiments...
Your comments are very welcome!

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 24, 2008, 05:48:32 PM
I think the secret to "free energy" is ambient thermal energy. I would consider ZPE as a form of thermal energy, but IMO it's far too difficult to capture any measurable ZPE. It's best to stick with the vibrating charges, atoms, and molecules.

Does anyone have any theories why nearly 100% of the "free energy" community avoids discussing methods of capturing ambient thermal energy like the plague, but wants to pursue unknown exotic energies that are unproven?

One cubic meter of common matter has ~ 1 billion joules of natural ambient thermal energy. Water has more than twice that. If an "energy moving device" moved such energy to an appliance, then thermal conductivity merely replaces that energy. An ambient thermal energy mover would not create nor destroy energy, but would create an energy loop where energy would flow from the device to the appliance to the environment (air & earth, etc.), and then back to the device.

Such ambient energy, that exists in all matter and is sustained by the Sun, is well known of by conventional physics. The only difference is that *most*, not all, conventional physicists believe it is *impossible* to capture such energy. That is 100% incorrect. I've outlined the known limitations and errors in the laws of thermodynamics. Scroll down to "2LoT (2nd Law of Thermodynamics)"
http://greenselfreliantenergy.com/physics/dirtydetails/

Conventional physics is riddled with limitations. The concept of "equilibrium" is based on the fictitious concept that a closed system can be in perfect 100.0000...% equilibrium. In the *real* world, equilibrium is an *impossible* state that would require *infinite* thermal insulation in a closed system. When the mathematics works with and replies on *impossible* states such as equilibrium you end up with fictitious mathematics.

One prime example that disproves the laws of thermodynamics is diodes. The best small signal diode modeling mathematics, that is based on semiconductor mathematics, which is based on quantum physics, clearly shows that diodes *must* rectify ambient thermal energy such as Johnson noise. I've challenged countless physicists to show otherwise. Even the acclaimed genius, Mike Englehardt, the creator of LTspice, said that I am correct that the math shows diodes rectify Johnson noise. See the above link, beginning at the top, for the math that is based on QM (quantum physics).

So most people don't have a grasp just how much Johnson noise exists in ordinary matter at room temp. For metals, most of the ambient thermal energy exists is the free particles, which are the electrons. The amount of KE (kinetic energy) and PE (potential energy) energy in each degree of freedom is kT, where k is the Boltzmann constant, and K is the temperature in Kelvin. Each electron has three degrees of freedom in terms of movement. There are L * ρ / Ar = L * 8.96e+6 / 63.546 = 8.49e+28 atoms/m^2. Where ρ is the density in g/m^2, L is Avogadro constant, and Ar is the Atomic weight of copper. The total thermal energy in the free electrons is thus k * T * 3 * 8.49e+28 = 1.04 billion joules at a typical room temp of 295 Kelvin, where the "3" is the degrees of freedom for each free electron. Lets see if that matches the specific heat capacity of copper. WikiPedia shows the volumetric heat capacity of copper as being 3.45 J/(cc*K). There are 1e+6 cc's per m^3, which comes to 1.02 billion joules per m^3. That matches the 1.04 GJ's.

There is over 1 billion joules of Johnson noise per cubic meter of matter, which is sustained by solar energy. ;D  There's no need to hunt for exotic energy when we're surrounded with more clean and reusable energy then we could ever use. My diode arrays prove that it's usable energy. The math proves is. My magnetic theory shows how to capture ambient thermal energy by means of magnetic materials.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 24, 2008, 06:46:39 PM
Quote
I have a theory why 100% don't pursue it, because the statement you just made is not true.

Thane Heins is nicely demonstrating how a high voltage coil can negate Lentz law and produce OU energy. It is hardly exotic and the technique was used in many free energy devices in the past such as the Hubbard coil and Cook patent.
I believe the energy coming from Thane's device is thermal energy. In terms of negating Lenz law, I think those particular experiments by Thane could be explained with the capacitance between all of the windings. Such an investigation is not simple and requires a scope, and you need to analyze all of the coils and the mutual inductance from each coil to other coils and the parallel capacitance of each winding.



Quote
Using diodes on the other hand to collect thermal energy is pretty far out there for some people including myself and to my knowledge has not been validated with working free energy devices by others.
All of Tom Schum's voltage readings on his diode array and all of CMB's (two) show a DC voltage, on all of the diode arrays. CMB claims his 1993 THz diode chip produced 100mV DC in a shielded room and oil bath.



Quote
If you on the other hand, prove that the leads of your volt meter are not picking up or donating some stray charge and you prove that it is cost effective and you prove that anyone can replicate a device that produces large amounts of current, then I am sure lots of people will get involved.
I've done that. Where are all of these people?



Quote
Until then, it looks like a busy work distraction to get people to produce tiny amounts of electricity that most do not have the expertise and equipment to measure as it is so small and so it really can't be proven to be OU or useful. Haven't seen that since the self running cold electricity that in the end, didn't self run or produce cold electricity.

Nobody here can produce high density diode array chips and so it is pie in the sky until someone does. Soldering a bunch of tiny diodes together with a cap is not going to produce a free energy device that matters in the real world of power consumption.
You completely missed my point. The ambient thermal energy exists, and I've outlined two methods of capturing such energy. 1) Diodes. 2) Magnetic material.



Quote
This thread about the cavitation link to free energy devices that have been created and validated in the past.

Gray tube
Methernitha
Hubbard coil
Tesla Magnifier
Thane Heins

Just to name a few... These are hardly "unknown exotic energies that are unproven."
Please show me one design with part numbers, and all the details to make it, that is self-running. The only one I know of is my diode array.  You are basing your theory on the Aharonav Bohm effect. It is well known, verified, and tested that the Aharonav Bohm effect is an extremely difficult effect to detect. There's no macro big effect that you speak of. What you emailed me is just simply not the Aharonav Bohm effect. I could just as easily say the above machines capture ambient thermal energy. For now, there's no validation for this cavitation. My point is that ambient thermal energy is well proven and accepted by conventional physics.  I just find it odd that nearly 100% of the people in the "free energy" community ignore real known energy and for decades keep trying to capture unknown exotic energy when they're surround with massive amounts of thermal energy that is sustained by the Sun. In a matter of two years, one person, myself, designed and built a "free energy" machine that anyone can build that includes the exact part numbers. Sure, it produces hardly no power, but it proves it's possible. Diodes is not the only method. You can use magnetic materials.


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 06:57:37 PM
   A cavitation in water allows the water to boil into the cavity as  well as accelerate any chemical reactions between molecules on the surface of the vacuum.  For any endothermic reactions to occur they are gonna need heat.
So we just transferred heat from surrounding molecules to the ones boiling into the cavity.  Now what is cool is that this is not a fixed cavity it's one that's gonna collapse real fast.  So the steam inside the cavity gets compressed big time.  Faster than it can transfer the heat of fusion to the collapsing field.  So the specific temp of the gas goes through the roof.  The gas has no altenative then to shed mass as the field is incapable of converting the thermal energy of the gas into the kinetic energy of the surrounding mass.  So it starts pitching emwaves out of it's structure as fast as it can.  This finally returns heat to the ambient at a rate acceptable to allow the total collapse of the bubble.  Least I think that is the way it happens.  Makes the steam go radioactive in a very time compressed event.  The field gets it's heat back and there is a temperature rise in the fluid because while the bubble was doing its collapsing deal the cooled fluid around the bubble was getting heat input from the rest of the fluid and any heat exchanger that acts as a heat scource.
   
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 06:58:56 PM
You can get rid of ZPE with a clever modification of Maxwell - I never believed in it anyway.

You can't tap into the "universal energy" unless you use the proper means to bring it together, build it up, and convert it.  If it was already conventional current, anyone could tap into it.

As for diodes, I can believe the results Paul is getting. You can get the same or better with an elevated plate, another plate in the ground and a cap between them - this directly converts the universal energy and stores it in a capacitor, but you will find that it only catches a small amount.  This can probably charge batteries too, but I expect it will be slow, but then solar is slow too. 

Diodes will not get you 1000:1 gain, but other things will.   This is why I suggested that the diodes be explored and the underlying mechanism determined, so that the mechanism can be applied in other ways.  Hey, don't diodes have capacitance?  LOL!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 24, 2008, 07:01:27 PM
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Thane's experiments are not showing something unusual. I am saying that IMO there's a source (thermal energy) behind his experiments, and that it has nothing to do with Lenz's law. For example, if one connects a transformer to the 120V 60Hz AC socket, and if there's an unknown voltage source across the secondary that aids the 120V AC signal, then that may appear as if Lenz's law was violated, but it has nothing to do with it. It's simply an unknown source.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 24, 2008, 07:07:46 PM
Since there's no power supplies needed for the diodes to produce a DC voltage across the load, you could say diodes have an infinite efficiency.   :D

ZPE is part of conventional physics for a lot of reason beyond mathematically. In conventional physics, ZPE is realized when the temperature of material cannot go below a certain limit, depending on the material. It is seen that ZPE keeps the atoms vibrating above a minimum level.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 07:25:20 PM
      If two plates of a charged capacitor facing each other are moved further apart what happens to the space inbetween.  Does it cavitate?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 07:25:31 PM
It is great that this thread is finally back on track.

@ Madddan - great ideas - you have to put them to use.

@ Paul - good luck with the diodes.

@ Buzz - do pulsars cavitate?   Nature always has the best stuff.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 07:30:14 PM
      If two plates of a charged capacitor facing each other are moved further apart what happens to the space inbetween.  Does it cavitate?

Not just by moving the plates.  The dielectric is already set to a storage state.  Place a magnetic field across the dielectric, a pulsed field that is, and then you can probably cavitate it - hmm - I got to try that one.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 07:55:26 PM
Ok now lets leave the space inbetween the plates stressed out and then an emwave traverses the electrostatic field between the two plates.  Would the emwave add to the polarization of the space between the plates or just pass on through unnoticed by the field polarization?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 24, 2008, 07:58:39 PM
Quote from: Grumpy
@ Paul - good luck with the diodes.
OK, thank's for comments, that goes to everyone.

Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year!!!

For those who are interested in continuing the previous discussion -->
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6388.0

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 24, 2008, 08:30:50 PM
@Grumpy

...yeah... but just ideas for now ... hope that tomorrow morning something interesting will await me under the christmass tree ... maybe the tree will cavitate  LOL

"Nature always has the best stuff."

- Only agree on that one

THX to all of you guys and Merry Christmas!

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 24, 2008, 09:29:35 PM
Yes, Merry Christmas to everyone here that celebrates it.  To those that don't, I wish you holiday greetings of whichever type is appropriate.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 09:39:50 PM
Merry Christmas to all - Happy Holidays to everyone!!!

As a token of friendship and Holiday Cheer, attached is an article on a very interesting form of magnetic power amplifier:

(I suggest anyone remotely interested in OU to copy this file before I have second thoughts.)

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 24, 2008, 09:47:12 PM
Yes Bill Back at you AND ALL
Paul
I admire and respect your research and appreciate your sharing
DuPont has a foil based nano product with 2nm holes [Discovered this while researching radiant barriers]
I don't know if this will help in your research but it definitely is interesting in Casmir effect IMHO
Sorry to intrude with this Buzz
 But I think Paul's research is very interesting [not implying anything derogetory in your responces with Paul and strictly my opinion]
I do see your point however
Bang for the Buc
 NOW NOT TEN YEARS FROM NOW
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 09:52:39 PM
  @Buzz

    As the contacts on a relay move closer together with a potential on them we basically have a couple of moving capacitor plates.  If the two capacitor metals start to get too close to each other we get ionization of the gas and metals in play and plasma and light and emwaves.   Now what happens if we stop short of a short then move the cap plates away?  Did we charge the gap without any current or does the dielectric polarization of the air in the gap stay there or just go back with the reverse motion of the contacts?

     Merry every day to all and nothing but the best for all days to come!!!!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 24, 2008, 10:54:58 PM
   Thankyou Grumpy!

    Looks like cook and hubbard and meyer all rolled up in one.   The gentleman who needed 30kv out of a lightweight transformer knew the deal too.   Now if the idiots down at xxx power and light would figure out that it is not a good thing to desaturate a core at the same time you are trying to choke the input current we would have progress. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 24, 2008, 11:33:00 PM
Thanks. Hope it helps everyone. 

This isn't mine by the way.  Ran across it a while back and it got my attention because I was interested in Hubbard.  Not sure where it came from.  I always run across stuff and then can't find it again later.  Talking about cavitation and all that reminded me of it, so I thought I'd share it.

There is a similar article floating around about A-field transformers.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: tak22 on December 24, 2008, 11:33:45 PM
Thanks Grumpy  :)

I'd already printed my nightly 'interesting' reading, but this looks much more appealing!

tak

(the newbie  ;))
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: fritz on December 24, 2008, 11:45:29 PM
A merry Christmas to you all,

Even if I have not the time right now to follow this thread,
I´m quite happy that you´re on cavitation issues.
Life on earth (effective and performant as is) relies on the specific properties of water. Cavitation is just one interesting issue.

rgds.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: BEP on December 25, 2008, 03:56:05 AM
Please forgive me if my search is faulty.

Where is it shown that the final stage of cavitation has any more energy in it than the initial step in cavitation?

There is no doubt cavitation can provide results indicating extremely high energy during the rebound portion but to my understanding that rebound is the same amount of energy in a much shorter time span.
With that thought cavitation is equivalent to many other interesting aspects of this research like BEMF and capacitive discharge. None of those provide more energy than what was put in the circuit. It just concentrates that same energy (with the normal losses) into a much shorter time span.

If I am completely wrong then please point me to something I can try on the bench.

Thanks!

 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 25, 2008, 08:43:43 AM
Please forgive me if my search is faulty.

Where is it shown that the final stage of cavitation has any more energy in it than the initial step in cavitation?

There is no doubt cavitation can provide results indicating extremely high energy during the rebound portion but to my understanding that rebound is the same amount of energy in a much shorter time span.
With that thought cavitation is equivalent to many other interesting aspects of this research like BEMF and capacitive discharge. None of those provide more energy than what was put in the circuit. It just concentrates that same energy (with the normal losses) into a much shorter time span.

If I am completely wrong then please point me to something I can try on the bench.

Thanks!

Exploding wire experiments:

Compression is always several orders of magnitude larger (i.e. has more energy) than decompression.

Exploding a wire with the negative terminal will not produce near the results of using the positive terminal - both with capacitor discharge as energy source.

I can quote some references if you want them.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 25, 2008, 09:15:06 AM
Exploding wire experiments:

Compression is always several orders of magnitude larger (i.e. has more energy) than decompression.

Exploding a wire with the negative terminal will not produce near the results of using the positive terminal - both with capacitor discharge as energy source.

I can quote some references if you want them.

If the compression and decompression are made by the same process in a cyclical manner (e.g. an IC engine), than your claim means perpetual motion. Unbalance is the key, no?

Exploding a wire? Like shorting a source (battery, cap,..) with a piece of wire? Risky business...
And a wire point connected to the negative explodes more violently? Now, why is that?
Please, do provide some reference.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 25, 2008, 06:23:47 PM
Loner

The purpose of this paper is to avoid that problem.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

IF the universe is perpetual - it must have an inherent mechanism that allows it to keep on going forever.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 25, 2008, 08:39:00 PM
@ loner - The first line - "Let us consider ring-shaped core transformers - … it is easier to draw them."

I built something along this line recently and the transformer seemed to resonate at 21MHZ - the ferro nuclear resonant frequency of iron. I don't have a frequency counter that goes that high but based on my old scope appeared to be right in that range and was similar to Meyer's burst waves that he was showing at the end of his notes.

The part that is most interesting is that the inductors do not collapse at the same time and so I could imagine a cavitation taking place similar to what Thane Heins has going.

It is just a tutorial and an interesting one at that. Also get to know a little more about Marinov. He figured out the Hubbard trick and his work shows how to start the coil with a glancing arc against the inductor. Read the Seattle intelligencer  article of the boat account and how Hubbard arced / struck a wire against a metal plate for five minutes until he got it working.



but easier to understand than Thane  ;)

Was that with Marinov's ball bearing motor or the other one?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 26, 2008, 02:11:22 PM
       If we go with a tuned torroidal core and get it ringing and then inductively link to it with a second tuned torroidal but this one has some resistance built into the circuit would we damp the waves in the first torroid?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: BEP on December 27, 2008, 04:11:15 AM
Exploding wire experiments:

Compression is always several orders of magnitude larger (i.e. has more energy) than decompression.

Exploding a wire with the negative terminal will not produce near the results of using the positive terminal - both with capacitor discharge as energy source.

I can quote some references if you want them.

@Grumpy

Thanks but not at this time. I'm up to my ears in trying to package a fish dinner  ;)

This cavitation idea fits nicely with my EMP toy. If that isn't cavitation then nothing else is. The problem I have is it always put out less than it used. Granted, the output could be pretty darned impressive or destructive (depended upon who I was torqued at that day) but I use two or three 800 amp hour batteries to fire off a blast. It is safest on the coil side of the wall (as opposed to the battery side) when I bang the IGBTs.

Still, there is no OU. It'll suck 50% of those batteries when fired with a time frame of several thousand mills but the contraction is so fast I can't see it on a 500mHz scope. No doubt it is there. I still have the smoked equipment to prove it and my daughter has a new brainbox for her car, too :-X

With all of that the math still said it was no more efficient than a stun-gun. So I'm looking for a repeatable experiment that shows some OU with cavitation as desert for the fish dinner.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 27, 2008, 02:51:08 PM
   It appears that there is an abundance of negative charge hanging around.
Protons are positive charge scources but seem to be insulated by the electron field.   But if we strip the field surrounding the protons of all the "insulation" we get a nice positive pulse.  So we get conventional current down the wire but in it's wake it leaves this very positively charged field that expands quite rapidly due to columb forces.  If the potential is shut down before the protons begin to migrate towards the cathode there is no scource of negative charge to define their inertial gain so they are left on their own and expand quite rapidly creating a cavity full of positive charge.  It won't be long before "something" tries to fill this cavity.  Perhaps electomagnetic waves stimulating the ions back into a more natural noisy insulated system?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Magnethos on December 27, 2008, 03:11:26 PM
@ PL
Quote
I think the secret to "free energy" is ambient thermal energy. I would consider ZPE as a form of thermal energy

I think that more than thermal is some kind of radiation. Hot/Positive Electricity dissipates heat, Cold/Negative Electricity absorbs heat.

If we analyse this, we can see:
Cold-> Heat absorbtion (endothermic)
Heat-> Heat emission    THIS DEFINITION IS STRANGE, RIGHT?
All is around heat... but... What is really "Heat" or Thermal Energy?

I think Heat is some kind of Radiation or Polarization or something else.

One thing is known...
When something is heat up or it emits heat... the molecules are moving faster and faster.
When something is cold down or cooled, the molecules are stopping until the Absolute Zero 0 degrees Kelvin.

So... Thermal energy is something related with the molecules movement, right?

An interesting question can be... What really happens when we freeze water? Since cold means heat absorbtion... When we freeze water... water is absorbing heat???
I have also read that Cooling = energy loosing.

UPDATE #1
I also remember that boiling isn't related with temperature. Boiling point is related with Pressure. There are some videos where you can see cold water boiling, of course, decreasing the pressure.

So, freezing = attraction of the molecules = heat absorbtion

All this is in relation with Hot/Positive and Cold/Negative Electricity.

I have also remember that Tachyonic energy (I think Tachyons are the universal particles) is related with the matter order. You can get Tachyonic energy, if you have an high order matter. I mean, Cold/Negative Energy seems to be the key to get free energy. Cold Means an ordered state of the matter like in the frozen water (all molecules have an order). Hot/Positive energy is like a molecular disorder and means energy dissipation. Tachyonic energy is related with that process. Maybe when order is present in the matter Tachyonic energy can be polarized and turns tachyonic to EM energy. Maybe the formation of ElectroMagnetic energy is a form of Tachyonic polarization or something similar.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 27, 2008, 04:44:15 PM
    Order and Chaos  Yid and the Yang     Create order and the chaotic will spread quickly into the vacated field.  When we remove the chaotic from water it freezes and forms a more ordered state.  When the ice melts it draws into it's lattice disorder and becomes chaotic. 
   An analogy would be 20 people using the same amount of energy running in random directions within a ring.  There are all sorts of people trying to pass through this ring of running around people but they cant because of the random motion of the 20 people within the ring.  Then the 20 people are "ordered" to use their energy to jump up and down instead of back and forth.   Now the ambient field or crowd can easily pass through or into the ring.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Magnethos on December 27, 2008, 04:53:51 PM
    Order and Chaos  Yid and the Yang     Create order and the chaotic will spread quickly into the vacated field.  When we remove the chaotic from water it freezes and forms a more ordered state.  When the ice melts it draws into it's lattice disorder and becomes chaotic. 

I remember that I read Tachyonic energy is an universal particle, but we can only get energy from it if we use a High Level Order Material. I also remember that energy absorbtion from the vacuum is a process of Negative entropy (reverse entropy) that turns chaos(entropy) in order and this process is known as negentropy, and using the negentropy process we can tap energy from the vacuum, by ordering the virtual photons, I think this process is something related with the polarization process or something similar. We must also know that ElectroMagnetic energy is ANY order in the Virtual Photon Flux of the Vacuum.

So, with our theory, we can say that Cold is something related with order and Hot/Positive is something related with chaos. Cold/Negative energy can get energy from the vacuum, so the energy can be ordered by turning chaos into order (Negentropy). Hot means disorder-chaos.

This sounds interesting...  ;)
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 27, 2008, 09:01:58 PM
Magnethos

"Boiling point is related with Pressure."

- There you go!

"So, with our theory, we can say that Cold is something related with order and Hot/Positive is something related with chaos. Cold/Negative energy can get energy from the vacuum, so the energy can be ordered by turning chaos into order (Negentropy). Hot means disorder-chaos."

- What about that: ok let's start somewhere... difference in pressure is a potential - from that we can get particle motion - from motion friction - from friction heat - from heat again pressure... Yes there are EM waves also in there, their frequency increases with heat (i think gravity is just a certain combination of all that) and maybe something else, but just to see better the entire picture in a simple way...
Now lets see the particle motion part - from that we can get difference in pressure - pressure increase in front of particle, pressure decrease at the back and right there is most probably cavitation going on. But what really is that? For what i can understand, the process is similar to a vortex process - it balances - moves the difference in pressure (energy), like a tornado or hurricane. what if you imagine a black hole? For what i know it does the same thing. And right there right through that hole the energy flows. Does this ring any bells? ...this thing can move the energy from a lower state to a higher state (or vice versa - not sure about that).
I just wrote this down from my thoughts in hope that it would help, so please correct me if you think i'm wrong somewhere...

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Magnethos on December 27, 2008, 09:48:54 PM
madddann

I think you're right because I read other work of a guy that was saying the same as you.

"Boiling point is related with pressure."
If anyone want see this, here you have a video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRZhzX67xHY

I have found another interesting video where the guy boils water using ice
NOTE: I don't know if this video is a fake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDoMBfSUSnY

Look at the similarities in both videos. When we decrease the pressure, water boils. When we put ice, water boils. So... water is absorsbing something... Maybe thermal energy in form of radiation?


Some days ago I thought about if melting point is related with resonance and not with temperature. Because if the boiling point is related with pressure, melting point is not related with heat... maybe it's related with ressonance. And I thought a possible way to perform a Cold Fussion(melting) experiment.

The theory you say seems to be ok, but remember there is also a 2nd electricity: The Cold/Negative electricity. In this kind of electricity when you draw more power, the system colds down more and more instead of heating up. I discussed what really is Thermal Energy (hot or cold), since cold is not
cold generation. Cold seems to be Heat absorbtion. I have discussed something related with pressure difference and the energy generation. I said that energy generation is possible while the poles are assymetrical. When the poles are assymetrical, there is a pressure difference of the virtual particles and electric generation is possible. I think amperage is not the amount of electrons that a dipole can draw in an amount of time. I believe amperage is the tame to turn from an asymmetric poles to a symmetric poles.
Discussion here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6384.0

I read gravitons are photon/antiphoton pairs.  Maybe Gravity is the opposite form of inertia, like an inverse inertia.
And I believe electricity are just photons, not electrons.


Quote
For what i can understand, the process is similar to a vortex process -
I read in a book that attraction in magnets isn't due to the South-N or N-S. Magnetic attraction is due to Vortex running in the same direction or vortex running in different directions.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 27, 2008, 10:47:13 PM
....
I built something along this line recently and the transformer seemed to resonate at 21MHZ - the ferro nuclear resonant frequency of iron. I don't have a frequency counter that goes that high but based on my old scope appeared to be right in that range and was similar to Meyer's burst waves that he was showing at the end of his notes.
....
The ferro-nuclear resonant frequency of an Iron?
An Iron acts as a very good EM/heat converter when used as a core in High-frequency coils....... The magnetic lag of an iron is somewhere in the range of a few milliseconds..... That means a coil / energy with a frequency of a few tens of kHz or above is converted mostly to heat.
A 21 Mhz circuit with an iron core? RF heater....
 
Quote
It is just a tutorial and an interesting one at that. Also get to know a little more about Marinov. He figured out the Hubbard trick and his work shows how to start the coil with a glancing arc against the inductor. Read the Seattle intelligence  article of the boat account and how Hubbard arced / struck a wire against a metal plate for five minutes until he got it working.

Marinov? Stefan? PM?
 ;D
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 28, 2008, 05:11:05 PM
Quote
Maybe thermal energy in form of radiation?
If you don't mind, I'd like to respond that in the other thread in a moment. Not sure this thread is related to thermal energy. -->

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6388.10


Quote
The ferro-nuclear resonant frequency of an Iron?
I spent a long time working with NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance). There is no single resonance frequency for iron or any particle in terms of NMR. The resonant frequency is relative to the magnetic field the nucleus is in. For, example, the iron nucleus resonant frequency in a 7.2 Tesla field is 9.718MHz, and 16.188MHz in a 11.744 Tesla field. Here's a table -->

http://chemweb.unp.ac.za/chemistry/Physical_Data/NMR_properties.htm


Here's a question. Why not test the cavitation theory by detecting for hard X-rays or gamma rays?  It would take an infinitesimal amount of mass to energy conversion to detect the hard X-rays or gamma rays.

IMO the answer to "free energy" is right in front everyone's eyes, *ambient* thermal energy that exists in all matter all the time. My diode array experiments prove that it is possible to capture ambient thermal energy. My magnetic theory, based on conventional physics, shows that it's possible to capture more ambient thermal energy then humanity could ever use. Besides, such technology would not use up such ambient thermal energy. It would merely circulate it, so the thermal energy remains on Earth. Also, the Sun continual maintains such ambient thermal energy.

It boggles my mind how people continue to ignore this simple physics like the plague. If you people spent 1/1000th the time you spend on these other theories and idea on ambient thermal energy technology we would already have global "free energy!"  Ambient thermal energy does not *add* energy to the planet. It merely moves energy.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 28, 2008, 06:44:28 PM
@ Paul:

The theory postulated is that all free energy devices are really cavitation.  (As I said in the first post of this topic, I do not necessarily believe this to be true, that is why it is being discussed)  If your thermal energy experiments with the diodes produce energy (from wherever) then it can be discussed here because the proposed theory encompasses ALL free energy devices.  Does your device work based on cavitation?  If not, then the theory is incorrect.  If so, then we can all learn something in the discussion that should follow.

As I said, I don't agree with this theory but, I don't have the background information to disagree with it intelligently. (So, I am trying to keep an open mind)  That is why I put the "?" in the title of this topic.

Bill             ***EDIT***  I wanted to add that this is The Buzz'z theory and if it turns out to be true, then he should get the credit for it.  I don't see it that way at this point, but, you never know.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 28, 2008, 06:57:43 PM
Bill
As I understand the cavitation Theory
It involves OU devices that do not RECEIVE energy [simplest example like an antennae]
Or Pauls device [receives energy through the environment ]
  Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 28, 2008, 07:07:04 PM
Bill
As I understand the cavitation Theory
It involves OU devices that do not RECEIVE energy [simplest example like an antennae]
Or Pauls device [receives energy through the environment ]
  Chet

Chet:

All OU devices "receive" energy from somewhere do they not?  Otherwise we would be creating energy which we all know is not possible.  This includes devices that "appear" to work on their own but, the energy is coming from somewhere, even if we can't identify the source at this time. I believe this applies to ZPE, energy from the aether, solar energy, etc.  In my opinion they all fall into the category of receiving and/or converting existing energy.  The universe has the same amount of energy now that it did when created.  I believe all we have ever done is receive energy or convert it. (This would include the pistol shrimp)  What do you think?

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 28, 2008, 07:13:54 PM
Quote
Does your device work based on cavitation?
Of course not. It is a known fact that ambient thermal energy produces Johnson noise. It is very simple to measure Johnson noise. The energy comes from ambient thermal energy.


Quote
Does your device work based on cavitation?  If not, then the theory is incorrect.
LOL, well that's a rather closed minded statement. I'd tend to believe that thermal noise is far far far far far far far more well proven to be a source of power than cavitation. I, along with millions of EE's can show you simple experiments to measure voltage fluctuations caused by ambient thermal energy. If you have some evidence that an iron core with wire windings causes matter to be converted into energy then by all means *please* post the details that include the gamma radiation readings.   :D



Quote
***EDIT***  I wanted to add that this is The Buzz'z theory and if it turns out to be true, then he should get the credit for it.  I don't see it that way at this point, but, you never know.
TheBuzz, he's prometheus, the same creator of the SMOT, correct?


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 28, 2008, 07:28:56 PM
Of course not. It is a known fact that ambient thermal energy produces Johnson noise. It is very simple to measure Johnson noise. The energy comes from ambient thermal energy.

LOL, well that's a rather closed minded statement. I'd tend to believe that thermal noise is far far far far far far far more well proven to be a source of power than cavitation. I, along with millions of EE's can show you simple experiments to measure voltage fluctuations caused by ambient thermal energy. If you have some evidence that an iron core with wire windings causes matter to be converted into energy then by all means *please* post the details that include the gamma radiation readings.   :D


TheBuzz, he's prometheus, the same creator of the SMOT, correct?




PL


Paul:

You misunderstood me, or I was not clear.  When I said that if your device is NOT cavitation, then the theory that ALL free energy devices are cavitation is incorrect.  Make more sense now?  You see, I don't think they are and I think that your type device is but one of other examples that do not fit this theory.  That was the point I was trying to make.  I am sorry if I was not clear.

I don't think my earth battery is using cavitation either.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 28, 2008, 07:42:18 PM
Bill
Its not my Theory
I have just noticed that the theory explains or helps to explain ,how when WE create an unstable /unnatural environment [cavitation] MOM [mother nature ]goes out of her way to reestablish order in that environment
This condition is opportunity knocking [a VERY VERY BIG window of opportunity]
 Chet
Receiving energy does not fall into Cavitation or the theory as I understand it
Perhaps the BUZZ can clear this up
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 28, 2008, 07:49:19 PM
Thanks for clarifying Bill. It is my hope that global "free energy" will become a part of every day life as soon as possible. Therefore, obviously I nor anyone would want a lot of time wasted. So, it seems to me that the cavitation theory contained in this thread is about converting mass to energy. If that's correct, then *******PLEASE******* legitimate researchers test this cavitation theory and get it out of the way so these good people can start working on something else, as it's very simple to test this.  Energy to mass conversion will produce gamma rays. See it's producing gamma rays. It would take just an infinitesimal amount of mass-to-energy conversion to show up on a meter. If that is not the theory in this thread, and it's based on some unproven theoretical aether theory, then IMO that is going far far beyond what's necessary because it's well known that we're surrounded with ambient thermal energy. One billion joules per m^3 to be exact, and twice that for water. That's conventional physics. And such ambient thermal energy is sustained by our Sun. Ambient thermal energy is always in all matter, day and night.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 28, 2008, 08:04:23 PM
All that's needed is a Geiger counter. There are well over a hundred for sale at ebay for less than $20.


Here's one for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-CDV-715-1A-Radiation-Detector-Geiger-Counter_W0QQitemZ160306325904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item160306325904&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318

Here's another for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-Instrument-Geiger-Counter-CDV-717-Model-1_W0QQitemZ190259748656QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item190259748656&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318

My ebay search showed close to 170 of them for sale. It's probably a good idea to test the cavitation theory to see if matter is being converted to energy. If it doesn't, then at least you're more prepared for a nuclear attack.  ;D

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 28, 2008, 08:13:30 PM
The way I see it there are two types of alternate energy devices.
Those that use cavitation and those that don't.  ;D

Actually I see cavitation as a method of extracting energy from the Aether or ZPE or Vacuum which ever we call it.
Other alternate energy devices convert natural or radiant energy into a useful form. eg. solar cells.
I read somewhere that the amount of energy bombarding us from space
24/7 is enough to power 200,000 hundred watt bulbs for every man woman and child on the earth.
Collecting this source of energy would not come under cavitation, even thought the actual source of it may use cavitation.

But devices that actually convert matter into energy like fusion would use cavitation.
That is what we are here to prove.

I have fired up my argon discharge tubes again and am experimenting with using the output produced to run other things.
Filtering the output through a Microwave capacitor in series only allows the AC component to pass to the external circuit.
It is this AC component that is showing the OU characteristics. 
This is an idea I have been applying to other devices on this forum too.
Filter out the DC and measure the AC. (Important experiment for all)

When I get around to it I plan on feeding the output to a MOT primary with neo's connected to it like IST showed us.
If 19 volts gives us a large increase in current what would 400 volts give us?
Also plan on finding a way to get the output from #1 to run #2,
if successful then I will use the out put from #2 to run #1.  ;D

If you don't hear from me for a long time it may be because I discovered a new source
of endless energy and am no longer here. ;D ;D
I have left instructions with my sweetheart to let the forum know if something happens to me.   

We are  having an unusually warm spell around here the last few days,
I wounder if running my discharge tube has anything to do with it. ;D

Sorry guys I went to see "Yes Man" last night and am still in a comical mood today.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 28, 2008, 10:52:02 PM
"When Pirate took a walk with my cavitation information and started this thread, he also took the responsibility to read and understand the information which he has failed to do. There is that nautical theme again."  Quote From TheBuzz



Excuse me but here you go again!  Your cavitation information?  I started a new topic because you hijacked Captainpecan's topic with this nonsense.  I have read all of your "information" so called, and see no evidence of your theory being correct.  But, I have also stated that even though I do not see any connection at this time, I reserved judgment until all of the facts are in.

When you grow up and get over yourself a little, maybe then we can have a decent discussion on these ideas.  I have reached out and listened to your presentation, and others, and maybe have even learned a few things along the way.  But, to say again that "Pirate took a walk with my cavitation information" is totally bogus and you know it.  How could I take your information when I have said many times that I think your information is not correct?  Did you not notice the"?" in the topic title?  Did you not notice my posting the first post that says I don't subscribe to this theory?
How the heck is that taking your information?  I have not stopped anyone from posting here have I?  I gave you many examples of devices that work without cavitation as did others and yet you choose to ignore these posts.  Fine.  That is your choice.  But to say that no one here has posted anything that refutes your theory is laughable to anyone that can read.

As I said, if you change your attitude, maybe we can all have an intelligent conversation.  If you can't, then I feel bad for you.

Paul has asked you to do a simple experiment that would show that you are correct or incorrect and yet, you say no one has challenged your theory.

If you don't like what I am posting, please feel free to start your own topic and continue your abuse over there.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: madddann on December 28, 2008, 10:54:23 PM
Oh guys, i think we are in the same boat, we are here to learn from each other and from nature, it's the only way known to me that would make better progress...

@TheBuzz

It would be great if you would at least try to clarify the process of cavitation - what do you think is really going on in there. I know, this could make "the skeptics" go wild and bury you, perhaps it's your decision what to do... looks like we really need a moderated thread or another forum at this point.
I'm more after the vortex thing, but i think it's closely related to cavitation.

Dann
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 04:53:00 AM
Paul has asked you to do a simple experiment that would show that you are correct or incorrect and yet, you say no one has challenged your theory.

If you don't like what I am posting, please feel free to start your own topic and continue your abuse over there.

Bill
So far TheBuzz (Prometheus) has ignored my suggestion of using a $15 Geiger counter to test his theory. When will everyone begin to catch on as to what's happening to the "free energy" community. Several years ago I encouraged Stefan to begin detailed IP tracking. It's always the same thing, just a different theme. A new username. The same people. The end result's are always the same, which is a huge waste of everyone's time. They have no interest in making money, so people should take a guess what their goal is. Anyhow, again -->

Here's one for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-CDV-715-1A-Radiation-Detector-Geiger-Counter_W0QQitemZ160306325904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item160306325904&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-CDV-715-1A-Radiation-Detector-Geiger-Counter_W0QQitemZ160306325904QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item160306325904&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318)

Here's another for $15
http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-Instrument-Geiger-Counter-CDV-717-Model-1_W0QQitemZ190259748656QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item190259748656&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Victoreen-Instrument-Geiger-Counter-CDV-717-Model-1_W0QQitemZ190259748656QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Security_Fire_Protection?hash=item190259748656&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A15|39%3A1|240%3A1318)

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 29, 2008, 05:43:30 AM
I don't work for you Paul and I have better things to do than silly experiments for you. Why don't you do your own experiments in your own thread as suggested.

According to Paul, anyone that is not in it for profit is suspect? Wow... I'm glad most of us don't think like that. Our hobby is searching for free energy, apparently you have a problem with that?

This thread is about the cavitation link to free energy devices and that link has been well established.

Slight correction there.  This thread is about IF cavitation is linked to free energy devices and that link has not been well established, or even established at all in my opinion.  That is what we are discussing here.  The jury is still out.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: maw2432 on December 29, 2008, 05:59:06 AM
@ Buzz

Thanks for the links.   Nice to get everthing listed like you put together.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 29, 2008, 06:00:34 AM
Well, I started this topic so I guess that makes me the jury.  And, it is still out.  Many devices have been listed that produce free energy without cavitation.  Maybe you call them receivers.  I don't as all free energy devices are receivers so that point is moot.  All energy comes from somewhere so, therefore all devices are receivers, not just all of the ones that don't fit your theory.

I did not name "The Young Effect", Mr. Young did. You really need to get your facts straight prior to posting...please.  I suggested the name as a possible option.  It was his choice.

I say again, please start your own topic and quit abusing folks here.  This is my second request.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 29, 2008, 06:11:54 AM
So far, no one has proved that cavitation is not responsible for anomalous energy output from various devices.

We need to come up with some way to prove it.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 06:42:17 AM
Why would TheBuzz say my suggestion of testing for gamma radiation is "silly" ?   If there's nuclear cavitation, and you don't have thick shielding, then there's going to be gamma rays.

If a $15 Geiger counter was purchased, then we could quickly see if there's nuclear cavitation. If none was detected, then it means cavitation is *not* the cause of the "free energy."

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 29, 2008, 06:43:27 AM
@ Buzz:

Interesting retort.  But you miss some basic facts.  Yes, I agree with you (wow) about the crystal radio using the transmitter's power to work...free energy to the guy with the radio but, you and I both know where the energy comes from.

And as far as not knowing the difference between an energy receiver and an energy converter, maybe you should rethink this a bit.  A device can not convert energy unless it receives it first.  See?  This is very simple and basic but you overlook it for some reason.  The atom bomb that you refer to so often could not and would not work without the plutonium energy already existing in the core prior to critical mass.

As far as me trying to get you banned goes......you did it yourself before and I am sure you will do it again on your own.  You certainly don't need my help as you have proved before.

I can't produce evidence to prove a negative you above all should know that.  You tell me one energy device that is not a receiver of energy and then we can talk cavitation or not.  I don't think one exists.  This is just a cop out for the defects in your interesting theory.  It is a good theory, don't get me wrong.  I just don't like absolutes where everything is everything and nothing is nothing.  Absolutes are never true.  (wait, that is an absolute)  See what I mean?

I mentioned the earth battery several times but you would say that is a receiver. (I agree)  The diodes that Paul mentioned you say are receivers. (again, I agree)  Solar power, you say is receiver. (agree again)  So, I ask you to name anything on the planet, or in the universe, that is NOT a receiver of energy and I say you can't.

So, I guess that is that.  Pretty simple really.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 06:52:14 AM
So far, until someone posts a validated free energy device that is not a receiver, all of them appear to use cavitation to convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass.
So far my diode array is the *only* published "free energy" device that includes every detail, part numbers, how to replicate, that would produce "free energy."  So, just out of curiousity, what "validated free energy" machines have you validated?

Nuclear fusion emits gamma rays. It requires special shielding to prevent gamma rays from exiting. It just seems highly unlikely these unshielded machines are bombarding these people with gamma radiation. The fact that for example Thanes is still alive is pretty much a guarantee his machine is not producing nuclear cavitation.

For anyone who's interested in testing this cavitation theory can get a Geiger counter for $15. Please see a previous post that contains the eBay links.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 07:12:42 AM
What Paul is trying to bait me into is producing a nuclear fusion device so that the government can justify arresting me or placing me under a secrecy order. Sorry Paul, while I was born in the morning, it wasn't this morning. It is an old suppression trick they use - nice try.
Huh?  LOL, that's funny. No, I'm trying to get you to test your theory. Also, I'm trying to save the time of legitimate researchers. BTW, students and professors at Universities are working on nuclear fusion. It's not illegal, and they're not in jail. So it's a bit silly to say that by me asking you to test for gamma radiation is some attempt to get you put in jail.

Don't get me wrong, nuclear cavitation is great field, but researcher should *in the very least* learn quantum physics, or at least some basic nuclear physics. For example, I spent two years learning semiconductor physics and mathematics for my diode array research. Working on nuclear cavitation technology is far far far beyond my task of fabrication semiconductor chips.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 07:25:01 AM
Here it is. Jean-Louis Naudin tested his Tom Bearden replication of the MEG for gamma radiation, and found none. Here's the quote -->

http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megv21.htm
Quote from Jean-Louis Naudin,
"With a gamma counter : No gamma radiation has yet been detected"

I have not verified the Jean-Louis Naudin MEG, but if it works, then IMO the "free energy" would come from ambient thermal energy.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 29, 2008, 03:54:48 PM
      Is a hole in a semiconductor or the hole in the valence shells of copper gold silver etc. considered a cavity?  The holes are massless but respond to voltage gradients.  Do the holes move before the electrons when voltage is first applied to a diode or copper conductor?    Is it possible to move the holes in the wire without moving the electrons?  Can we charge a capacitor by just moving the holes?  Can the movement of the holes exceed the speed of light?  Do the holes coalesce within a reversed biased diode to make a bigger hole? 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 05:05:13 PM
Paul, I did not cite the MEG and to my knowledge the MEG did not ever produce OU and I certainly never claimed that the MEG did a Fe56 to Fe54 transmute.

Paul, I don't know where your imaginary MEG argument came from but it has nothing to do with my theory to my knowledge but my knowledge of Beardens MEG is zero. Bearden in my mind has no credibility - he is an ex-navel intel agent. If anything he ever wrote had any value, someone would have taken the information in one of his books and put it to good use producing a free energy device. To my knowledge it has not happened. Where are they?

Next - it is my understanding that in order to run an accelerator, you need a license. I would assume universities have the necessary license and so the students are naturally not be in jail. Once again, your argument seems baseless and devoid of fact, scientific or otherwise.

While I do trust much of what Naudin says, he is but one person and fallible. Notice he didn't include the accelerator coil in his Meyer replication schematic but it is visible in the photo? What up?

Now if your idea is so good, why don't you go buy a bunch of diodes or manufacture a chip and get rich selling energy?

Last (and it would be nice if it were the last I heard of your baseless misquotes),  I could care less about conventional physics since conventional physics has more holes in it than swiss cheese just like your most recent mis-statement regarding the MEG.

To my knowledge, nobody has ever gotten Bedini's pulse motor to run OU for an extended period of time either, but I don't know what I don't know.

So why don't you build a MEG, make it run OU, buy a counter and prove me wrong. It is not my job to prove myself wrong but would gladly admit it if I were. It is just about the science with me, not some false ego driven need to be right.

I actually wish you could prove me wrong. The Methernitha is a device that was highly validated. The Gray tube is another. Please post a highly validated free energy device that was not a receiver that did not use cavitation to convert mass into the atomic energy contained within mass.

Bottom line, they will all use acceleration or cavitation to produce the same result.
This needs quoting since TheBuzz (Prometheus), via email, threatened to delete all of his posts.

I'm a huge fan of "free energy."  I just want to offer tests to either prove or disprove theories & devices that would waste a lot of legitimate research time.

For the sake of people who would get caught up into this nuclear cavitation theory, and waste a lot of good time, lets provide information so people can make a good decision -->

* TheBuzz (Prometheus) was offered to test his theory by using a Geiger counter. Prometheus's replied back that such a test is silly, even though he claims such devices are powered by nuclear cavitation.

* Prometheus discredits the MEG, even though Naudin claims to have successfully replicated the MEG.

* Naudin's Geiger counter measurements on the MEG showed no radiation.

* Prometheus's claims that I misquoted Naudin, even though I directly copied and pasted the words that are on Naudin's website --> "With a gamma counter : No gamma radiation has yet been detected"


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 29, 2008, 05:55:37 PM
The diode array as an energy source is not so good.    Kinda like solar - the energy is free but you can't collect much of it.

Rather than argue, you can change your attitude and we will all be better for it.

How can you produce your own thermal noise by cavitation of some medium and then collect more energy?

Does the diode array have a receiving antenna or collector to help it catch more thermal noise?

What is "thermal noise" in the first place?   Does it have a longitudinal component?

================================================================

The MEG uses magnetic current - which Bearden either never mentions or doesn't know they exist.  See, Maxwell left that out of his theory and this is why "zero point" exist at all.  Add magnetic current and ZP goes away, but you gain much more.  There will be no gamma emission, but might detect something with a beta detector, especially if his core leaked, but I doubt it, it would not be a true particle anyway - just an induced charge.

================================================================

Some of your views on transmutation need to be updated.  Walter Russell transmuted flourine in a well-known and well-documented experiment - I don't recall this producing any radiation. 
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 06:03:00 PM
Diode array as a source would be one of the best since all matter has ambient thermal energy, plenty of it, and the Sun sustains such energy.  One cubic meter of most matter has over one billion joules of energy. Water has twice that.  :)

If you want to know what ambient thermal energy is -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com

I'm glad J.L.Naudin purchased a Geiger counter and tested the MEG, which he claims according to the scope shots produces "free energy."  Anyone who believes their "free energy" machine is producing energy from nuclear cavitation should spend the $15 and buy a Geiger counter.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 06:08:44 PM
Some of your views on transmutation need to be updated.  Walter Russell transmuted flourine in a well-known and well-documented experiment - I don't recall this producing any radiation.
Please provide the details, such as how thick was the shielding?  As far as I'm aware any verified nuclear fusion device that produces usable amounts of power also produces gamma radiation. You need to shield such radiation.


How can you produce your own thermal noise by cavitation of some medium and then collect more energy?
Thermal noise is not produced by cavitation. It's well know that it is caused by ambient thermal energy; i.e. all particles on a microscopic scale vibrate. Get a 10X magnifying glass, and with some patience you'll see Brownian motion, which is caused by ambient thermal energy. Get a cheap $40 microscope and you'll easily see Brownian motion. Just sprinkle some light particles such as powdered cumin (cooking spice) on water. The cumin will randomly jitter all over the place. This random movement is caused by ambient thermal energy that exists is all matter all the time.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 29, 2008, 07:33:20 PM
Please provide the details, such as how thick was the shielding?  As far as I'm aware any verified nuclear fusion device that produces usable amounts of power also produces gamma radiation. You need to shield such radiation.

Thermal noise is not produced by cavitation. It's well know that it is caused by ambient thermal energy; i.e. all particles on a microscopic scale vibrate. Get a 10X magnifying glass, and with some patience you'll see Brownian motion, which is caused by ambient thermal energy. Get a cheap $40 microscope and you'll easily see Brownian motion. Just sprinkle some light particles such as powdered cumin (cooking spice) on water. The cumin will randomly jitter all over the place. This random movement is caused by ambient thermal energy that exists is all matter all the time.

PL

Russell used no shielding.  He used a quartz tube (container) and manipulated fields of energy in such a way to bring about the transmuation from water. 

Quote
In 1927 Russell transmuted distilled H2O into significant amounts of hydrogen, or helium, or nitrogen, or fluorine - at the Westinghouse Laboratories.

Quote
In 1958-1961 Russell worked with NORAD in pulling energy from the cosmos with his dually sexed coils methodology - reported success

http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Walter_Russell

Google "Walter Russell" flourine transmuted for more info.

"Ambient thermal energy"?  So, what causes it?

Is there no way to use cavitation to produce this "ambient thermal energy"?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 29, 2008, 07:37:49 PM


BUZZ so these are some links of which you refer cavitation  to be the cause
Almost missed this

 what people have posted as examples of cavitation.

The list is far from complete but thus far the theory has stood.

Cavitation of a fluid

The Pistol Shrimp
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc

Self running free energy machine
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=qhwQt1tJYa8

Ultrasonic Cavitation
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0oNZcLyCR_Q&NR=1

Propeller Cavitation
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KExSxt-lo5c&NR=1

Snapping Shrimp
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ONQlTMUYCW4

Sonoluminescence
http://keelytech.com/sonoluminescence.html

Codename "Shkval-Torpedo": Super-cavitation is a loop-hole in physics
http://www.articlesextra.com/supercavitation-torpedoes.htm

Producing nuclear fusion with the help of cavitation inside a glass of water
http://www.articlesextra.com/cavitation-fusion-nuclear.htm

Overunity free energy water heater from WITS
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxnEQssJ4FQ

John Worrell Keely-dale pond pt1
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TMEpCpzahFY&feature=PlayList&p=A426FDF5BA3CD7FD&index=0

Cavitation and Fusion
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StringhamRcavitationb.pdf

FUELLESS HEATER NO FUEL NO GAS NO WOOD NO GREEN HOUSE GASES
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=yh_-DUKQ4Uw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_fusion

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Sonofusion

http://sonofusionjets.com/

Cavitation in Microgravity (Full Movie)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=gR0YBAhY2PQ

The Clem Engine
http://www.rexresearch.com/clemengn/clemengn.htm

Methernitha  - Cavitation of a H2 plasma to produce H2 H1 transmute.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 07:43:43 PM
Russell used no shielding.  He used a quartz tube (container) and manipulated fields of energy in such a way to bring about the transmuation from water. 

http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Walter_Russell

Google "Walter Russell" flourine transmuted for more info.
IMO Russel was a great man who worked on a lot of things, but what you're referring to has never been verified. WikiPedia has a more unbiased point of view -->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Russell
It says his books "continues to be rejected by mainstream academia."

I firmly agree with conventional physics on this one, that any nuclear fusion that produces usable amounts of power will produce gamma radiation.



"Ambient thermal energy"?  So, what causes it?  Is there no way to use cavitation to produce this "ambient thermal energy"?
Did you go to my website?  The Universe is nothing but energy. It's always exists. The big bang. Before the big bang. So how could I answer your question. It just exists. All matter is continually vibrating. If you doubt this then get a $40 microscope and you'll easily see Brownian motion.


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 29, 2008, 07:48:40 PM
Buzz I'm sorry but I am looking for your quote [towards the beginning]

Where you specifically state certain types of cavitation can be VERY dangerous and asked us to study things similar to what Thane was doing

looking through all the unassociated [to your cavitation theory]posts makes this very hard to do

When I find it Maybe Paul will stop running around the forum with  Geiger counter sales brochure's?

Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 07:59:33 PM
When I find it Maybe Paul will stop running around the forum with  Geiger counter sales brochure's?
I'm not selling anything.  I took the time to find you various Geiger counters for sale at ebay.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 29, 2008, 08:10:56 PM
Paul
I know your not selling  [didn't know they were this cheap]
Its hard for me to tell if you are poking fun at the Buzz, or if you think his theory has merit, and could be dangerous !!
Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 08:19:35 PM
Yes, I was also amazed they're so cheat. If I wasn't broke I'd buy one just for the fun of it. Hey, if there's a nuke attack then you could be prepared.   :)

I completely disagree with TheBuzz about his theory because I think most "free energy" machines get the energy from ambient thermal energy.  I kindly offered thebuzz a way to test his theory. He rudely replied that my test is silly!   I'm not the only person here who's turned off him. Why would he try to avoid tests that could either end or support his theory?

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 29, 2008, 08:20:57 PM
    If we cause a vacuum bubble we have basically pumped down a vacuum tube.   The absence of mass will allow alot of stuff to go on that would otherwise not be possible in the field.  Water will boil into the cavity as well as nitrogen and oxygen.  The ambient field will be cooled as the mass emitting the vibrations is going vector.  The nitrogen with no partial pressure finds itself able to convert intrinsic vibrational modes to vectored inertial gain of the mass into the void from all directions towards the center of the sphere.  The collapse of the bubble adds velocity to this nitrogen flow and any number of mass to energy conversions could insue upon collision of the atoms accelerated towards a common collision point.   Perhaps this inward implosion results in a vortice of gas as the columb charges of the atoms would rather the atoms take on a vortex flow than fuse.  Either way it is a clever way to concentrate energy stored in the form of mass into a very condensed field.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 29, 2008, 08:49:34 PM
A few facts regarding Paul's radiation challenge and his mis-quotes attempting to smear me or distort the information I have presented:

1. The average person is exposed to 85 millirem of ionizing radiation per year. That is 1/1000 of a rem.

2. That 45 year old survey meter was not designed to detect small amounts of radiation brand new as the scale goes from 1 - 5 rem. In fact, the old joke that goes with those old civil defense meters is "If you ever had to use one and the needle moves, you are dead."

3. To expect to measure a low energy particle coming from a core wrapped in copper which shields the core in order to collect any beta and gamma radiation would be silly and becomes laughable once you expect to measure it with a 45 year old survey meter that was not designed to measure low level radiation to begin with..

4. During a Fe56 to Fe54 transmute through ferro nuclear resonance it is my understanding that Fe55 is not produced and both Fe56 and Fe54 are stable isotopes.

Perhaps Naudin should have placed a phosphorus filter near the inductor and maybe Paul should stick to building hydrogen line crystal radios or whatever it is he is doing that he claims nobody is interested in. Preferably in his own thread.

If Paul can't do his own flawed experiments with the wrong test equipment then why would I?

One other thing Paul might do is stop misquoting me.
If we look at that meter, it's not difficult for the human eye to see 0.01 units change. In 0.1 mode, that comes to 1e-3 rem per hour, which equals 8.8 rem per year. The blackground dose of natural radiation received by a US citizen is 0.3 rem per year-- reference -->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation#Units_of_measure_and_exposure

So correct me if I'm wrong, this equipment is capable of detecting background radiation that's just 29 (8.8 / 0.3) times greater. The normal background radiation level is extremely small. So if a device cannot create 29 times over background, then how's it going to produce anything useful?

It seems this equipment is fully capable of measuring the gamma radiation. With the aid of a 10X magnifying glass you could probably see the background radiation fluctuation with this equipment, no?


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 03:12:12 AM
How convernient for you to  ignore the very salient point #3. Your argument appears to be as sloppy as your science.

Sorry Paul... nice try though. Why don't you save up your pennies so that someday you can afford a 45 year old survey meter in unknown condition costing $15.00 and a magnifieing glass in order to do your own flawed experiment.

Maybe if you employed a bit more integrity in your science you could afford a $15.00 surplus meter.
There was no reason to address point #3 because it *should* go without saying that the gamma rays will easily penetrate the iron core with copper windings. Even natural occurring Uranium ore would easily set off these Gieger counters.
http://www.unitednuclear.com/uranium.htm

Simple logic. In order for the Gieger counter to detect the gamma rays, the radiation would have to travel through the rock.  :)

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 03:27:13 AM
You do not need a Geiger counter or anything like that.

All you need is a piece of speaker wire or "zip cord" - about 8 to 10 feet long - leave one end unconnected, and connect the other end to a battery and an electrometer (with very high impedence).

Now you may say that this can't work and if you do, then I suggest you tell that to Patrick Flanagan - I'm sure you are all familiar with him.   You can earn more about scalar fields and dielectrics in one of his emails than in any book by Bearden or Bedini.  When he was about 14 he developed a circuit that could detect missile launches - seems that any large mass in motion produce a continuous emission of waves that can be detected.  Yeah, stealth ain't all they make it out to be...  Flanagan's neurophone works by scalar waves as does our nervous system.

When you start "cavitating" and electric field, which is compressing it over and over very suddenly such as by a capacitor discharge or very large inductive field collapse, you will begin to detect what will appear to be an increased charge at the battery.  This will appear to you as charged particles, but it isn't, yet it induces a charge on the battery.   

How does this happen?  What is the mechanism for gain?

Haven't any of you been paying attention?  Compression is several orders of magnitude large than refraction - go figure - nature is preprogrammed for gain!
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 03:39:16 AM
I firmly agree with conventional physics on this one, that any nuclear fusion that produces usable amounts of power will produce gamma radiation.

Did you go to my website?  The Universe is nothing but energy. It's always exists. The big bang. Before the big bang. So how could I answer your question. It just exists. All matter is continually vibrating. If you doubt this then get a $40 microscope and you'll easily see Brownian motion.

PL

Conventional nuclear fusion is brute force.  The method of transmutation that we are discussing is finesse.

I know all matter is vibrating, but this is not a very usable form of energy, as you well know.  People are not interested in vibrating particles, diodes, or other anomalous circuits that produce minute amounts of excess energy.  It takes 20kW+ to run you car electrically, and 5kW+ for you home.  You need to look for 1000:1 gain.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 03:49:19 AM
About your wire gamma ray detector. That's not a good idea, even if it was sensitive enough, because you wouldn't know if it's picking up gamma rays, radio frequency waves, or even electrostatic fields that could be caused by just about anything.


Conventional nuclear fusion is brute force.  The method of transmutation that we are discussing is finesse.
If you can provide mathematics then scientists are willing to listen, including myself.



I know all matter is vibrating, but this is not a very usable form of energy, as you well know.  People are not interested in vibrating particles, diodes, or other anomalous circuits that produce minute amounts of excess energy.  It takes 20kW+ to run you car electrically, and 5kW+ for you home.  You need to look for 1000:1 gain.
You did not read my website. You'll see where it goes over the mathematics showing how a diode array chip is predicted to produce kilowatts.  :)


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 05:36:45 AM
About your wire gamma ray detector. That's not a good idea, even if it was sensitive enough, because you wouldn't know if it's picking up gamma rays, radio frequency waves, or even electrostatic fields that could be caused by just about anything.

If you can provide mathematics then scientists are willing to listen, including myself.


You did not read my website. You'll see where it goes over the mathematics showing how a diode array chip is predicted to produce kilowatts.  :)


PL

Ah-Ha!  Paul!  I see you are familiar with this sort of detector - the two wire coil thing.  So far it only seems to pick up stuff that is longitudinal.  (Another one for the troll boys - write it down.)  How do you know what the gamma detector picked up?  It just detects an induced charge.

Here is a million dollar quesion:  Does a Geiger counter respond to lightning?

Hint: storm chasers use them.

(You may not be aware that Hertz initially detected longitudinal waves before he detected transverse waves.  His diaries were released a few years ago.  So, the story about Tesla going to visit him may be true after all.)

I stopped reading about diode arrays when I saw the word "predicted". 

Also, I can not construct my own diode array chip or many of the the fancy devices that abound on the web these days, so I was forced to find my kW's elsewhere.  When Tesla  stated that he could easily pull 100 amps from the third coil of his magnifier - everyone should have listened.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: BEP on December 30, 2008, 03:08:10 PM
Here is a million dollar quesion:  Does a Geiger counter respond to lightning?

Hint: storm chasers use them.

 ;D No Bovine Excrement!

It is a handy tool for locating a well formed tornado when the visibility is zero, as well!

I just used one three days ago. Darned thing only missed my house by 1.5 miles! For lightning the range is based upon the strength of the strike more than distance.  And that is using a used GM tube with parts from my junk box.


Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 03:33:28 PM
;D No Bovine Excrement!

It is a handy tool for locating a well formed tornado when the visibility is zero, as well!

I just used one three days ago. Darned thing only missed my house by 1.5 miles! For lightning the range is based upon the strength of the strike more than distance.  And that is using a used GM tube with parts from my junk box.

So, what do Geiger counters actually detect?
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 30, 2008, 04:03:33 PM
So, what do Geiger counters actually detect?

     high frequency of high intensity
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: spinner on December 30, 2008, 04:31:16 PM
Geiger/Muller tubes/counters are usually a LOW COST devices which are mostly used as an indicator for a possibility of radiation consequences (mostly Beta and Gamma radiation presence).

Something like a "live-wire indicator screwdrivers" are for AC electricity... A measuring/correct quantisation is not the main purpose of those instruments...

Not exactly a "death proved" method for evaluating nuclear radiation effects... (there are instruments capable of detecting the radiation effects by orders of magnitude higher sensitivity...). Of course, they're a bit more expensive...

Yes, if your 15$ Geiger is working correctly and it is detecting something, you may have already been exposed to an "above normal level", or cumulative (usually unhealthy) dosage of radiation. :o (depends on the time of exposure....)


The Beta radiation consists of the high energy electrons (released not only by nuclear activity but even with, e.g. partial activity in CR Tubes, or (natural) violent atmospheric electricity discharges (lightning)), ....IT IS quite possible to detect natural lightnings with Geiger's.... Although you may see a lightning with your own eyes before you hear the "clicks" from your Geiger...

Check your "Geiger" close to a brush-type electromotor... If it doesn't show at least some decline of a needle ( or if there is no apparent sound clicks) / analog type), then it is not working correctly....




I'm one of those people who have serious objections (or problem with understanding) with TheBuzz's theory of "All FE devices works because of the Cavitation"...

Firstly, I don't know for any such FE devices.

And secondly, I *think* I understand what "Cavitation" really means.

Btw, naming a "Meternitha device" as a proof for Cavitational OU must be a joke.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 05:20:17 PM
Thanks for the info spinner. J.L.Naudin used a gamma counter (not sure of the model) to see if the MEG was producing gamma radiation. He found no gamma radiation.

I would agree with you that cavitation is not the key to *all* free energy devices. Thanes just recently said the same thing, so he also agrees with us. I would go as far as to say that to date there are no "free energy" machines based on cavitation.  :(

As far as I'm aware, my diode array is the first documented legit "free energy" device that includes every detail, including part #'s, that anyone could build using SMS7630 diodes, which the semiconductor industry refers to as Zero Bias Diodes. Please see my website and forum for details -->

http://greenselfreliantenergy.com

So yes, there is now an actual "free energy" machine. I have offered a legal business challenge to countless physicists and EE's that if my diode array is not producing a DC voltage across a load that I will buy their product. Contact me for details. No takers so far. Also, *conventional* physics, using the best small signal semiconductor mathematics, which is based on quantum physics, clearly shows that diodes *must* rectify ambient thermal noise. Even the acclaimed genious, Mike Engelhardt, creator of LTspice by Linear Technologies Inc. said that I am correct that the math shows diodes rectify Johnson noise. I have challenged countless scientists to show mathematical proof that diodes produce zero volts DC from Johnson noise. They cannot, because the math clearly shows that diodes must rectify ambient thermal noise.  Twelve months of extensive measurements with up to *three* layers of metal shielding far out in a wide range of rural areas have shown the diode array always produces a DC voltage. The diode array has been tested in oil baths and non oil baths. It's been tested with various types of low bias current voltage meters, including the recent electrometer using a chip that produces a few femto amps of bias current. So both the math and measurements show that diodes rectify ambient thermal noise.

As far as I'm aware, this is the first "free energy" machine that anyone could build that will work. It's not going to power anything you'll need, but it proves the concept. It will require a diode array chip to provide usable amounts of power. The SMS7630 diodes are large enough to handle with your hands. Just solder at least 100 hundred of them in-series, as compact as possible, get an electrometer, place in appropriate metal shielding, and you get DC voltage. See my forum for details.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 30, 2008, 05:48:59 PM
    I thought geiger counters were like little vacuum tubes filled with gas.  Then when the gas "absorbed" the wave energy it became ionized and it's resistance drops.  I always check for xrays by using an evacuated tube filled with mercury vapor.  Mercury vapor likes em waves so much it starts to glow.   Below is how a smoke detector works which uses ionizing frequency to create an electric current.


       Ionization detectors have an ionization chamber and a source of ionizing radiation. The source of ionizing radiation is a minute quantity of americium-241 (perhaps 1/5000th of a gram), which is a source of alpha particles (helium nuclei). The ionization chamber consists of two plates separated by about a centimeter. The battery applies a voltage to the plates, charging one plate positive and the other plate negative. Alpha particles constantly released by the americium knock electrons off of the atoms in the air, ionizing the oxygen and nitrogen atoms in the chamber. The positively-charged oxygen and nitrogen atoms are attracted to the negative plate and the electrons are attracted to the positive plate, generating a small, continuous electric current. When smoke enters the ionization chamber, the smoke particles attach to the ions and neutralize them, so they do not reach the plate. The drop in current between the plates triggers the alarm.
   What if instead of a battery we use a high voltage high frequency scource.  Then the ionized neuclei migrate towards the cathode and the electrons towards the anode.  But just when the going gets good we shut off the voltage.  The electrons keep going and charge up one plate and the neuclei the other.  Then this secondary charging of the capacitor is shorted out to a load of some sort and the cycle begins all over.  The big question here is do the electrons and ions pickup momentum because of the energy of the external field or do they go faster at their own expense in energy.

Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 06:06:55 PM
Quote from: PaulLowrance
Thanes just recently said the same thing, so he also agrees with us.
Actually, here's the exact quote -->

I asked Thanes if he had tested his machines with a Geiger counter? He replied,
Quote from: CRANKYpants
FOR SOMEONE TO SAY IT IS "ONLY" THIS OR THAT IS JUST LIMITED THINKING LIKE ME SAYING THERE IS ONLY ONE WAY TO FLY.

MY THEORY IS:

THAT THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES OUT THERE OR WAYS TO MAKE THEM...
JUST LIKE THERE ARE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS TO FLY - OR CRASH OR MAKE A LIGHT BULB.
AND OBVIOUSLY SOME ARE BETTER (AND SAFER) THAN OTHERS AND INFINITELY MANY ARE YET TO BE DISCOVERED.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 06:13:43 PM

As far as I'm aware, my diode array is the first documented legit "free energy" device that includes every detail, including part #'s, that anyone could build using SMS7630 diodes, which the semiconductor industry refers to as Zero Bias Diodes. Please see my website and forum for details -->


Tesla has two patents on radiant energy receivers that capture naturally occurring radiant energy.  There was a nicely documented experiment confirming that the method works.  So, your diodes are not the first.

Eric Dollard has written and experimented a great deal with Tesla Transformers.  These are deemed to be OU, but I guess they do not fall under the "anyone can build" statement.

On the Geiger Counter, don't they respond to displacement current? - which is not an electron current.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 07:08:09 PM
Tesla has two patents on radiant energy receivers that capture naturally occurring radiant energy.  There was a nicely documented experiment confirming that the method works.  So, your diodes are not the first.

Eric Dollard has written and experimented a great deal with Tesla Transformers.  These are deemed to be OU, but I guess they do not fall under the "anyone can build" statement.

On the Geiger Counter, don't they respond to displacement current? - which is not an electron current.
I don't know what you mean by radiant energy, but a solar cell captures solar energy, but obviously I'm referring to a different class of "free energy" machines. As you know, there are perhaps countless "free energy" machines, and I'd agree that it's possible a lot of them were legit, but the public does not have enough details right now to build such a "free energy" machine. Otherwise, I and others would build them right now and start powering my car and home. Are you kidding me,  :D , I'd love that!!!

I'm saying that my diode array is the first documented and detailed device that produces "free energy" across a load that includes all of the details to replicate and verify this very moment. One could say it's the "Pico Smoking Gun" because it only proofs the concept due to the small amount of power it produces. The next step would be the "Grande Smoking Gun."  A "free energy" device that could power a home.

BTW, last month I calculated that a home could live off of 1KW of *continuous* power. Of course you would need batteries to store the power when not being fully used.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 07:27:20 PM
Hey Grumpy,

My usage of the term "free energy machine" here is a perpetual motion machine of the *2nd kind* or *1st kind.*  -->

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion_machine#Classification

Check it out. Most would consider my diode array a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind, not the first. When most people hear the term "perpetual motion," they're probably thinking of the 1st kind, not the 2nd kind.

I would include any machine that capture *unknown* energy, or energy that conventionally speaking is consider inaccessible (such as ZPE) as part of thermal energy, which would fall under the perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind category.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 30, 2008, 07:29:06 PM
      If space is full of voltage relativity then I would imagine a moving voltage would effect the relativity of space charge in some sort of displacement mechanism.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 30, 2008, 08:29:44 PM
Hey Grumpy,

My usage of the term "free energy machine" here is a perpetual motion machine of the *2nd kind* or *1st kind.*  -->

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion_machine#Classification

Check it out. Most would consider my diode array a perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind, not the first. When most people hear the term "perpetual motion," they're probably thinking of the 1st kind, not the 2nd kind.

I would include any machine that capture *unknown* energy, or energy that conventionally speaking is consider inaccessible (such as ZPE) as part of thermal energy, which would fall under the perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind category.

PL

I'm not interested in "perpetual motion", only conversion and magnification of energy, and, of course, the smashing of "trolls" along the way.   ;D

ever heard of:

Feynman's "Brownian ratchet": A "perpetual motion" machine which extracts work from thermal fluctuations and appears to run forever but really only runs as long as the environment is warmer than the ratchet.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 08:39:22 PM
I'm not interested in "perpetual motion", only conversion and magnification of energy, and, of course, the smashing of "trolls" along the way.   ;D
You obviously didn't read the wikipedia page. You never read anything I link to.  :D  Read it again.



ever heard of:

Feynman's "Brownian ratchet": A "perpetual motion" machine which extracts work from thermal fluctuations and appears to run forever but really only runs as long as the environment is warmer than the ratchet.
Are you claiming my diode array does not produce DC power across a load???


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 30, 2008, 08:45:14 PM
Spinner

Just for the sake of clarity

DO YOU BELIEVE IN ANY FREE ENERGY DEVICES!! ??[never mind your  theories for now]

Paul I suppose this thread opens a challenge,

 Of all the free energy devices listed by the BUZZ ,which do you claim to know are not caused by cavitation?

Again we are not talking about RECEIVING devices

   Chet

                                                                                     
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 08:52:37 PM
Quote from: ramset
Paul I suppose this thread opens a challenge,

Of all the free energy devices listed by the BUZZ ,which do you claim to know are not caused by cavitation?

Again we are not talking about RECEIVING devices

Chet
That's a good question for everyone. It's my firm opinion that it would require large and expensive equipment along with tons of future research to produce nuclear fusion by means of cavitation where the output was greater than the input. So I'd say none of the "free energy" machines are caused by cavitation.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 30, 2008, 08:59:15 PM
Paul
So' fusion' is what you feel the Buzz means by cavitation?
Perhaps the Buzz can clarify this![as it relates to his theory]
    Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: AbbaRue on December 30, 2008, 09:22:39 PM
Fusion is only one form of Cavitation.
The transmutation of elements is another, which I understand has been clearly proven.
A third would be Magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) which is behind spark gaps.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 30, 2008, 10:14:22 PM
AbbaRue
Thankyou for that response
I hope you are having fun with your tubes
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 30, 2008, 10:45:30 PM
I just learned that the $1M Randi challenge is available for perpetual motion machines. You guys should enter yours!!

I'm entering my diode array into the $1M Randi challenge, if they'll let me. Please see my new post at this forum in the "News" section.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 30, 2008, 11:03:57 PM
     Tela's ball at the top looks like it could cause a little electrostatic gain from the field.  Drive that ball up to 30or 40 thousand volts over ground and I'm sure well get a little incoming energy from somewhere.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 30, 2008, 11:09:21 PM
Sparks
I like what Grumpy said
Nature gives back with GAIN
Chet
PS ain't MOM great [Mother nature]
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: sparks on December 31, 2008, 12:39:54 AM
       The problem with Tesla's work was there was too many waterfalls around.  His idea was wireless power transmission using hf hv.  So he wasn't in to any overunity devices.  So when he describes a system using resonance to boot up or store power in a resonating system he thinks it is marvelous because now you can take the horsepower of the generator and dump it into a resonating system for maybe a few milliseconds and let her go through a transformer that pumps up a capacitor to alot of volts.  Now once this capacitor is maxed out you dump it into an inductor where it results in alot of ringing and magnetic pulses inside the motor  as the oscillations ring down.  Where is the gain in all this system.  Why not just run the motor off of the input voltage.   Cause capacitors store up time.  You can put 10watts in for 10 milliseconds and change it all into voltage inside the cap.  Or you could just power a dc motor and piss away the 10watts for 10milliseconds.  Now if you got this capacitor at a high voltage potential and you dump the voltage into a system that resonates now the motor gets magnetic energy which collapses and charges the capacitor back up which discharges into the motor again etc.  It osciallates the system or vibrates the system.  More in then out.  For sure if your oscillations are 10watts for 1000 milliseconds.    A gain in voltage at the expense of time is very much retrievable.  A coil of high selfinductance takes it's sweet time manifesting the higher potential at it's terminals.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: ramset on December 31, 2008, 12:40:53 AM
Yes the smell of broiled troll is quite distinctive
 Chet
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 12:49:05 AM
I have no idea who he's talking about, but please show the *exact* designs to make a Methernitha machine. That would include part #'s. If it's made from scratch, then the *exact* materials and details how to make them. So if you can't even prove it's a "free energy" machine yet, then you definitely can't say what powers it.

So far I see one device that provides such details, including part #'s, the diode array.  :)

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 01:05:43 AM
Nor can you say what does not. But given the fact that the Methernitha for 30 years has been building these devices and using them to power their community lends credibility to me and takes what little you had away.

My guess is there is a large paper capacitor in the base to get it running the right direction after stopping. My guess is that they use a H2 to H1 transmute and the reason they feel it is dangerous. My guess is that they use anarov Bohm effect to convert the electrostatic energy into since the device can be clearly seen on the horseshoe magnets and in earlier designs the long bar magnets with the wad of coil on the ends.
That's all we ask, that you be honest.



If I had one running here beside me I would not tell or show you Paul since that is what you are all about, free energy suppression and that is what it takes to get the ball moving on your end.
Please prove it. Or is this just another one of your outbursts?


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 01:28:48 AM
Prove it? You did that with ever post you have made regarding this subject.
TheBuzz, how is it that my claim to violate the Laws of Thermodynamics with a "free energy" device, my diode array, a form of suppression?  How is asking you or someone to purchase a gamma radiation meter to provide some form of proof as a form of suppression?  How is Truth-Seeking (asking for some proof) a form of suppression?


Anyhow,
But given the fact that the Methernitha for 30 years has been building these devices and using them to power their community lends credibility to me and takes what little you had away.
This fascinates me. Could someone, besides TheBuzz  ;), please show a reference. I would like to add the Methernitha to my web forums lists of "free energy" machines.

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 01:33:45 AM
Prove it? You did that with every useless post you have made regarding this subject.

The tactics used to suppress are:
1. Get them doing busy work that produces no power of any threat to the energy companies. That would be your diode thingy.

2. Bait the person into getting mad and then get them banned. Been there, fell for that already.

3. Bury the information under useless dribble. You every post regarding cavitation?

4. Change the subject / information / title / etc. Nuclear fusion? Geiger counters? Maybe.. I said electron clustering followed by electron cascade.

And if none of that works, just grind em down 24/7. It took over 300 pages to grind Thane Heins down to where he stopped posting and he is a whimp compared to me.

I find I learn more from the reaction by the spooks than I do from the honest players in this infested forum. You are so obvious in your intent, any honest player knows that I nailed it by your reaction.
If anything, TheBuzz, you are the one trying to suppress "free energy."  You outburst when someone even ask to test your theory, such as with a Geiger counter.  You make outrageous statements based on nothing.  I am trying to provide hardcore proof. Did you happen to read my website where it states a diode array *wafer* could provide kilowatts of power per square meter?  At least I provide the mathematics and real experiments to prove the concept works. All you have done is try to trash my diode research and boo hoo it.   :)


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 01:37:20 AM
Maybe Hartman could help you out with that. This should bring back memories...
I'd appreciate it, but you were the one who made the statement --> "But given the fact that the Methernitha for 30 years has been building these devices and using them to power their community lends credibility to me and takes what little you had away."

I'm just trying to sift out fact from fiction. Surely you don't mind that, correct?

PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 01:59:11 AM
The history of the Methernitha and their free energy device is well established. They no longer speak of it due to suppression. Nice work spooks.
Do you have any facts, any public statements made by this community stating what you said?




Me suppress free energy? Ha! That is funny. Remember me? I'm the guy that figured out what they all have in common and posted the information.
What do they have in common?



You on the other hand are the guy that claims it is not possible.
What is not possible?  I said nuclear cavitation is possible, but that I firmly believe it would require expensive equipment.



The world trashed your diode thingy by ignoring you. Most people would take the hint.
How do you believe that when someone already successfully replicated my diode array.



Your claim that your energy receiver is the first free energy device got beat out by the crystal diode radio close to a hundred years go and more real free energy devices than I care to recite.
Where does the energy come from?



Hum..... Well, the jury spoke already when you were ignored.
How so, my new forum alone is getting traffic, and people are posting on there. Anyone who knows anything about websites knows that's good growth.  :D


PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: PaulLowrance on December 31, 2008, 02:43:09 AM
OK, anyone, here's a search for Methernitha at peswiki.com
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Special:Search?search=Methernitha&go=Go
I see references to Methernitha Testatika. Is that the device Methernitha?

Thanks,
PL
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Pirate88179 on December 31, 2008, 04:04:13 AM
No Buzz, actually you are the one polluting this topic with useless posts.  You keep posting the same thing over and over again and yet, you do not answer any questions.  And, better yet, you have Chet to chime in and repost all of your useless posts.  When you posit such a broad theory of "everything free energy" you should at least expect a few questions.  Calling folks names (trolls comes to mind) and accusing them of what it is you are doing, is very unprofessional and unproductive.  I asked you many times to start your own topic for this type of posting that you seem like you have to do.  You have, and no one posts there.  Big surprise to me.  Maybe folks don't like your abuse?

Anyway, I have had it with your abuse of the good members of this forum and I am requesting that Stefan lock MY topic.

Thank you, nice job.  Another topic stopped.

Bill
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2008, 04:23:56 AM
Paul is somehow a "debunker", I'm not sure of the exact connection, it may be subliminal.  You can tell by what he chooses to respond to and what he ignores. Basically, if he can counter he responds to it, of not, he ignores it.  Anyone truly looking for alternative energy would have more interest in some of the things posted on this thread so far - absolute gems - but trolls always ignore gems unless they can readily respond and refute them.

Not sure if Chet is involved yet, definite possibility.  Perhaps his art is coaxing and prodding. I_S can squeeze blood out of a turnip - pretty slick at it too.

Pirate - go ahead and lock the topic, but unless you delete every post, the seed is planted.

Methernitha was reviewed by Dr. Stephan Marinov, a physicist, who could not explain the device's means of operation.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2008, 04:26:40 AM
       The problem with Tesla's work was there was too many waterfalls around.  His idea was wireless power transmission using hf hv.  So he wasn't in to any overunity devices.  So when he describes a system using resonance to boot up or store power in a resonating system he thinks it is marvelous because now you can take the horsepower of the generator and dump it into a resonating system for maybe a few milliseconds and let her go through a transformer that pumps up a capacitor to alot of volts.  Now once this capacitor is maxed out you dump it into an inductor where it results in alot of ringing and magnetic pulses inside the motor  as the oscillations ring down.  Where is the gain in all this system.  Why not just run the motor off of the input voltage.   Cause capacitors store up time.  You can put 10watts in for 10 milliseconds and change it all into voltage inside the cap.  Or you could just power a dc motor and piss away the 10watts for 10milliseconds.  Now if you got this capacitor at a high voltage potential and you dump the voltage into a system that resonates now the motor gets magnetic energy which collapses and charges the capacitor back up which discharges into the motor again etc.  It osciallates the system or vibrates the system.  More in then out.  For sure if your oscillations are 10watts for 1000 milliseconds.    A gain in voltage at the expense of time is very much retrievable.  A coil of high selfinductance takes it's sweet time manifesting the higher potential at it's terminals.

Tesla did not use HF.   HE couldn't have.  You are right about the coil taking it's sweet time.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2008, 04:32:55 AM
You obviously didn't read the wikipedia page. You never read anything I link to.  :D  Read it again.
Are you claiming my diode array does not produce DC power across a load???
PL

I read it.  I ignore most of your link as I suspect that they are just propaganda.

I'm claiming your diode array does not produce "useful" power across a load - which I believe you already admitted.
Title: Re: Cavitation. The key to overunity?
Post by: Grumpy on December 31, 2008, 04:35:41 AM
Ok.  Enough wasted time spent farting with the trolls.

What are the basic requirements to achieve cavitation in a medium, be it air, water, or other?

Turbulence and high velocity?