Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Energy Receiver  (Read 28758 times)

Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Energy Receiver
« on: January 24, 2006, 05:10:06 PM »
One of the most basic concepts which proves or disproves the existence of electrical energy in the ether all around us is that of an energy receiver similar to Tesla's ideas on the subject.  It can take various forms, but common ones are wires and flat panels.

Similar to solar panels, the flat variety are supposed to work at all times of the day or night because the electrical energy or cosmic power is always around everywhere all the time.

Does anyone have any data that shows conclusively how much energy per square inch has been able to be captured in real world experiments?

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2006, 11:17:20 PM »
I can give two answer to the question !

If you want to know the theoretical/experimental energy receiver max-potential I recommend
the study of all Joseph C.Yater patents(special attention: US4004210,page7,line 8-10;
EP0634055,page23,line20-23
US562311,page8,line60-67/page11,line 47-54/page15,line 3-6

then the visit of the Borealis.com webpage and their technical summery
(reference:Stanford experiment =Yater work approvement !).

If you want to know about "ambient energy capture potential" I recommend to think about this
test/experiment:Eastgermany,Dr.Helmut Reichelt et al.
 room,20 sqm floor area,60sqm of the room walls and tect are covered with a therm-ionic/-ovoltaic cell:
Conversion effect:ambient/room temperature decrease from 27 degree C to 23 degree C,
and transversion of this energy as 60X80Wh(=per sqm) ergo 4800Watth !?

The NL SPACE-BOX with 18-22 sqm floor area is equipped with a 1300 Watth heater,
only an idea to compare this values,winter- natural outside/wished ambient inside-temperature amplitude !

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca
« Last Edit: January 25, 2006, 01:30:52 AM by lancaIV »

Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2006, 06:40:36 PM »
Thank you for the response.

However, this is part of the problem that plagues the whole New Energy Movement.  While I don't doubt that you may very well know the answers, the thing we non-scientists need is simple, straight, bottom-line answers to our questions.  In fact, I'm sorry but I didn't really understand half of what you wrote.

Those of us in business will never be able to promote anything if we don't have clear, hard facts.  We do not have time nor interest in redoing the research that others surely have already done.  We really don't want to be research scientists.  I personally believe that if an inventor has discovered something of value, he should have the facts and figures to show for it.

In the case of the Tesla-type receiver panel, the idea has been around for aproximately one hundred years.  That begs the question of why we don't use it.  The answer to that question becomes apparent when we have the answers to my original questions.

It is sort of like asking how long a gas-saving device has been in use in the inventor's own car, and how much he spends on gas and how many miles he's driven.  The figures speak for themselves.

Like Friday used to say, "Just the facts, maam".

Thanks again.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2006, 08:21:36 PM »
Tesla- sphere,ambient,ground,wire,flat panel:
GB198467,Electric Power Accumulator,Gilbert Adam Bartholomew,1923

or Don Adsitt ambient power? modules

But do not expect KWH en masse !

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca? ?
« Last Edit: January 25, 2006, 08:50:38 PM by lancaIV »

Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2006, 12:41:03 AM »
Thanks.

These devices either are not listed on the Internet as being used currently, or they put out too little power, as you pointed out.

We need something that actually powers a house now.  I doubt that there is any such thing in the category of electricity receivers.  What I think is that we need to use something like BingoFuel to power an engine to drive a generator to power the house.  That is available now, so maybe that is what we all should be using.  It's a thought.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2006, 02:28:27 AM »
Pardon,I recuse !

All alternative fuels based on Water/Hydrogen are not usefull for the existent combustion engines !
We would get -in a short time-corrosion problems !

The idea of alternative solutions to crude oil is right,but there is also the need of appropriate
-modified-engines !

At first the only solutions are to use Synfuels and? Biofuels(f.e. Microdiesel,Uni Muenster).
The time parallel action will be to extract CO2 and convert it!(f.e.Holcoumb,NZL)

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca

p.s.:Some people should begin to think about their lifestyle-their consume habit-,
? ? ? because there is a great difference between effective use and real-"non sense" use
? ? ? of our anytimes not endless or non fast available resourches !?
? ? ?
« Last Edit: January 26, 2006, 03:32:01 AM by lancaIV »

Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2006, 03:37:27 AM »
I agree with you.  I think that we need to learn to be more efficiient in our demands for energy.  I personally struggle with the computers I operate continually.  One does not want to think about the amount of electricity that is used while they are running.  However, that is part of the solution supposedly offered by the promise of free energy.  If we can tap into some naturally occurring huge reserve, then the use of it becomes unimportant.

By the way, I believe that the type of carbonaceous hydrogen fuels, like Bingo Fuel, may not be as damaging to the existing engines as you point out, but I may be incorrect in that assumption.  On the other hand, a more efficient engine other than the piston engine is long past due.  We are probably looking at a combination of solutions to solve our overall problem.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2006, 02:17:58 AM »
Nothing against piston engines,we can convert them to H2-engines(f.e.BMW,OTTO-MOTOR) or
e-piston-motors !

The point that I posted and which you probably not understand-
"to compare the values"-:
How many Watts are normally the physical need to increase the room /ambient temperature from 23 degrees C to 27 degrees C ?(Inverse view of the Dr.H.Reichelt experiment)
K-/U-/R-value dependant calculations !?
The NL Space-box with same test room dimensions:? -only-with an 1300W heater !!!

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 4800W to 1300W(option:heat-/friction-pump)
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? and a circuit closing !
Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca

Clara Listensprechen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2006, 05:57:54 AM »
Pardon,I recuse !

All alternative fuels based on Water/Hydrogen are not usefull for the existent combustion engines !
We would get -in a short time-corrosion problems !

You mean as in water corrosion radiator type problems cured by propylene glycol additive?  So don't use a cast iron engine block, fer cryin' out loud.  Seems to me that aluminum engine blocks are what's curently in use.

Not to mention that we're using injection combustion as opposed to carbureted combustion, which is a second strike against your theoretical fear.  In a combustion chamber that fires off hydrogen in the same manner as a acetylene torch, the water doesn't happen until after it's in the exhaust system.

Besides, there's a type of hydrogen vehicle in the process of development that utilizes the hydrogen to generate electricity, which drives either an all-electric motor or a petrol/electric hybrid motor.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2006, 02:29:35 PM »
When we think about fuel-kind conversion,
we do not think about motor-kind conversion,
and the material status-quo of combustion-motors is "Grauguss",
not aluminium or carbon et cetera !.
When you write about acetylene,search for Prof.Wolfgang Priesemuth-Info,
but you have to accept that all alternative experiments failed in the last
30 years,after first oil-crisis,not only because of less investment in this sector
than in nuke science!


It is possible to shield the surface of the chamber (Nitrogen-engine) ,
but this make the conversion much more expensive !

Sincerely
            de Lanca


Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2006, 02:37:37 AM »
I want to thank those who have posted replies here.  I appreciate the interest.

The use of hydrogen is one fraught with problems and dangers.  First and foremost is the extremely explosive nature of the stuff.  I wouldn't want to use it near my car or home.  It is simply a bad idea.  One can put out a match in a pan of gasoline, but all you need is a static spark to set off hydrogen.  All one has to do is remember the Hindenburg.....well, enough said.

By the way, I love to discuss the issue of engines and fuels.  Perhaps in another subject thread.

However, the issue is energy receivers.  Either they work or not.  If they do, do they put out enough current to be useful.  If they do, how much.  In layman's terms.

By the way, I understand horsepower, watts, Fahrenheit and measurements like that.

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2006, 10:51:34 PM »
Some up-to-date info about hydrogen-storage-technology:

http://www.amminex.com

http://www.fuelselltechnologies.com

"Imagine driving from San Francisco to Los Angeles for under $2.00 in fuel costs.
Visualize powering an entire single family home for a year for under $80.00 ..."
(www.marketwire.com;March,2002)

When this will become reality ?
Do not ask me,ask them-it is their prophecy !

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca

p.s.: you see."Big",that your negative arguments are a part of the R&D !!!
       I am not a  pro/con-hydrogen-affiliate,but I invest my power not in
       angryness,but in usefull work (hmmm,I think so !) 
« Last Edit: March 12, 2006, 02:10:20 AM by lancaIV »

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2006, 01:23:00 AM »
I think the status quo-with my technical standart-is:
Tate/Don Adsitt/Reichelt Ambient module/cells
Battery
Motor/Generator(DC/AC)
EM-/PM-Transformator(AC/AC)

Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? de Lanca

p.s.:Somebody could ask:why not self-running ?
      The simple answer: perpetuum mobile are officialy not accepted/denied,
      (not to explain about our body-circle-lifespan,sun-planetes-moons-circles),
      so  it will be easier to accept the common "new invention"-procedere !
« Last Edit: March 12, 2006, 01:58:54 AM by lancaIV »

lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5233
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2006, 02:41:07 AM »
Es wird Zeit ein bisschen "die Buechse der Pandora" zu oeffnen:
nehmt einen einfachen-fuer den Modellbau konventionellen-6V/1WMotor/1500rpm DC-Motor
befestigt daran einen Rundmagneten(bonded/sintered Ferrit-unerheblich,falls richtig),
umringt denselben mit einer speziellen "Ausruestung" ,bei Waschmaschinen? als
Drehzahlmesser genutzt(bei uns "Made in Italy"),
und messt Eingang(DC) und Ausgang(AC) !
Ein rotativer Wechselrichter,mit Verstaerker-Funktion !!!
Physikalisch integriert ist die Publikation amasci.com: Simple Generator und
Martin Hauck;DE19741256(Kugelschalengenerator)
Oder eben die Ramon Huth-Version nutzen !

 Sincerely
? ? ? ? ? ? ?de Lanca

p.s.:Meine Partner ,unter Anderen,verfuegen ueber circa,kummuliert,150 Jahre work-power-
? ? ?Erfahrung,es sind geophysikalische Anomalien bekannt !
? ? ?Es sind "Electric Repair and Special Coiling Shop"-worker !
? ? ?Dieses nur bezueglich "Messfehler"!?
? ? ?Ich danke fuer jedseitige Kommentare,also from you,Mr. Mannix !

     Dieses wird fuer die naechste Zeit mein letztes "post" sein,
    good bye and well success !
« Last Edit: March 12, 2006, 04:58:22 AM by lancaIV »

Big

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Energy Receiver
« Reply #14 on: March 12, 2006, 04:28:54 PM »
LancaIV
Thank you for verifying my point.  There is indeed no currently available safe method of using hydrogen.  I appreciate the affirmation.

On the other hand, were you implying that I was negative and angry?  Perhaps that was just an unintended mistake on your part.  But please do be careful what you write.

Sorry I don?t read or write any language other than English.  I know I speak for others when I point out that I?m not sure the purpose of using another language in a forum based upon English, but it appears to be confusing and inappropriate at the least and serves no positive purpose.