It's said that all the energy stored in the coil due to the magnification factor is invisible. That is, even though the energy is there it can not be used for anything be cause it can not be extracted.

I believe this is the way to get the energy out of that circuit. What was invisible is now usable. How it is gotten out is the "secrete."

I used the term 'capacity' instead of 'capacitor' intentionally, to distinguish between a 2 pole device vs a 1 pole device.

There is no real difference. A one pole capacity is a two poles capacitor whose the second pole is a fictive electrode at infinity, considered storing no charge and enclosing the first one.
See http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8977.msg266455#msg266455

...
In that sense, the earth is a capacity and the coil is a capacity...

I agree

...
I am suggesting that the 2 cap experiment gives us a peek at how a strong charge gradient will behave...and specifically...it will cause more charge to travel from the source to the sink than the sink can contain.
...

I think there are many misunderstandings about capacitors.

In the two cap experiment, at the moment the charge is maximal in C2 and null in C1, the voltage at C2 terminals is higher than at the first one, because the energy conservation implies that
W=1/2*C1*U1²=1/2*C2*U2². C2 being less than C1, U2 is higher.
But only a part of the initial charge of C1 is transfered in C2. Why? Because energy in a capacitor is equal to the work for separating positive and negative charges. This work is the mechanical work done against the Coulomb force to move negative charges away from positive charges, i.e W=F*Q*dl where dl is the gap between the electrodes. In the big capacitor C1, dl is less than in C2, therefore the same energy in C1 is represented by a bigger quantity of separated charges than in C2. On other words, the positive and negative charges having to be more separated in C2 than in C1 because of a larger gap, less charges are concerned in C2 than in C1, in order the work for separating the charges to be the same in the two cases.

The mistake is to think a capacitor as being a reservoir of charges, when it is globally neutral because there is the same quantity of positive and negative charges on each electrode. The conservation of charges applies only to this quantity, which is zero.
The capacitor is only a system for an equal quantity of positive and negative charges to be maintained separated from one another, i.e storing the energy that was used against the Coulomb force for separating the charges.
It follows that adding charges by connecting only one terminal of the capacitor to a high potential or to the earth or to whatever will not change anything. Only the quantity of separated charges is meaningful.

 

Postulate: Energy in = (Energy out - Losses)

Universal Source of Energy = Universal Ambient (virtually unlimited/continuously reconverted)

Conventional thinking:

Local E Input = Local E out - Losses (conversion)

Bigger Picture:

Local TRIGGER Energy Input = Abundant "hidden" source of Energy (Ambient/radiant/universal) - Local trigger E losses (resonance maintenance for ex.)

     This "access" appears to happen with 2 simultaneous effects in this case as stated by SR, one is the "conditioning" HV pulse through SG around the ferrite core and the other is the modulation coil which at the right moment or phase of this effect dumps the extra field onto the load coil that the ferrite "extracts" from the ambient.

    Hints from SR:
    - KT's green box device is somewhat misleading. The Turkish 100kW setup video though show's a good 80% of the concept (look at the Spark Gaps).
    - Parametric Resonance is not involved!
    - madsat's video contains an important element (http://www.youtube.com/user/madsatbg)

There is no real difference...

My theory may be completely wrong for a great many very good reasons, but none of the answers given back to me seem to be addressing the real point I am trying to make. The earth appears to be a reservoir of charge. It either gives it up in lightning, or takes it in, but the fact that huge amounts of charge are flowing to or from the earth during the abundant number of lightning strike every day suggests very strongly it contains a large amount of free charge.

So if the earth is at an absolute non-zero charge state, then how do we define zero? If zero is something different than the earth, will the earth flow to zero? If the earth flows to zero, will it's behavior be similar to two caps leveling out?

All of the answers keep speaking in terms of charge separation and relative charge. I'm not talking about relative charge...I'm talking about absolute charge. I am reasonably confident that the capacitor as a charge separating 2 pole device doesn't offer any free energy, but if the earth is a virtually infinite source of free charge, then can we use capacitive behaviors to coerce it into giving us some of what it has? Kapanadze's and SR's devices both seemed to need a good ground...I take that as a clue.

I also think that Earth contains a lot of charge but the key question for me is not how it can be made usable (though it is important) but why that charge is there ?

Super question.

If as I suppose it is by electric current from space which also is a source for gravity and magnetic shield then probably not only ground contains free electrons but also any metal (recall how Tesla taol about Earth as a polished metallic ball in space).
For me indirectly Kapanadze proved my concept my talking about 3 phase device not needing ground connection. Also other his video when as ground he used large metal construction of building not directly grounded in real ground indicate that this idea may be correct.

So you think the excess charge may be more or less steady state in anything big enough to catch it? That would be a wonderful thing, if true. That would suggest that lightning isn't so much the result of accumulated charge as much as perhaps an imbalance in the ground state due to variable media density or something like that.

If you watched Tiger replication videos you probably saw that he disconnected real ground and device still worked more or less undisturbed. He has shown that the ground wire in his setup works like antenna capturing "something" which effectively raised efficiency of the circuit.

Haven't seen Tiger's vids, just saw the schematic Did he ever get anything stable and measurably OU? Gotta link?

LtBolo

I also think that Earth contains a lot of charge but the key question for me is not how it can be made usable (though it is important) but why that charge is there ?

If as I suppose it is by electric current from space which also is a source for gravity and magnetic shield then probably not only ground contains free electrons but also any metal (recall how Tesla taol about Earth as a polished metallic ball in space).
ng" which effectively raised efficiency of the circuit.

   You suppose right. This has been demonstrated also by Nobel plasma physicist Hannes Alfven. Earth (and all planets) form with the sun a "circuit" through "frozen electromagnetic lines of force". Our planet "hurtling" through space behaves like a polished charged sphere, and as such produces a magnetic field. Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity also explains the interaction between these emissions from earth and how they interact with the "ether" creating "gravity" for objects in earth's field.
   

Cosmo

Please!  if you can measure if your ferrite DO NOT PRODUCE NEUTRON RADIATION !
Just to be sure that Meyer & Macy patent is not a the source of effect.
I think it is very important.
French  patent application FR2680613