it could be that Bessler has used this invisible curved ramp already in the 18th century within his wheel, couldn't it?

I don't know but I think that gyros worked the same way in 18th century as they do today.
It is important to remember that this invisible "corkscrew ramp" disappears the moment you stop twirling the gyro.

It is fun to think and analyze the pitch and slope of this virtual corkscrew, as a function of the twirling speed.

It is important to remember that this invisible "corkscrew ramp" disappears the moment you stop twirling the gyro.

Then don't stop it. Maybe that's why it is said that some UFO's constantly spin around.

When a mass turns with high speed within the earth's gravitational field then this field changes its direction with each degree the mass turns, so because of its inertia the mass can't decide in which direction to fall, so it does not fall at all.

His patent states that he picks up the excess energy from the air. It's all there in plain sight.

Can't remember having seen the word »shielding« in one of his patents. According to the drawings the ground is connected directly to one of the bobbins, not to a metallic shield. That's rather misleading.

So why do some transformers burn out when a solar storm comes along? The transformer (or the grid) obviously absorbs the energy in the electric field coming from the sun. Then why is this not always the case (as with the Kapanadze device) but only when a solar storm hits the grid? Is this because the electric field surrounding the (widespread) grid and its transformers during a solar storm is not uniform but one transformer could be exposed to a stronger field than all the others? So a difference between the bobbins of these transformers occurs generating (unwelcome) free energy?

Then could that mean (without a solar storm) shielding one part of the grid could also create a difference between the bobbins and thereby generating (welcome) free energy? Then what's still the problem doing it this way?

There is just one tiny weeny problem here:  We all know that negative charges repel, so why don't they all repel out from each other and eventually accumulate only at the boundaries of the conductor ?

The answer to this question is the cause of many alternative unconventional conduction theories out there.  Those theories postulate that the electrons inside conductors are uncharged but can acquire charges at their boundaries due to high voltages or temperatures or light irradiation.
Charged electrons are responsible for the, so called, static-electricity which indeed manifests charge accumulation at conductor boundaries and travels through vacuum.  Uncharged electrons cannot cross vacuum and are confined to matter.
This is the key difference between current conduction-electricity and static-electricity.

    They do spread out in all directions.  Power companies to save capitol expenditures when running long high tension conductors use hollow cores as they have found that 90percent of the current is carried near the skin of the conductor.  This is where the free electrons end up.  The free electrons have moved  from the core of the conductor to the skin of the conductor.  Recently working with an inverter noticed that the manufacturer used foil between the mosfet bank and the transformer.  Roll foil into a tube and you have yourself a pipe.  Coil the pipe and you have yourself what alot of people use as a primary in highvoltage tesla transformers.  But was Tesla using the current going through the primary or the electric field emanating from the primary?  Any chance that he calculated the impedance on his primaries in such a manner as to insure no current flowed through them but used them more as a capacitor where we find large amounts of electrons or missing electrons amassed on metals  seperated by a non-conductive medium.  The force applied results in an intense electric field between the two capacitor conductors.  In there things aren't like they are out here.  Electric fields can reach intensities very capable of cancelling the binding efield of the electron proton.  If the bound electrons pocess any inertia within their "natural" orbitals and suddenly find themselves no longer bound to the neuclear core what is stopping them from jumping ship and moving towards the anode of the capacitor?  If as these electrons within the dielectric move towards the anode they encounter a magnetic field which slows them down (changes their mass/velocity) should we not expect a large amount of photons being released.  The rate at which they slow down will determine the wavelength of the photons radiated.  If these photons are then absorbed by a mass that serves as an antennae would there be a conversion of electron mass/velocity from within the atoms of the dielectric to electron mass/velocity within the antennae serving as a conductor?

How do we know this from the patent when the patent not even shows the correct shielding connection?

The patent says it occurs a difference between two bobbins. Therefore there should be a bobbin (transformer) in the shielded tin can so there can occur a difference between this bobbin and the bobbin outside the tin can. But I can't see how a transformer or a coil suitable for 24 amps could fit in this tin can.

So what I suspect is that the patent shows a device working on the same basic principle as the tin can setup but it shows NOT the tin can setup. In the tin can there would be room for a capacitor, so there can occur a difference between two capacitors, one shielded in the box and one outside lying on the table.

Hence build a parametric LC circuit which switches between two capacitors, shield one capacitor from the earth electric field as good as possible and put an antenna (or a lot of wires) on the second one so the earth electric field can influence that one as good as possible.

Now I have to look for a tin can (or even better an aluminum box) ...

at min 38:58  Tariel indicate  the resonance in the green box and suddendly the coils.the little energy it takes to create the "phenomenon" it is present inside the box/round can.the "receptor"is the coil.24 amps is in the coil .they are only .the first device is mechanical,because he did not know how to power the 220 v ac applience with the crude device.(HF dc pulsed).and has coupled to an alternator......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Goq76CQapyI

How do we know this from the patent when the patent not even shows the correct shielding connection?

The patent says it occurs a difference between two bobbins. Therefore there should be a bobbin (transformer) in the shielded tin can so there can occur a difference between this bobbin and the bobbin outside the tin can. But I can't see how a transformer or a coil suitable for 24 amps could fit in this tin can.

So what I suspect is that the patent shows a device working on the same basic principle as the tin can setup but it shows NOT the tin can setup. In the tin can there would be room for a capacitor, so there can occur a difference between two capacitors, one shielded in the box and one outside lying on the table.

Hence build a parametric LC circuit which switches between two capacitors, shield one capacitor from the earth electric field as good as possible and put an antenna (or a lot of wires) on the second one so the earth electric field can influence that one as good as possible.

Now I have to look for a tin can (or even better an aluminum box) ...

One more time:  Kapanadze uses high frequency switching. He told me so and it is in his patent.

Well his patent is complicated because he has to make the device work for 50hz and 220 to 250 volts ac. Some of the circuitry has to take that into account. The basic principle has to be simple and the only logical deduction is high frequency switching which produces a spike wave form and gates energy out of the vacuum. I have done many, many experiments which confirm this. I already have proved the principle to myself many times. What I can not do yet  is loop the system.
Maybe we should ask the EE's on this forum one question at a time from his patents. That may help us to solve the riddle. We also have to remember that the 2004 video is the precursor to the patent. It is still an experiment at that stage.
I for one would be happy just to get a device to heat water - no matter the frequency or voltage.
The compicated stuff after that is just conventional physics.
The biggest clue is that TK worked on a mechanical version with a team at an  ex Soviet factory. The common denominator is the so-called Tesla switch. ie a rapid switching on and off of an inductor in the circuit.

I came across this video a while back and it didn't mean anything at the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhXV3ca1J6g
Now I believe it is the essence of the TK device. I have captured the relevant still from the vid.

When the magnet drops inside the tube, the currents in the 'copper' tube flow around the tube. If it is slit, the path is broken.  The thinner the tube wall, the less lenz will play an effect. If the walls are thick, then even with a slit, there will be lenz currents in small circular motions in the thickness of the copper. ;]

Mags

Spot on Mags, I think it's the eddy currents and the magnetic field they produce which attracts the magnet that caused them, being the eddy current field is opposite.

But I think it also depends on the orientation of the magnet.

I can make a neo magnet float slowly down a flat aluminium plate, in this case one pole of the magnet faces directly the surface of the flat plate (not a tube)
and makes it's eddy current magnet to stick to that way using only one pole.

Cheers