My inventions

[MR----B]

I cannot post anymore on this subject. Be careful out there.

 

[godisnum1]

Listening...

Bran <><

 

[godisnum1]

Yep... and I completely agree! That's exactly what happened to Stan Meyer after he moved forward with hydrogen technologies, running his dune buggy completely on water... and then was found "dead" Heck, I've seen salt water literally burn with a flame... just regular old salt water... because it produces hydrogen when applied under certain conditions. Anyway, interesting concepts. Too bad agencies, government or otherwise, has to interfere with our creative abilities as Americans.

Bran <><

 

[godisnum1]

See, I just love this stuff... even if I'm no scientist or inventor. I still like attempting to wrap my mind around some of it. What would be super sweet is a water powered water vehicle that's also possibly submersible. With the right type of propulsion unit, it could probably be very agile. The vehicle that's always fascinated my mind in that area was the mini-sub from the TV series SeaQuest DSV.

 

[godisnum1]

I have all the SeaQuest DSV seasons on my hard drive.
I'm curious about those velocity tubes now...

Bran <><

 

[auferret]

I can tell already that this is going to be a very informative thread. Please continue.

 

[fenixdigger]

Thanks, Mr--B

Please be dam careful on this. They ain't playing.

 

[WishfulThinker]

Be very careful what you post ... Like you said, Many bad things have happened to people working in this area ...

WORD OF CAUTION --- Browns gas = Hydrogen oxygen gas mix generated from electrolysis must be produced and used "on demand" basis -- UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES DO YOU COMPRESS IT AND TRY TO STORE IT -- IT WILL EXPLODE. There a couple devices from China .. like welding/brazing machines that use this principle. Couple videos on web showing engines running on Hydrogen/Oxygen up to 15 Hp. Level ==> Note: must use distributor controlled or electronic controlled spark plug -- no spark allowed during exhaust cycle (like standard 4-stroke small Hp. lawn mower engine -- two stroke with oil injection is OK)

www.waterpoweredcar.com
www.geet.nl
search "Hydrogen Oxygen Generation", "Water Powered Car", "Fuel From Water",
"Pacheco Battery"
will dig up some of the more interesting websites and post them later.

another fun project was the wood gas powered engine design in Mother Earth News from years ago. YES it really will work ... burn wood chips in controlled environment and filter (clean smoke from) wood gas and it will run engine at about 1/2 normal rated Hp.

 

[snake35]

Great thread. I hope it grows!

 

[snake35]

Batteries is where we need improvements. I can produce homemade power cheaply, but storing the power requires lots of expensive and bulky batteries. I do not net meter due to being off the grid.

 

[beancounter]

Unfortunately there is still big money to be made in oil/gas as demonstrated by the recent non reaction from our government with the oil spill, (they don't want to upset any of their big backers). Once everyone had a perpetual energy machine they could not make any more money. I applaud your efforts to keep going with your ideas, you truly believe in what you are doing. There is way too much salt water available for free for anyone to supply it. Until the government can figure out a way to deny everyone access to the ocean for a fill up (for some states this is already in effect, only the rich can get exclusive beach access). So I don't think the hydrogen thing will pan out. The sun, the government will proably make you plant trees, I am sure there are a bunch of "beancounters" scrambling trying to figure how to tax people for sunshine. keep up your research and maybe we should make copies of your findings to prove you existed with an original idea before all traces disappear.

 

[EagleDown]

Anytime almost anyone brings up the discussion of "free energy", someone else will bring up the "The First Law of Thermal Dynamics", or "A Perpetual Motion Machine is impossible"!! (Kinda makes me wonder how long it will take for the universe to "run down".)

In any case, for the ones of you who dare to step out of the box and REALLY THINK OF WHAT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE, I will offer the following well researched link. Hopefully, while reading, you might be inspired to do something to help our Mother Earth and Humanity to break free of our slavery. (Lot of forgotten inventions in there.)

Incidently, I've been in the field of HHO for several years and have obtained mpg's of well over 200mpg while driving a '88 Chev. P.U. powered by a 350cid engine. Hard to believe?? Oh well, I do have credible witnesses. But, this post isn't about me. And I'm not here to argue, so don't bother!!

Link:

http://www.freeenergynews.com/Direc...ention_Suppression_Cases_September_3_2007.doc

Excerpt from link:
Isn’t it significant that essentially none of our scientific history books credit Tesla for being the actual inventor of the radio, but instead give credit to the theft of Tesla’s radio discoveries by Marconi? What does that say about the “official” ethics of the scientific community?

But Morgan was not only ruthless, but thorough. In the latter 1880’s, etc., when Tesla was gung ho to give us free energy from the active medium, Morgan also anticipated the future of this “energy freely extracted from the active medium” problem that had suddenly risen in Tesla’s work. At the time, there were less than three dozen “electrodynamicists” in the entire world. Maxwell had died in 1879, and those who despised quaternions (Heaviside, Hertz, Gibbs, etc.) immediately chopped Maxwell’s 20 quaternion-like equations in 20 unknowns into a very much smaller vector subset containing only four equations. Maxwell’s theory was never accepted during his own lifetime, but only begrudgingly and very slowly after (eight or nine years after Maxwell’s death) Hertz performed speed-of-light measurements showing Maxwell was correct.

The real Maxwell theory has never been routinely taught in electrical engineering, which contains only a pale shadow of it. For the full Maxwellian theory, see James Clerk Maxwell, "A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field," Royal Society Transactions, Vol. CLV, 1865, p 459. Read Dec. 8, 1864. Also in The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, 2 vols. bound as one, edited by W. D. Niven, Dover, New York , 1952, Vol. 1, p. 526-597. Two errata are given on the unnumbered page prior to page 1 of Vol. 1. In this paper Maxwell presents his seminal theory of electromagnetism, containing 20 equations in 20 unknowns. His general equations of the electromagnetic field are given in Part III, General Equations of the Electromagnetic Field, p. 554-564. On p. 561, he lists his 20 variables. On p. 562, he summarizes the different subjects of the 20 equations, being three equations each for magnetic force, electric currents, electromotive force, electric elasticity, electric resistance, total currents; and one equation each for free electricity and continuity. Most electrical engineers have never even read Maxwell’s theory, even though they were falsely informed that they had studied (and mastered) “Maxwell’s theory.”

Free download of that original Maxwell theory can be made directly from the ZPE website, at links

http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_1.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_2.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_3.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_4.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_5.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Maxwell_1864_6.pdf
http://www.zpenergy.com/downloads/Diagram.pdf

Barrett (one of the co-founders of ultrawideband radar) comments on the curtailing of Maxwell’s theory as follows:

"[T]he A field [for the potentials] was banished from playing the central role in Maxwell's theory and relegated to being a mathematical (but not physical) auxiliary. This banishment took place during the interpretation of Maxwell's theory... by Heaviside... and Hertz. The 'Maxwell theory' and 'Maxwell's equations' we know today are really the interpretation of Heaviside... Heaviside took the 20 equations of Maxwell and reduced them to the four now known as "Maxwell's equations". [Terence W. Barrett, "Electromagnetic Phenomena Not Explained by Maxwell's Equations," A. Lakhtakia, ed., Essays on the Formal Aspects of Electromagnetics Theory, World Scientific Publishing, River Edge, NJ, 1993, p. 11.]

Actually it was worse than that! Heaviside hated potentials (which today we know are primary), thought they were mathematical conveniences only, and that they should be “murdered from the theory”. Quoting from B. J. Hunt:


“In a letter to Oliver Lodge in 1893, Heaviside referred to his own work and stated that it represented ‘….the real and true ‘Maxwell’ as Maxwell would have done it had he not been humbugged by his vector and scalar potentials.’ [B. J. Hunt, The Maxwellians, Ph.D. dissertation, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 1984, p 317].

Heaviside also thought (as did all others at the time) that a thin material fluid ether filled all space, so that nowhere in all the universe was there a point where mass was absent. For that reason, the electrodynamicists – including Heaviside – thought there were force fields E and H in space, when today we know such electromagnetic force fields exist only in charged matter (matter is a component of force, by the equation F = d/dt(mv). Quoting Feynman:

"…in dealing with force the tacit assumption is always made that the force is equal to zero unless some physical body is present… One of the most important characteristics of force is that it has a material origin…" [Richard P. Feynman, Robert B. Leighton, and Matthew Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, Vol. 1, 1964, p. 12-2].

For a commentary on even the unsatisfactory condition of the original Maxwell’s theory, Cornille states it this way:

“Even today, Maxwell’s equations are given as granted, their validity being justified by experiments. In fact, there is no demonstration of Maxwell’s equations from first principles since the mechanical approach used by Maxwell has been abandoned in favor of a new non-mechanical entity: the electromagnetic field. Of course, Maxwell’s equation[.s] can be obtained from a variational principle but they are derived from an action appropriately chosen in order to recover them. …Maxwell’s equations raise a certain number of fundamental questions which have not been answered in a satisfactory manner to date.” [Patrick Cornille, “Inhomogeneous waves and Maxwell’s equations,” Chapter 4 in Essays on the formal Aspects of Electromagnetic Theory, Ed. A. Lakhtakia, World Scientific, 1993, p. 138-139.].

But it made no big splash, and the Heaviside severely truncated equations were “chosen” as the basis equations for the new “electrical engineering” that was beginning to be set up in a few universities here and there. Morgan apparently had the “new” equations (for the new electrical engineering being born) checked via group symmetry (adopted in 1870, so therefore well known by the very few leading electromagnetic scientists of the world at the time) to see if the “new” science/equations contained any of those “systems taking excess free energy from the active medium” – in short, containing any of Maxwell’s asymmetrical systems present in the full Maxwellian theory. In short, Morgan was determined not only to suppress Tesla, but also to suppress any future “young Tesla” who might be stimulated to see and develop “free energy from the active medium” Tesla systems. The review of Morgan’s scientific advisors was not good; the “new” and truncated Heaviside equations were still not totally symmetrical, which meant some of those dirty old asymmetric Maxwellian systems were still there.

Morgan, of course, just directed that it be “fixed”. And Lorentz was the fellow chosen or arranged to do the job; in 1892, Lorentz arbitrarily symmetrized the Heaviside equations – just to “make them easier to solve algebraically”, so the story went. He thereby firmly excluded all asymmetrical Maxwellian systems from the standard electrical engineering model, from its very birthing.

Lorentz was a great scientist in his own right, but also was fond of appropriating and using other people’s work and taking credit for it himself. For example, the whistle was finally blown on this aspect of Lorentz, by the great electrodynamicist J. D. Jackson. See J. D. Jackson and L. B. Okun, "Historical roots of gauge invariance," Reviews of Modern Physics, Vol. 73, July 2001, p. 663-680. Even the symmetrical regauging used by Lorentz (and credited to him generally) was first done by Lorenz (without the “t”), as Jackson and Okun show.

To see the original Lorentz “suppression” paper applying symmetrical regauging, see H. A. Lorentz, "La Théorie électromagnétique de Maxwell et son application aux corps mouvants," [The Electromagnetic Theory of Maxwell and its application to moving bodies], Arch. Néerl. Sci., Vol. 25, 1892, p. 363-552. [Also in H. A. Lorentz, Collected Papers, The Hague : Martinus Nijhoff, vol. 2, pp. 168-238, esp. p. 168.] This is the work that Lorentz cites later (in 1895) for his proof of the symmetrical regauging theorems (the two equations of symmetrical regauging).


This is what arbitrarily eliminated (from standard electrical engineering) the use of “Tesla” asymmetrical Maxwellian systems that do receive excess electromagnetic energy freely from the active medium – and thus can function at a coefficient of performance (COP)>1.0 precisely similar to a windmill-driven electrical power system or a solar panel powered electrical power system. A real system with real losses will always have efficiency (total useful energy or work output divided by the total energy input from all sources) of less than 100%. But if it asymmetrically receives (freely or nearly freely) excess energy from its active environment, then its coefficient of performance (total useful energy or work output divided by the total energy input by the operator only) can permissibly exceed 1.0. No laws of nonequilibrum thermodynamics are violated, as are no laws of physics.

Two persons – Oliver Heaviside and John Poynting – independently and simultaneously discovered the flow of electromagnetic energy through space in the 1880s and early 1890s; before then, the concept does not appear in physics. Poynting only considered a very tiny part of the “total electromagnetic energy flow pouring from the generator terminals and flowing through space outside and along the external conductors (of the external circuit)”. That tiny part is the small fraction of the energy flow – the linear part – that gets diverged into the conductors to “potentialize and power up the electrons” and the external circuit. Heaviside also discovered a giant curled electromagnetic energy flow component in addition to the diverged little component. The nondiverged curled electromagnetic energy flow component is more than a trillion times greater in energy magnitude than the feeble Poynting component.

Well, again it would simply not do (in Morgan’s relentless view) for our young future electrical engineers to know and be taught that the generator actually outputs more than a trillion times as much electromagnetic energy output as the mechanical energy input one furnishes to crank the shaft of the generator. That would mean it would just be a matter of time before some young budding genius would discover how to trick some of that giant curled Heaviside component into diverging into the conductors after all, thus producing Tesla “energy from the external active medium” systems after all.

So again, Morgan would have issued orders to “fix it!”

And so Lorentz was arranged once again to do the dirty work. In 1900 he stated that this giant curled Heaviside component “does nothing”, since it does not interact, and so it “has no physical significance”. And he arbitrarily just integrated the entire energy flow vector (containing both the diverged Poynting energy flow component and the usually nondiverged Heaviside giant curled energy flow component) around a closed surface assumed around any volume element of interest. Thereby Lorentz misinformed us that this nondiverged giant energy flow had “no physical significance” and taught us to just deliberately cancel it as a matter of course.

In his August 16, 2007 email to Gary Vesperman and Leslie Pastor, Thomas Bearden adds:

For additional rigorous mathematical demonstrations, see the following:

M. W. Evans et al., "Explanation of the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator with O(3) Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(1), Feb. 2001, p. 87-94. Quoting: “…the fundamental operational principle of the MEG is explained using a version of higher symmetry electrodynamics known as O(3) electrodynamics, which … has been developed extensively in the literature. The theoretical explanation of the MEG with O(3) electrodynamics is straightforward: Magnetic energy is taken directly ex vacua and used to replenish the permanent magnets of the MEG device, which therefore produces a source of energy that, in theory, can be replenished indefinitely from the vacuum. Such a result is incomprehensible in U(1) Maxwell-Heaviside electrodynamics.”

M. W. Evans et al., "Explanation of the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator by Sachs's Theory of Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 14(4), 2001, p. 387-393.

M. W. Evans et al., "The Aharonov-Bohm Effect as the Basis of Electromagnetic Energy Inherent in the Vacuum," Foundations of Physics Letters, 15(6), Dec. 2002, p. 561-568.

T. E. Bearden, "Extracting and Using Electromagnetic Energy from the Active Vacuum," in M. W. Evans (ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, 3 vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 2, p. 639-698.


A quote of interest is: “This has led to one of the greatest ironies in history: All the hydrocarbons ever burned, all the steam turbines that ever turned the shaft of a generator, all the rivers ever dammed, all the nuclear fuel rods ever consumed, all the windmills and waterwheels, all the solar cells, and all the chemistry in all the batteries ever produced, have not directly delivered a single watt into the external circuit’s load. All that incredible fuel consumption and energy extracted from the environment has only been used to continually restore the source dipole that our own closed current loop circuits are deliberately designed to destroy faster than the load is powered.”

T. E. Bearden, "Energy from the Active Vacuum: The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator," in M. W. Evans (Ed.), Modern Nonlinear Optics, Second Edition, 3-vols., Wiley, 2001; Vol. 2, p. 699-776.

M. W. Evans, T. E. Bearden, and A. Labounsky, "The Most General Form of the Vector Potential in Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 15(3), June 2002, p. 245-261.

For a rigorous proof that removing Lorentz's 1892 arbitrary symmetrization of the Heaviside-Maxwell equations does indeed provide usable energy currents from the vacuum, see M. W. Evans et al., “Classical Electrodynamics without the Lorentz Condition: Extracting Energy from the Vacuum,” Physica Scripta, Vol. 61, 2000, p. 513-517.

To see the horrible falsities (as pointed out by eminent scientists such as Nobelist Feynman) being taught in electrical engineering in all our universities, see my paper “Errors and Omissions in the CEM/EE Model,” available at http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/CEM Errors - final paper complete w longer abstract4.doc . This paper was favorably reviewed by the National Science Foundation; for the NSF letter see http://www.cheniere.org/references/NSF letter Bearden.jpg .

Here is a little exercise that is revealing to think about:

Take a common permanent magnet and sit it on the bench. Lay an electret across it so the E-field of the electret is at right angles to the H-field of the magnet. Then by the ordinary Poynting theory already accepted and contained in every basic electrical engineering textbook, that silly thing sits there and continuously pours out a steady Poynting stream of real electromagnetic energy flow S, given by
S = E X H.

The CEM/EE folks just shrug and walk away from that embarrassing problem. A typical comment is one by Buchwald:

"[Poynting's result] implies that a charged capacitor in a constant magnetic field which is not parallel to the electric field is the seat of energy flows even though all macroscopic phenomena are static." [Jed Z. Buchwald, From Maxwell to Microphysics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1985, p. 44].

He states it, but does not pursue its implications at all.

 

[savant365]

Very interesting subject, what are your thoughts on all of the wind farms that have sprung up in the midwest in the last 10 years or so? One of the companies is owned by a politician from Missouri (can't recall his familys name at the moment) so automatically I'm leary of it . It seems to me that if these turbines are all they are made out to be burning coal would be obsolete by now. Are they really making a difference or are they just a lot of hype?

Charlie

 

[EagleDown]

Very interesting subject, what are your thoughts on all of the wind farms that have sprung up in the midwest in the last 10 years or so? One of the companies is owned by a politician from Missouri (can't recall his familys name at the moment) so automatically I'm leary of it . It seems to me that if these turbines are all they are made out to be burning coal would be obsolete by now. Are they really making a difference or are they just a lot of hype?

Charlie

Excellent question. And one that I've pondered on ocassion.

We have thousands of "wind turbines" in CA, but the state still has to "import" energy from neighboring states. It seems that the only ones who derive any benefit from wind turbines are the enterprising ones who build them in their own back yards. (And, they ARE incredibly easy to build.)

Eagle

 

[spartacus53]

This is a very interesting topic, and I feel for you MR--B.. It's sad when someone has a brilliant idea and then have someone put the screws to you. Those tactics aren't about to stop anytime soon when there is big money behind the power brokers.

I am also finding those wind farms interesting and I was wondering what is their max capability? I am sure there must be some type of governor on them. How much energy would be produced during a hurricane

 

[savant365]

I'm not an inventor either but It makes sense to me that you could also put solar panels on the wind turbines at least to assist if the wind isn't blowing quite enough.

We don't get hurricanes up here but 60 mph straight winds are common during thunderstorms. I don't think a hurricane or a tornado would be very good for them at all though.

Charlie

 

[spartacus53]

We get a ton of nor' easters and they pack some mighty strong winds, just under hurricane. Tis the season now

 

[EagleDown]

I am also finding those wind farms interesting and I was wondering what is their max capability? I am sure there must be some type of governor on them. How much energy would be produced during a hurricane

Any generator will only produce as much energy as it's copper windings allow. That is, if it puts out 120volts and 35amps as it's maximum at 500rpm, it still can only put out it's maximum 120volts and 35amps if it turns at 1,000rpm.

Governors were invented years ago and used on some water pumping windmills.

My friend in PA makes windmill generators by using the motors out of old exercise treadmills. They must be pretty good, he's sold a bunch of them.

Eag;e

 

[Johnnysan]

Perpetual energy motor?

OK. Let's see it. BTW, I am a technician.

 

[EagleDown]

(I don't know where the "strike throughs" below came from, you'll just have to read through them.)

It came from the strike though tag in this line:

the electromagnetic field. Of course, Maxwell’s equation[.s] can be obtained from a variational

The 'dot' in the bracket will block the tag

Thank you SWR. Those "strikethroughs" have been bugging me for the past 3 weeks.

E.D.