It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I am the Evil one the oil companies want Dead

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 06:12 PM
reply to post by Illuminis

WOW I suggest not just one doctor buddy, but a whole team of doctors to go to work on you man. All we want is just the littlest piece of information that we can all see and know you aren’t just some snapper head coming in here jerking our chain.

If you can’t provide that then go screw with the boards that let that happen. ATS is for claims, which can be backed up with credibility. You show not even the least bit of credibility, and frankly I should be cut from ear to ear for giving you anymore time, but it’s a slow night before the COWGIRLS come on so why not F with you for not following the rules.

you know it feels pretty good to bash a possible time will tell HOAXER.

oh sorry everyone i got lost for a second ....but had to be done you know...... ok game is on..... Come on Panthers... Every one have a nice Christmas....... I hope though that the Op’s cookies amd milk gives Santa the pepto runs and he leaves a half baked loaf trail on the way out.


posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 06:20 PM

One of my original inventions is the advertising order separator, and shopping cart advertisement plates. The person I gave this to can be researched and contacted. I can tell you the original name of the business in the building I gave it to him in many years ago.

Do you know the patent numbers of those inventions? I've tried searching for the advertising order separator, but came up with nothing.

So, to sum up, you have no patents, yet you have an invention that should benefit mankind, that has been rejected by the big companies. You then came to a conspiracy website to announce your plight.

When asked for some (ANY) verification of your claims, you get your back up and accuse people of trying to trick you into revealing I.P, being know it alls etc. What, exactly do you want from us? Is this some kind of Multi Level Marketing exercise?
Quit dangling the carrot. Lest you get the stick.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 06:38 PM
Seriously, get it over with, ban him.

He is just all talk. He has never once in this thread given any kind of information that could validate his claims. I would love an car that could drive "forever". I think it might be possible with some ingenious ideas, but he clearly does not have them. And if he would have them he would sell it out for the best buck (=the least positive outcome for the rest of us). Dont give him any more server space, please!

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 07:12 PM
reply to post by the seeker_713g

ok i took a look at google cant find anything to do with electrical experiments their brian depalma wants to show me--just a hollywood movie director i'm not interested in but faradays homopolar motor is interesting---right now i can see no logical reason why a voltage would not be induced from center of dish to outside edge if the magnet was spun around the outside of dish(i'll have to sleep on it).and they say if you apply a dc current with no voltage thru the center and edge of the dish that the magnet will rotate.thats a puzzel --i have never seen current be able to flow without at least a little voltage----even if it was a shorted out tractor trailer battery fully charged--i guarantee you that 12volts pushes enough current to blow the end off a box wrench but while its happening its hard to think of putting a meter across the ends of the wrench to see what the voltage is.could'nt find what kind of torque the magnet would produce if you passed a current thru dish.obviously the experimenters never got something for nothing while playing with faradays motor----one of their power supplies required 2 mega jouls of energy to get it to thats not free energy.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 07:29 PM
reply to post by Illuminis

You don't seem to realize Illuminis, that what you might consider a knee jerk reaction from some here is actually exactly the opposite. I have studied free energy as well being familiar with the current technology of hybrids and electric cars. I have designed and built my own electric motors and have pursued the idea of perpetual motion and over unity gain magnet motors and have yet to find one that works.

I am still open to the possibility, but have also seen many like yourself that claim to have found it come and go. Here at ATS the combined knowledge of the members always is able to determine the truth. Something tells me you didn't know this and have stumbled in expecting some attention, but will be banned as others just like you have been.

You only need to deliver some proof of your claims and all will be forgiven.

Otherwise, it's asta la vista baby.

posted on Dec, 22 2007 @ 07:31 PM

Originally posted by yahn goodey
ok i took a look at google cant find anything to do with electrical experiments their brian depalma wants to show me--

You're actually looking for "Bruce DePalma", not "Brian DePalma".

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 04:47 AM

Originally posted by g210b
I don't really get your problem. What does a patent cost? Sure it costs something to make it correct (you need a professional) but also not the world. Patents are there to protecting inventions and payable for individuals.If you know it works, Patent it and then put it open.

Not having a patent does not prove a thing and given that the US patent office no longer accepts patents applications that basically taps directly into the active vacuum ( from where all electricity comes from) with no fossil fuel burning in sight.

Hench, if then there is no one in the world that has interest into this than I guess your idea is simple not really working.

Electric cars that can be recharged from the main electricity grid have been around for far longer than gasoline cars and they are most certain not absent from the market for a lack of demand!

Despite the demand, the EV-1 could only be leased, not purchased, and was available only for six-month terms before the lease had to be renewed. The first prototypes had a range of 100 kilometres without recharging, but new technology added a further 50 per cent to this. This covered 90 per cent of the trips made on a daily basis by Californian vehicles, and it’s been estimated that the latest advances in battery life would have extended this even further to more than 300 kilometres.

The regulation was removed on 24 April 2003, when CARB, under a new Chair, reversed their decision.

Although demand for these vehicles continued growing expeditiously, General Motors not only withdrew them all from their distraught owners, but had them crushed and minced into metal confetti to prevent their ever reaching the marketplace again.

An independent study commissioned by the California Electric Transportation Coalition (CalETC) and conducted by the Green Car Institute and the Dohring Company automotive market research firm found very different results. The "study the auto industry didn't want to see....used the same research methodologies employed by the auto industry to identify markets for its gasoline vehicles" [Moore 2000]. It found the annual consumer market for EVs to be 12-18% of the new light-duty vehicle market in California, amounting to annual sales of 151,200 to 226,800 electric vehicles [Green Car Institute, 2000], approximately ten times the quantity specified by CARB's mandate [Moore 2000]. The results of the Toyota-GM survey are also called into question by the success of Toyota's RAV4-EV, which has waiting lists of buyers at over $30,000.

What humanity 'wants' have rarely determined what it got without humans having to fight the establishment for it.

Originally posted by Illuminis
A link would be welcome.

Here's a few patent ideas that he might have employed towards designing his own 'self charging' unit.

James L. Griggs




Alfred Hubbard


John Huston

USPO Houston

Meyers No us patent

T Henry Moray





Joseph W. Newman

James H. Rogers


Here are the hard facts:


Originally posted by Illuminis
Ok. And you don't want to tell use where the energy it charges from comes from?
Tell us at least one thing. Is it correct to say it drags the energy from a known and existing source or is this incorrect?
Oh and the human can just sit in the car or do he/she have to deliever the energy by pedaling for example. (just to sure exclude this

account obviously does not explain much about the circuit.
Indeed, in the Feynman lectures we read:4
‘‘We ask what happens in a piece of resistance
wire when it is carrying a current. Since the wire
has resistance, there is an electric field along it,
driving the current. Because there is a potential
drop along the wire, there is also an electric field
just outside the wire, parallel to the surface ~Fig.
27-5!. There is, in addition, a magnetic field
which goes around the wire because of the current.
The E and B are at right angles; therefore
there is a Poynting vector directed radially inward,
as shown in the figure. There is a flow of
energy into the wire all around. It is of course,
equal to the energy being lost in the wire in the
form of heat. So our ‘‘crazy’’ theory says that the
electrons are getting their energy to generate heat
because of the energy flowing into the wire from
the field outside. Intuition would seem to tell us
that the electrons get their energy from being
pushed along the wire, so the energy should be
flowing down ~or up! along the wire. But the
theory says that the electrons are really being
pushed by an electric field, which has come from
some charges very far away, and that the electrons
get their energy for generating heat from
these fields. The energy somehow flows from the
distant charges into a wide area of space and then
inward to the wire.’’ ~emphasis added!.

However, the result of such an application
and the resulting energy transfer in the circuit apparently did
not satisfy Feynman. He wrote: ‘‘this theory is obviously
nuts, somehow energy flows from the battery to infinity and
then back into the load, is really strange.’’4 Feynman, however,
did not persist and left the problem for others to find a
reasonable explanation. Can we say more about energy transfer
in this simple circuit?

Main stream scientist like Feynman ( well that's probably a insult as he was not nearly as bad as the majority) saw that our current electromagnetic models are horrendously flawed and that they do not in fact reveal to us where the electricty comes from!. The energy that powers the load can be proven to flow into the wires from all around and that it simply does not come from the battery or from the electrons.

Originally posted by Illuminis
Batteries? Classical Batteries (More correct Accumulators) stores the energie useually longer than an hour without a load. So I guess it must be eighter different sort of Batteries. (forexample high capacity capacitors) or the 1 hour next human limit isn't connectted to the Batteries. But in the last case I wonder if you can not use the stored energie in the Batteries then to restart it. Hmm or are this Batteries keeping that system alive for the 1 hour and are then empty? Where does this energy go to then? Is this the energy then you drag the energy later from? A little pointless then.

I suppose that the batteries are still required because the self charging unit can not provide the type of peak power requirements the driver might wish to employ on the freeway. It does sound very suspicious to me and i have long since learned not to defend people in the 'vacuum energy' field as they can be as greedy and dispicable as the people who wish to keep current monopolies.

Is there a raw 'description' how it works on any website? if so a link would be welcomen.

Good luck getting that from him.


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 04:51 AM

Originally posted by Illuminis
not scaleable ..hmmm most is scaleable. Really not scaleable or not well scaleable?

This normally means that he does not really understand where the power he is tapping comes from and that he losses the ability to tap into it when he tries to make the device deliver more or less electricity. This obviously does not disqualify his claims that his device works but just that he is one of the almost complete majority on this planet who do not understand all the forces that comes into play when they try to increase the electricty tapping capacity by simply scaling methods.

Originally posted by Illuminis
At the moment I more think they refused it because they think it is not really working the way you think it should.

I think there have been far too many instances of alleged buy-outs to simply dismiss his claims but obviously he is not helping himself by making claims on this public forum while not being willing to disclose the type of proof you would require.

Originally posted by Illuminis
Although I like reading news like this on ats I am not sure what motivated you to post this here. Most of us like to have information with links or pictures or anything we can work with.

Sure we do but lets not kill the messenger in our effort to get the 'proof' out of him?

But you just say you invented something cool, didn't patent it (till now) and therefore you will give us nothing to verify anything that could put a light into if you just tell us a story or if what you say is true and your idea really working.

Why have you decided to heap the burden of proof on him when there are so many others engaged in the vacuum/free energy field? Why not rather insist on asking if his specific device works instead of questioning the entire area of research?

Then what worth does it have to post this for you and us next to the obvious that we all like to talk a lot about things that doesnt run well in the world? Is there something to expect comming from you in regards of the invention (that would be of interest to me)
or do you only want to talk about here that the oil compagny hates you? (that's of no interest to me)
No offensive, just my thoughts here.

Looks like it's all talk for now but i am the patient kind and i will only indulge in keelhauling if i think he is clearly misrepresenting the technology itself.

I don't get where this thread is meant to lead.

You and me both but it's not like waiting for developments is going to hurt either of us!


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:21 AM

Originally posted by rawsom
Electric car will almost certainly create exact same problems than one which runs with gasoline. There are several reasons for this, one main reason being the fact that fossil fuels are used when actually creating electricity. Not all electricity is created so, but pretty much most is.

Actually burning fossil fuels do not 'create' electricity or electrical charge!

The generator moves an electric current, but does not create electric charge, which is already present in the conductive wire of its windings. It is somewhat analogous to a water pump, which creates a flow of water but does not create the water inside. Other types of electrical generators exist, based on other electrical phenomena such as piezoelectricity, and magnetohydrodynamics. The construction of a dynamo is similar to that of an electric motor, and all common types of dynamos could work as motors.

But interestingly there is no known way in which it can move electrons fast enough to power the loads we are attaching...

Electric currents in solid matter are typically very slow flows. For example, in a copper wire of cross-section 0.5 mm², carrying a current of 5 A, the drift velocity of the electrons is of the order of a millimetre per second. To take a different example, in the near-vacuum inside a cathode ray tube, the electrons travel in near-straight lines ("ballistically") at about a tenth of the speed of light.

However, we know that electrical signals are electromagnetic waves which propagate at very high speed outside the surface of the conductor (moving at the speed of light, as can be deduced from Maxwell's Equations). For example, in AC power lines, the waves of electromagnetic energy propagate rapidly through the space between the wires, moving from a source to a distant load, even though the electrons in the wires only move back and forth over a tiny distance. Although the velocity of the flowing charges is quite low, the associated electromagnetic energy travels at the speed of light.

The nature of these three velocities can be clarified by analogy with the three similar velocities associated with gases. The low drift velocity of charge carriers is analogous to air motions; to wind. The large signal velocity is roughly analogous to the rapid propagation of sound waves, while the large random motion of charges is analogous to heat; to the high thermal velocity of randomly vibrating gas particles.

I have discussed this fallacy in detail in the proceedings of a previous workshop (Sefton, 2002) so I will give only a short explanation here. The idea that an electric current, or the electrons which constitute the current in a wire, pick up energy from a source and carry it along wires to some load such a light globe is an attractive one but it is clearly wrong. It’s wrong because the electrons don’t actually get far enough fast enough. In an alternating current the electrons don’t go anywhere at all, they just jiggle about and in a direct current they just drift along very slowly indeed. In view of these well-known ideas, it is a surprise to me that writers of school-level texts can still get away with perpetuating this fallacy. The origin of the fallacy may be traced to a common but spurious derivation about the power
(VI) delivered by a battery. The argument involves following a charged particle from one terminal of a battery to the other and calculating the change in PE of that particle. That is fallacy 1 (above)! The particle does not own the PE – the whole system does. The derivation is also spurious because, as already pointed out, charges in circuits don’t behave like that. (Nevertheless, P = VI is a valid equation; it’s just the common derivation that is a fudge.)

So where does whatever energy powers the load really come from?

In the battery, the Poynting vector is outward, indicating
the direction of energy flow. ~Note the sensitivity of this
result to the sense of the current through the battery.! In the
vicinity of the conducting wires and next to the positive terminal
of the battery, S is parallel to the wire. Perhaps surprisingly,
S is directed from the battery on both sides of the
battery. Along the resistor R, the change of direction of E
outside the resistor causes S to change as well, gradually
turning from parallel to perpendicular to the resistor axis
~and entering it!, at its middle point ~zero surface charge!.

where E is the electric field, H and B are the magnetic field and magnetic flux density respectively, and µ is the permeability of the surrounding medium. For an electromagnetic wave propagating in free space µ becomes µ0, the permeability of free space.

For example, the Poynting vector near an ideally conducting wire is parallel to the wire axis - so electric energy is flowing in space outside of the wire. The Poynting vector becomes tilted toward wire for a resistive wire, indicating that energy flows from the e/m field into the wire, producing resistive Joule heating in the wire.

What proof do we have that energy flows into the circuit from outside of it to power the loads we have attached?

Objection 3: although some books say that you have to have a complete conducting loop before a current can exist, that is just another misconception. Electrons do not travel across the insulating gap in a capacitor nor do they jump across the space between the primary and secondary windings of a transformer. This is so even when the energy source is a battery; I have constructed circuits like those in figure 2 that show that the lamp lights up briefly when the switch is closed. No matter how
the energy travels in those examples, it must be able to get through empty space. (It is true that if you want to maintain a steady current in a circuit, then a continuous conducting loop is required.)

So if you suddenly happen to create a car that is commercially viable, you also create IMMENSE increase in demand of electricity.

But electricity can be 'produced' ( yes, i know ) in centralized locations where it's environmental impact can be far better controlled than in thousands of different car models burning different types of gasses/fuels.

This will drag prices up, up and up. Electricity becomes expensive, and prize of gasoline will go down a bit as demand lessens. So, you are then left with a world that wants electric cars that use electricity which, by the way does not exist.

National electricity grids are designed to deal with peak usage and at certain times of the day , especially at night, there are massive volumes of unused capacity available for charging millions many millions of cars.

It would certainly take at least twenty years to double the amount of electricity created each year, and during that time the economy of world would go haywire..

Nonsense and that's about as much time i should waste on such a ludicrous claim.

It is propably because social responsibility as a citizen of any country, that electric cars are not wanted.

WHAT? If that is a conclusion i would LOVE to see the arguments employed!

Electiricy to run them simply doesn't exist and creating more power plant, essentialyl doubling their number a short time, is impossible to any goverment in this world. It costs too much.

But the government that could change the world economy spends a trillion dollars a year on occupying foreign lands and arming itself accordingly? Right....

And what are you gonna do when most of that power is created by burning coal? Coal, oil and gas consumption will skyrocet because of your electric car. It will happen, you'll see.

Prices have not skyrocketed despite massively increasingly demand in the last few decades and i am not sure why a slow introduction of battery vechiles will affect prices much or at all.

It is simple math. We do not have a fusion reactor to create that electricity - yet.

Fusion reactors have consumed vast amounts of monetary resources ( to say nothing of regular resources) and have not added a single watt to our electric grids. If that money had been applied to researching to solar energy research were would we have been today? It's not that there are no resources to expend in our search for 'energy' but that it's being horrendously ineffectively applied by those exact people that profess to be interested in our welfare. I am not fooled but you sure seem to have bought into their deceptions.


[edit on 23-12-2007 by StellarX]

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 05:26 AM

Originally posted by rawsom
I know that, but I also know a few things about physics.

Sorry for not having noticed; i am in the process of trying to find some signs of that being the case.

I want to see the calculus behind this self-charging electric car. If you put some energy into a generator, that energy goes into running that generator and cannot then run the car. It is a trade-off, which also cannot be 100% efficient.

Actually the energy does not go into running that generator as all it does is separate charges to create dipoles which it then promptly destroys and recreates for as long as you burn that fossil fuel.

James L. Griggs

If you can make a trip to Atlanta can visit some of the buildings in which his devices have been installed and observe the fact that they are in fact providing more output heat/energy than input.

If the only evidence for these claims were the colour brochure printed by Griggs's company, Hydro Dynamics Corporation Inc., and reports of his supporters, then most observers might be inclined to side with the skeptics: Griggs's claims seem fundamentally improbable. Yet surprisingly, Griggs has not only patented his device and started manufacturing a commercial version on a small scale, he has also sold and installed devices to users in the Atlanta area.

The customers include the Atlanta Police Department, a fire station, a dry cleaning plant, and a gymnasium. Interestingly, the Hydrosonic pump was installed in the public buildings by the county engineer after evaluating the device. The buildings are using the device mainly for heating purposes, and they have been running for more than a year. The customers have bills from their local electric utility company showing a year on year decrease in bills equivalent to 30 per cent.

I can of course imagine a generator attached directly to axels of the wheels, but that would still take energy from movement which reduces energy gone to the movement.
Solar panels of course help somewhat, but those aren't efficient enough to give enough energy to increase battery life that much.

How very insightful.


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:37 AM
reply to post by MrdDstrbr

thanks guys for that info--if only my dad were still alive to see you helping me--he always thought that i was stupid and that G-D forgot to give me a brain---just because i cant read minds yet !

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 09:09 AM
reply to post by yahn goodey

as said i had to sleep on the mystery posed by the experimenters statement that faradays bipolar motor:spin dish thru magnet and a dc voltage is produced between center rod and edge of dish-----but if the dish is stationary and you spin the magnet around the dish no dc voltage is will get a voltage produced if the contact point on the outside of the dish moves at same speed as magnet---if the outside edge of dish contact point does not move neither will you get a dc voltage produced.a similar version of faradays motor is employed by the power companies to show the consumption by the customer for billing--it employs 2 ac "electromagnets" and an aluminum dish---this motor is geared to the dials they read----it is gutless--no torque--a dead fly can jamb this dish from turning.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 11:45 AM
He still hasn't showed anything? He is a good talker though, like Dr.Phil, not a really doctor but likes to call himself that....yes, I'm an inventor too....I'll stop before i get out of hand.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 12:30 PM
reply to post by StellarX

Happy Holidays StellarX

As usual another one of your rare appearances with so much info it will mean a few months of homework for me

Thanks for the links

Originally posted by yahn goodey
homopolar motor is interesting

Basic do-it-yourself homopolar motor

(Goes to simple explanation of principle

[edit on 23-12-2007 by zorgon]

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by zorgon

thanks zorgon for showing us more mysteries---no---never in my life have i seen anything like this battery motor--the government i worked for kept me in the dark and fed me ****while they sent my thieving crooked boss on courses to teach his drugged out mind secrets like you show us here--info he couldnt care less about or appreciate---something more for me to sleep on and try figure out---thanks

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 02:57 PM

Originally posted by yahn goodey
free energy ?

Do we 'pay' much for solar, wind or tidal power after the original fixed cost? What's not 'free' about that? Did your grandfather participate in the construction of our Sun?

sorry i just cant seem to frame the words correctly.the universe operates on fixed laws that never change.

If the laws were so damn fixed how come scientist have such a hard time figuring it out? If they are so fixed how do they manage to 'misunderstand' it so badly and come up with such ludicrous theories they maintain long after it's obviously been disproved? Sure the universe might operate according to 'fixed' laws , presuming there is no grand designer/operator busily pulling at the strings ( hehe), but what does that have to do with energy being readily available for our use? Why is it presumed that the frequently used 'free' means that it comes from nowhere and that i just can't be explained according to our current understanding of the physics?

to have a vehicle that powers itself without putting an external source of energy into it breaks the laws of gravity and inertia and thermodynamics

How can any load without a 'source' of power? Why presume that the absence of mainstream theories to explain where that power flows from mean that there is no place for it to come from?

if there were a source of invisible "radio" energy out there that an antenne could direct into a receiver that could power up the motors and charge the batteries it hasnt been found yet.

So how are our current loads powered when our current theories can simply not explain how the electricity powers the load at the speed it's observed to?

if we had a scanner like the ham radio guys play with and it locked onto a power frequency with enough energy in it to power just one car---that radio would self destruct--they havent found such a channel because if they had we'd all know about it

That's not true.

With high frequencies, Tesla developed some of the first neon and fluorescent illumination. He also took the first x-ray photographs. But these discoveries paled when compared to his discovery of November 1890, when he illuminated a vacuum tube wirelessly—having transmitted energy through the air.

Wireless energy transfer is not really new but interesting consumer products are going to start to appear in the next few years.


the sun plasma as an energy source?apparently that is edisons direct current not telsas alternating current----dont know how it would be possible to break into this d c circuit from the sun let alone how much dc each of us could tap off it.

So lets support those few scientist who are brave enough to risk their careers and standing to investigate the matter?


posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 03:44 PM
reply to post by StellarX

i'm trying to search--please try to be patient with me--i would just love to see all of us be given free energy--but i can only speak from my own experiences ,education, and understanding---if there is a way to free power that others can tell me/us about i am all ears--if it makes logical sense--up till now with my limited understanding--what einstein knew and taught and the laws of thermodynamics and ohms laws that have never been proven wrong so far i have to stick with them--sorry i havent yet been allowed by my family to look at your long posts ahead of this--they are running me around doing stuff for them --some more thinking i did today while not totally asleep has caused me to realize how shallow my imagination has been limited to by my previous job----if instead of a small 4" diameter dish rotating in a magnetic field we had a 50' steel dish with a copper coating that weighed 200 tons or so spining to produce electricity--no stupid fly is going to jamb up those gears---i've been thinking small too long.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 03:47 PM
reply to post by MrdDstrbr

thank you MD; i must have had a cranial infarction or something when i typed brian instead of bruce,lol;

oh well at least you covered my boo-boo for me.

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 04:20 PM
How about a prize offered by the ATS site for the demonstration of zero point energy? Say a million dollars. Since it's impossible they would never have to pay off. What about a national prize, say 10 million?

posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 04:47 PM
Are you surprised? There is no reason to use fossil fuels, but the oil lobby will kill or destroy you. Our president, if that is what he really should be called, is oil man. We have no way of dissuading a weak and corrupt congress from changing this except with shear numbers. I suggest you get a patent in Iceland, they are extremely ahead in promoting alternative energy. You deserve it.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in