Are computers hiding the answers?

No, no, it doesn't mean what you think it means... the Terminator is not stealing secrets from the aliens.

Rather, this is about something I noticed many years ago, which I never was able to understand... until now. The digital computer age, with all of it's marvels, cell phones, Internet, automation, mp3 players, HDTV, digital DVD movies (with special features not available in the theaters!), Bluetooth devices, wireless Internet access, digital phone service, Iphones, PDAs... the same technology that floods our daily lives is also covering our eyes on a daily level.

Back in the days, I was an avid student of electronics in general. I had studied the field and read everything I could find on it, and had experimented enough to where I actually had a prototyping lab set up in my home. I was working with surface-mount technology long before that same technology could be purchased commercially in the nearby cities. I will never forget the day I walked into one store and asked if they had a 555 timer, SOIC package. The guy threw a DIP package chip in front of me, and I said "No, I need SOIC... surface mount." The guy gave me a startled look and said "Nobody around here works in surface mount!"

I didn't say anything else, but left amazed because I had been working with it for several months, maybe a year. I had simply started buying my components mail-order, where SM packaging was available.

Anyway, back to the conspiracy. Back then I subscribed or regularly purchased several magazines devoted to electronic hobbyists. Some of these were "Popular Electronics", "Electronics Now!", and "Electronics Illustrated". Every month I would pour over the sample circuits and learn to understand how and why they worked,and how they could be modified for differing purposes. I learned about tank circuits, oscillators, waveform generators, filters, and all of those things that you hear around an old TV repair shop.

I also used those articles to spark my imagination. I was always trying to make a circuit cheaper, more powerful, easier to use... most times I succeeded, as evidenced by the piles of old homemade circuit boards lying around out in that old house. But then, something changed.

It started with the introduction of the BASIC stamp... a single-chip computer that was affordable enough to be be to be used as a controller chip in most applications. Soon, there were no schematics to speak of left to pour over and understand; they had been replaced by pages of programming code for the BASIC stamp, and of course an address where you could order the EEPROM already programmed with it.

At the time, I afforded this change to the fact that with an automated programmer (which I could quickly build, so I would assume so could many others) a person could program a $1 EEPROM chip and then quickly sell them for $10-$20 each. Quite a money-maker, and I had always assumed that was the reason for the change. I lso assumed that things would get back to normal once everyone else got tired of playing with the BASIC stamps and got back to 'real' electronics.

It never happened. And not only did the magazines stop publishing schematics for the most part, so did Radio Shack (a division of Tandy Corporation). In less than a year, the book shelves in the stores went from veritable libraries of theory and circuit cook-bookery to books designed to get a ham license or how to set up an entertainment system.

What happened to all the information that was steadily being created?

Answer: it was hidden from the eyes of the public. There was a .pdf format book linked to in a recent thread (which I cannot seem to find now. If someone still has it, a link would be appreciated) which was all about free energy devices. Now, like most books of similar things I have seen, the devices inside it mostly either will not work (usually due to a missed force vector in the calcs or a misunderstanding of the forces involved), or are impractical. But that's not the case for all of them.

A discussion recently with another member in the chatroom combined with a re-reading of this book led me to a startling realization: the reason analog circuitry is not being released readily is not because more money can be made in computer chips, but because there is a simple easy way to produce one's own electricity. Now, I am not talking about any circuit as described in the book (most will not work). I am talking about an application of the principles in it. Such an application would mean disaster to the energy interests worldwide, and bring their financial house of cards tumbling down.

Discussion?

TheRedneck

This thought has crossed my mind before, as a fellow redneck, I used to tinker with old 23 channel CB radios, electric fence boxs and other gadgets back in the day.
Then the eproms came about and I was just stumped, I could not do anything with them as I was used too with old tube type cb linears from the 70's.
What I always thought, was the creator of the eprom's code, could patent it, being the same as it's analog's counterpart, just hidden.

reply to post by Snift

I dearly loved working on old bug-zappers.

Computers are precise, fast, and accurate when fed accurate data. For some applications, they are perfect. But why is it that computers are used exclusively for music when there are a lot of things to be said for the old analog amps? They delivered a warmth to the sound that does not exist with digital.

I'm just glad I still have my library with a treasure chest of old magazines and cook-books.

TheRedneck

I fail to understand how analog circuitry is an easy way of producing electricity? As far as i remember source of energy is needed to transform it into electricity. This is based on school knowledge so please - be patient.
And if it is that simple - just arrange bunch of wires/semiconductors and stuff and receive electricity - how it can be hidden in the world of informational overload.
Maybe lack of diagrams is simply due to patents, growing complexity of circuits or simply no demand?

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

I think I should have phrased this better. If so, please accept my apology.

IF there were a way to use simple electronics to produce over-unity, and IF a large number of experimenters in this area existed, what would be the best way to minimize the possibility that such a method would be uncovered? Would it not be to dissuade independent research into the field by diverting attention to digital circuitry?

Remember that Nikola Tesla's research papers were confiscated by the government upon his death. He did not work with digital devices.

TheRedneck

Hi,TheRedneck !

Hooooo boy ! The good old times !

Even with the new arrival of "chips", we could "play" with our computers.
I remember my VIC-20, made by C= Commodore.
Do you Remember ??

We had enough diagrams to fool them. Do you remember in those
days, there where plug-in game-cassettes. The game was on a ROM.

With the installation of **switches**, we could:
1 - Plug the game in the slot, and transfer it to the cassette TAPE.
2 - remove the cassette-game.
3- ( later ) Read the cassette-tape-with-the-game.
4- switch some switches, that
5- fooled the VIC-20 that tought the game came from
the game-CASSETTE, but it was from the TAPE-cassette ! !

We had to "fool" the VIC-20 that had 5 memory blocks,
and #3 was the ROM with the OS, and the #4 & 5 were used
for the cassette-GAMES.

So the switches where there to do:
5 => 1 to read the tape and put the game in block #1, and
1 => 5 to start the game with the command SYS64802, from
what the VIC-20 THOUGHT was block 5. . .

B-))))))

Blue skies.

I don't know if the solution to our energy problems can be found with a simple self made circuit, but it would not surprise me, the universe is made of energy.

But it's pretty much obvious that mankind has the self defeating habit of trying to monopolise information. I had the unfortunate experience of working in a company with an individual who was better qualified than me, slightly, and many times instead of giving a better solution to a concrete technical problem he would try and keep it secret from me, so as to maintain his superior position in the company. I have a friend who tries to do everything by himself so he learns, yet never will he help others with technical information. Both these people lose out on the dynamics of cooperation and endup being less productive because of it. Both of them end up learning less as people stop giving them information because, as per the atraction principle, their behaviour results in the same behaviour being given to them. So, even at the low levels of the social pyramid it's obvious that mankind has a less than optimal use of information.

Computer filtering, Copyright laws, dumbed down media are just the same thing further up the fractal. The core problem is selfishness, the core solution is generosity, which will open up energy and make our society, as a whole, better.

reply to post by TheRedneck


First of all - thank you, i was not aware of over-unity principle/devices. And with Tesla - clearly extraordinary men with lot of projects way ahead of his time - everything is possible. Still, i find it hard to believe that something relatively simple can be hidden for so long. People in academia can be gently persuaded to invest more in one field then in another by grants and such.
But there are a lot of individuals dealing with it for personal interest ,at home. It is impossible to control them all, however hiding information will somewhat interfere. But no more, in my opinion.
If in a famous experiment two students could recreate atomic weapon based on very filtered information then relatively simple way for free energy should be less of a problem.
I think that at a most it is big corporations limiting vulnerability of their systems to ingenious "amateurs". Might be easily mistaken though.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by ZeroKnowledge]

Your on to something there. i think the basis of creating some over unity devise will just be plain old simple transistors resistors capacitors and i think solenoids are a big part of the puzzle. but the eprom could come in handy for some complex switching.

my farther was an amazing electrician therefore i hold a basic understanding of electronics,not on a Tesla level i must add but i see what you mean about the change from analogue to digital

a simple principle of the differences between the two is to my understanding digital is like a two way switch either on or off, analogue is like a dimmer switch you can tweak it.

please OP keep this discussion flowing as i have much interest but little to add I'm afraid but i am willing to learn. star & flag for you

reply to post by C-JEAN

Hiya C-JEAN!

I had a TRS-80 Model 1 (didn't know it was a model 1 until model 2 came out though ). It had a floppy based OS (5 1/4", the real 'floppy' disks), and a tape drive which was basically a cheap cassette deck with some cables to adapt to the computer.

No such thing as hard drives, no such thing as Windows, everything was proprietary and had to fit in 144K memory. No Internet either, although I played around on CompuServe for a while.

Thanks for the trip down memory lane!

TheRedneck

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

I am one of those who worked at home for personal interests.

Back then, there was a device we called an "infinity transmitter". Someone found out that the phone lines had a secret 'code' signal that was easily activated by the proper signal. You could call any number in the world, send that signal to the phone switches, and the receiving phone would turn on, but not ring. It effectively became a listening device in the home of whoever you called.

Of course, it was quickly deemed illegal, and of course that loophole in the phones has long since been closed, but it shows what someone with a little bit of knowledge can accomplish.

I wonder.... yes, they are still around! Information Unlimited used to sell plans to infinity transmitters, as well as many other interesting (and potentially dangerous) devices.

TheRedneck

reply to post by stealthyaroura

Yeah, you've got the analogy right. Digital is on-off, analog is, well, analog.

But digital goes deeper. When you begin to place thousands, tens of thousands, millions, and now hundreds of millions of discrete devices inside a ceramic-coated chip, all of the creativity goes right out the window. I can take some transistors, resistors, and capacitors and make a switch, an amplifier, an oscillator, a reverberator, a voltage regulator, the possibilities are virtually endless. But hard-wire those same components into a microchip, and I can only use them one way, for one purpose.

So while computers are by definition able to be reprogrammed to perform a variety of tasks, all those tasks involve digital manipulation of data. It's still a limitation. I don't dislike computers at all; I think they are awesome tools and I use them regularly (like now ). But sometimes I need to build something that isn't digital, and something that doesn't fall under the umbrella of what has already been done. As I mentioned before, I can do it, because I still have my library, but what about this generation?

Are they to be limited to circuits designed into a microchip? And if so, why?

What are the PTB so afraid we might find?

TheRedneck


[edit on 2-2-2009 by TheRedneck]

reply to post by TheRedneck


Yes i wonder to about today's up and coming "electricians", will it just be throw away components rather than repair or better still upgrade, will it all be down to inputting code ?

I myself hated the first time i came across the pre programmed chip embedded in resin so i could not take it apart to see how it worked or to tweak things a bit.

I suppose there will be a few hardcore college grads that are into valve's and old school tech that utilize it and maybe come across a way to make a revolutionary gadget "over unity anybody"?.

Ahh yes and Tandy or "radio shack", i use to love that place! going there with my farther then back home with a load of resistors transistors and diodes so i could knock up a radio or something on some "bread board",

we had a store called MAPLIN's with a huge catalogue to gaze thru and i can recall seeing for the first time eproms and programmers and thinking OH COMPUTER STUFF! which was out of my depth because it seemed useless to me, of course i can see the applications now but back then it was a big jump.

what was around then was the commodore 64 and Atari, all cassette tape stuff or cartridge, apart from the games, i never got into or saw the potential of writing my own programmes.

If I want free energy I will use a crystal radio set lol.
I do miss the days when ratshack had isles of electronic parts and books with schematics in them. Now all they have is cellphones and ipod accessories .
Really though I don't understand what you are talking about with this free energy. It just isn't going to happen at least not on an electronic level. All electronic components use up energy to some extent. Heck even wire itself has a resistance factor when used in a closed circuit.
It kind of sucks that people aren't forced to learn how electronics work anymore. Back in the day we had to program our computers, build our radios for a science fair project, etc.. Now any retard can use electronics and not have to understand anything about how they work or operate.
At least people like us know what goes on inside a peice of equipment.
As far as over unity devices I still think the answer is in the magnets

Good Evening Redneck, my friend.

What happened to all the information that was steadily being created?

I think the answer to your question lies here:

Since the seventies, it is illegal to commercialize any technology that would undercut the fossil fuel industry or the utilities. This is so because Saudi Arabia threatened that OPEC would dump US dollars for Yen and Marks if we used special technologies to get around the oil embargo. Avoiding to use the words "scalar," "zeropoint," etc., The Department of Defense has assumed control of "superconductivity" and methodically stifles public awareness of the state of inventiveness by many thousands of backyard/garage/workshop inventors, one of whom built a saucer and went to me moon in 1957, when DOD took over the physics. It is illegal to make the "super" magnets required without the foundry registering one with the FBI. It is illegal to have anything to do with the tech or any species that has such knowledge

In addition:

The weapons which National Government agencies have wielded include; * Preventing the issuance of patents for energy technologies [based upon "National Security" claims, utilizing Section 181 of the US Patent Law to withdraw revolutionary energy devices prior to granting of patent numbers. Hundreds of promising devices have thus become lost and remain unknown to the general public, even though many of these technologies were developed with tax-payers funds]. * Phone taps by government agents/agencies * Intrusive and repeated tax audits * The intentional harassment and/or arrest of inventors using either legitimate or bogus criminal charges * Arsons * Theft of property during shipment * Death threats [or assassination] and a host of other intimidations which make the business of marketing a free energy machine virtually impossible

gvinstitute.org...

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Good evening Prof! As usual, you add much to the discussion!

I am a bit rushed tonight, but I will be checking out that link. Why have I not heard about someone who 'went to the moon' in a saucer-shaped craft?

Yeah, I'll be doing some research into this! Thanks for the heads up.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck

I am a bit rushed tonight, but I will be checking out that link. Why have I not heard about someone who 'went to the moon' in a saucer-shaped craft?

I know, I saw that too, but I decided to post it anyway. The patent laws do, however, prohibit the activity I quoted above.

reply to post by ProfEmeritus

Actually, you may misunderstand my reference to the alleged flight. There are some theories (which I subscribe to) which would indicate that such a flight would be possible, and the simplest geometric shape for such a craft is a saucer shape. The work is based off of T. Townsend Brown and John R. R. Searle (among others). I believe I have found a link in Edison's work to the same principle.

So, barring the concern over a garage inventor being capable of building a craft that would be sufficiently airtight to make the trip, my reference was more of "wait, someone actually built one?" as opposed to "That's a load of male bovine excrement."

TheRedneck

Thanks for the explanation. My lack of credulity didn't refer to the possibility of such a device, but that someone had actually done that, without even a hint of it anywhere in any literature for over 50 years.

Originally posted by darklifeAs far as over unity devices I still think the answer is in the magnets

maybe the answer is using the earth for power, i mean it's got a magnetic field around it and a spinning iron core.the basis of a kind of generator

,what it boils down to is the fact that we should of been made aware of such things as solar power cells, wind turbines and even water wheels geared on to a generater years ago! when i say we i mean not us who know about these things anyhow but the mass public.

these devices should of been promoted and marketed on a massive scale years ago, and know one can say the technology was not there because its always been there.

of course we all no why the government does not want us to have free energy for our homes. GREED!

oh if only my hero Tesla was around today, would it not have been the coolest past time being his lab assistant

[edit on 6/2/2009 by stealthyaroura]