It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by playswithmachines
I do, however, oppose 'mainstream' or 'conventional' science in that they, too, make blunders...
Ferroelectric Capacitors & the Magnetic Resonance Amplifier by Tom Bearden
In a nonlinear ferroelectric capacitor there are three major nonlinear processes involved, so it is possible to carefully choose and arrange conditions so that the current through the capacitor moves against the voltage across its terminals.
With adroit switching and timing, and some consideration for resonance effects, it is in theory possible to use such highly nonlinear effects in a circuit to allow (1) an overpotential at the terminals of the battery as a reaction from the ferroelectric capacitor, (2) consequent recharging of the battery via that back potential on the battery side, while the load is also being powered, (3) consequent driving of the load on the load side of the terminals, and (4) having a bypass ferroelectric capacitor across the terminals of the battery, where the capacitor is in the "current against the voltage" condition.
McLain and Wooten patented a great little MRA (Magnetic Resonance Amplifier) system, based on that application. Dr. Robert Bass, a very fine electrodynamicist of exceptional knowledge, experience, and ability wrote the patent for them, and assisted in their work. For that he was persecuted, unjustly attacked, and suffered financial difficulties. The "system" does not forgive highly qualified scientists who take a serious interest in "perpetual motion machines" -- as permissible Maxwellian open dissipative systems are erroneously and derogatorily labeled by the orthodox scientific community. Any scientist violating that inquisition suffers the consequences.
After technical discussions back and forth, the Patent Office even notified Wooten and McLain that the patent had been accepted and the patent would be issued. Within days, to their consternation the patent was rejected and that was the end of that.
In other words, the fix was in.
Google Video Link |
We regret to inform you that as of 11-11-2004 we can no longer fulfill any book orders
for Joseph Newman's book describing his revolutionary energy machine technology.
The 8th Edition of the book, "The Energy Machine of Joseph Newman" is currently sold out and a new Edition will not soon be issued since the original printer's negatives and plates were lost in a fire that destroyed the printing company in Baton Rouge, Louisiana..
As physicist Dr. Roger Hastings (who endorsed Joseph Newman's work) wrote regarding Maxwell's emphasis on the MECHANICAL nature of energy:
"This is stated in no uncertain terms in Maxwell's book A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field. In fact, Maxwell used a dynamical model to derive his famous equations. This fact has all but been lost in current books on electromagnetic theory. The quantity which Maxwell called 'electromagnetic momentum' is now referred to as the 'vector potential.'"
Originally posted by Mary Rose
From "A New Paradigm":
It was approximately at this point in his studies that Joseph Newman came across Fleming's Rule. . . .
But accepting the limited paradigm of the Rule does not answer the more fundamental question:
What MECHANICALLY --- physically --- causes the Rule to be true?
That is the more fundamental question that occupied Joseph Newman's mind during the 1960s. He sought an honest answer to that more fundamental question as to what is the MECHANICAL cause of Fleming's Rule. He could not find an answer to that question in any of the books that he read on electromagnetics and electrical engineering. Yet he believed it was absolutely essential to answer that question, if he was to progress in a deeper understanding of the fundamental MECHANICAL nature of (electro)magnetic fields [per Faraday's and Maxwell's statements above].
It was about this time in his studies that he began studying the GYROSCOPE. . . .
Maxwell appears not to have appreciated the role of interactive forces in a current’s momentum, perhaps because the particulate nature of electricity hadn’t yet been discovered. In his mind, ‘momentum’ is an intrinsic property of a physical entity, independent of other entities in the environment. Thus he believed that the total momentum of a system is the sum of the momenta of its constituent parts. In Article 549 of his Treatise he states, "…if the phenomena are due to momentum, the momentum is certainly not that of the electricity in the wire, because the same wire, conveying the same current, exhibits effects which differ according to its form…"
Originally posted by Mary Rose
"Joel McClain & Norman Wootan - The Magnetic Resonance Amplifier,"
The Rule of Nines: Resonant Geometry and the Zero Point
by
Joel McClain
"Nest two tetrahedrons and you have the keys to the universe."
The word "rule" has several different meanings -- as a form of law, or as a form of dominion, or as a measuring standard. This text uses the word in all three contexts to define the effect of the supreme chord, the trinity of harmony, in the universe.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, independent researchers began to notice the "anomalous" effects of applying resonance to a controlled experiment. Then, as now, this area of "science" is far from the mainstream. The results of those early experiments, such as the lightning of Tesla and the motors of Keely, have been ignored both as science and as history...at least in America.
Elsewhere, the work of Tesla is revered and has been "amplified" by paid research. With the creation of the Magnetic Resonance Amplifier, or MRA, perhaps history and science will have to take a second look. The theories behind the MRA are the same as those of Tesla, Keely, Russell, Bearden, King and others. The application, however, in a closed-loop ZPE device, takes a sharp turn away from effect and into application.
Look at either a piece of quartz or a magnet, and you are looking at trapped energy. Tap the quartz, and you will get a spark as the electrical potential of the quartz instantaneously jumps. Spin a magnet relative to a coil of wire, and electrical current flows in the wire. How do we extract the power of these materials without the attendant physical energy required to either tap or spin them?
Matter = energy. To convert matter to energy, resonate the matter.
To achieve energy output which is above the energy applied at resonance, use three octaves, and there will be three harmonious notes in each octave, for a total of nine resonant frequencies.
These notes occur naturally when the base frequency applied is three octaves above the magnet's resonant frequency, and equal to the resonance of the quartz.
In this way, the potential applied to the quartz "taps" it, without the need to use physical force. The result is electrical output. Connect this output to a coil around a magnet, and the domains of the magnet, which comprise a tiny portion of its weight, and which do all of the "work" in a generator, will be forced to spin. This spin is called "virtual rotation", because it is the spin of energy without the spin of the matter. . . .
Originally posted by Mary Rose
I believe my posts from pages 131 and 140 probably allude to what was lost.
Originally posted by Mary Rose
Included within the following video, Bearden talks about a clever phrase that has been used in relation to electrodynamics: "Has no physical significance..."
Look at either a piece of quartz or a magnet, and you are looking at trapped energy. Tap the quartz, and you will get a spark as the electrical potential of the quartz instantaneously jumps. Spin a magnet relative to a coil of wire, and electrical current flows in the wire. How do we extract the power of these materials without the attendant physical energy required to either tap or spin them?
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Looks like that article was written by an imbecile.
Buddhasystem, you were more kind than I would be, to use the word imbecile. I would use the word "idiot".
Originally posted by buddhasystem
In the words of Lewis Black, "I can't be kind about that. This is dead cold f- stupid".
Whoever wrote that is a mentally deficient person incapable of ordinary reasoning, so the historical meaning of the word fits. I'm not in a position to determine their exact IQ but my estimation from the illogical statements would be pretty low.
those who have an IQ between 0 and 25 are idiots; IQs between 26 and 50 are considered imbeciles; and those who have an IQ between 51 and 70 are considered morons.
“Idiot” derives from the ancient Greek, “idio”, meaning “person lacking professional skill” or “mentally deficient person incapable of ordinary reasoning”.
Originally posted by playswithmachines
unless i see a fully functioning 3 ring SEG without the coils,
and delivering more power than is put in, it is just a very nice induction motor
Originally posted by Mary Rose
Originally posted by playswithmachines
unless i see a fully functioning 3 ring SEG without the coils,
and delivering more power than is put in, it is just a very nice induction motor
I understand and do not dispute you. My belief is that people should stop calling him a fraud or delusional or other such use of ignorant ridicule and reserve judgment until Searl Magnetics completes its work, if it is allowed to complete its work.
I find it annoying as hell that people make flippant remarks about innovators such as Searl without taking the time to investigate the history of suppression of free energy technology that has been going on for decades. It's disgusting. And lazy.
There is no doubt in my mind that the technology is real and what's hiding it from the mainstream stems from pure evil.
Normal people (people who are not the "elite") have to decide whether they want to be part of the problem or the solution. If one is a minion of the elite, one is part of the problem.