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.

 

"Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 220
39
<< 217  218  219    221  222  223 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Don't use a wattmeter, but instead follow their suggestion to make the device do work like lifting a load of known weight with a string wrapped around a motor shaft.


I like that.




posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
To provide a good link: Watt Meter - Model 2330
Thanks for the link.
The relevant part of the specification is:


The Model 2330 watt meter allows broadband and high accuracy measurements of both sinusoidal and highly distorted wave shapes.
What is unclear is if a spike is considered a highly distorted wave shape. To put it another way, there may be limits to what they define as "highly distorted", meaning it could be possible that distortion could be so great it's beyond the capability of even that meter to give an accurate measurement. I'd have to test it with some extreme spikes to see how well it did. I think an oscilloscope is better.


Originally posted by Mary Rose
I believe his intent is participation in an open-source community and is not the charlatan that you have called him. Perhaps a qualified engineer will join his project.
I didn't call him a charlatan until he started "accepting donations" for his coil which he has still not been able to make self-running which would prove it's over-unity. Now that he's taking money, he's crossed the line.


About how much does an oscilliscope cost?
Anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. The newer more expensive models can interface with software which is a nice feature.
Ebay has >6000 listings for oscilloscope:

www.ebay.com...



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I didn't call him a charlatan until he started "accepting donations" for his coil which he has still not been able to make self-running which would prove it's over-unity. Now that he's taking money, he's crossed the line.


I don't think you're an expert on the open-source community and how they operate and what is ethical within their paradigm. Remember he is doing research and development. He's not an entrepreneur.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Russ Gries is another of the open-source researchers into Rodin math/coils I've posted about.

Here's his page on The Math.

Here's his page on the Coils and Testing.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Developing standards is a good idea. Appealing to NIST is not.

I've lost my respect for NIST, due to their prostituting themselves as part of the 911 cover-up.

www.patriotsaints.com...

I don't trust them to be a neutral party in questions regarding a disruptive technology. My dad worked for NIST while I was growing up in Boulder. I used to have high regard for them.

Sterling



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by sterlingda
 

So who would you recommend instead of NIST?

The problem I see with that logic is, NIST did not act in a vacuum. They consulted with several outside firms on this list, and many other outside firms on this list conducted separate investigations:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Note the part that begins:
"Here is a partial list of those who responded to and/or investigated the events:"

So if you distrust NIST, do you also distrust their sources, and the others on that list? Note that post is in the 9/11 forum where the 9/11 discussion really belongs, but if you have a suggestion of who should be used instead of NIST to create standards for measurements of over-unity machines, that would be on-topic here.

The post Mary Rose posted suggests pesn.com (aka "Sterling") as an alternative to create standards, however as I said I don't think they will want to do it because it's not in their best interest. Sterling's site may be worth $3800 a month in revenue now and if they show that most projects they report on are the result of faulty measurements, they could be left with perhaps only $3.80 a month in revenue.

Speaking of Pesn, Sterling has written some interesting stories on Magnacoaster:
pesn.com...

June 18, 2007 Electromagnetic > Magna Coaster Motor Co - Magnetic motor and generator produces electric power without using fuel. A home unit is planned for production in fall of 2008....

Richard told me that his idea is a spin-off of Howard Johnson's understanding of vortices around magnets, hence the name "vortex", except with a "k" interjected...
Vortex power, yay! I mean vorktex? Oops!

Then once or twice a year, an update from pesn.com says magnacoaster is about to start shipping. The last update in June 2012 says they did start shipping:

pesn.com...

To make a long story short, the machine and team in the video is Magnacoaster from about a year ago, the voice is Richard Willis, and they are now shipping product to their back-order customers.
I want to hear some customer testimonials, where they have taken their homes off the grid! I mean this is the holy grail of free energy, to actually be shipping a working product, right? Well except for the $45,000 price tag, though he does have cheaper units.

However, I haven't yet found any updates since June when they allegedly started shipping. Shouldn't we have heard something more about this after they started shipping the holy grail of free energy 3 months ago?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Vortex power, yay! I mean vorktex? Oops!

Your point here is simply to ridicule?


Originally posted by Arbitrageur
However, I haven't yet found any updates since June when they allegedly started shipping. Shouldn't we have heard something more about this after they started shipping the holy grail of free energy 3 months ago?

How did you miss this:


Rasa's Zero Point Institute Announces Emerging Generators Galore

A theoretical physicist and networker in India describes the scientific basis for magnetic resonance generators. He said he has received his Vorktex generator from Magnacoaster, who is now delivering back-orders, and that this is but one of several variations presently being deployed widespread in the third world.

Caution: see note below: . . .

Postscript: Skepticism about Magnacoaster Shipping

June 13, 2012; 2:30 pm MDT

I just got off a call with a couple of people who were concerned about my positive statements above about Magnacoaster shipping units to some back-order customers.

Their experience has been negative.

Michelle of Canada, was one of the first people to pay full price for a ~4 kW unit, back in February 2009. He was told it should be done by March of that year. When it was delayed for a long time, Michelle asked for a refund, but was not given one. After another period of time, he finally threatened to take them to small claims court. They still didn't refund. Now they don't even respond to his emails. "We would fully support Magnacoster if he delivers a working product that does what is promised."

What made him especially mad was that the company continued to take new orders without clearly disclosing to people that they are still working out bugs and troubleshooting, not ready to ship; and have been doing that for more than four years now.

Customers are putting money down for a unit with expectation of delivery "in a few months". They are not putting down money as long-term investors; yet that is how their money is being used.

Even recently, if you go to the Magnacoaster Twitter feed, it reads like they are still deep in troubleshooting mode. Same on their YouTube channel.

Magnacoaster has not responded to my email and phone requests for an interview with Richard, though I did talk to two people there on June 8 who both said something to the effect that they are shipping out units for some back-orders. They said I would half to talk to Richard to get an official statement.

So at this point, all we can do is speculate that perhaps certain friendly interests are among the first to receive units, more along the lines of beta testing.

Until Magnacoaster is in full production with a unit that is essentially problem-free, I'm going to drop them down into the runner's up in our Top 5 exotic free energy technologies.

We all know that the development process is a challenging one. It seems to us that Magnacoaster needs to be more forthcoming with their customers and the likelihood of delay in delivery; and when customers ask for a refund, they should get one.

This is still a "buyer beware" situation, though we do hope Magnacoaster can get their act together.

edit on 10/03/12 by Mary Rose because: Format



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Vortex power, yay! I mean vorktex? Oops!

Your point here is simply to ridicule?
You mean ridicule that vortex isn't spelled with a "k"? Except at Magnacoaster?

Or ridicule the claim about "Howard Johnson's understanding of vortices around magnets"? I don't see the point in ridiculing the device based on the patent Johnson received on April 24, 1979, because this statement of fact says more than ridicule:

freeenergynews.com...

As of April, 2012, we do not know of anyone who has successfully replicated one of these motors, though many have tried, and many are presently making an attempt.
I think the lack of function in Howard Johnson's design speaks for itself, so yes I was poking fun at the fact that magnacoaster's technology is supposedly based on a vortex (which neither he nor Howard Johnson demonstrated even exists) when he can't even spell vortex...how could I resist?


Rasa's Zero Point Institute Announces Emerging Generators Galore

A theoretical physicist and networker in India describes the scientific basis for magnetic resonance generators. He said he has received his Vorktex generator from Magnacoaster, who is now delivering back-orders, and that this is but one of several variations presently being deployed widespread in the third world.

Caution: see note below: . . .

Postscript: Skepticism about Magnacoaster Shipping
Thanks for the info, but even the theoretical physicist, if he really is one, doesn't claim he took his house off the grid with this "vortex power", and the other customers still aren't getting their shipments. So if this was supposed to convince me Magnacoaster is not worthy of ridicule, sorry but it had the opposite effect. In fact as Sterling points out, it fits the "pattern" he has observed:

Magnacoaster Vorktex nearing commercial rollout

At that time, it seemed like an interesting attempt, but just another of so many thousands of tries at electromagnetic motor overunity. We certainly did not expect that they would come close to their objective of being ready for production by Fall of 2008. How many times have predictions like that proven futile -- like every time so far!

In the eight years I've been involved in this seemingly Don Quixotic quest for exotic free energy devices, I have yet to see a true overunity generator that can actually produce useful energy in a practical embodiment that would make sense in the marketplace.
That was in 2009 so now that eight years is eleven years. If Sterling lives long enough for that to be 50 years, I'm not sure the conclusion will be any different.

The interesting thing about the $45,000 Magnacoaster unit is that it includes 3 solar panels. Solar energy is not over-unity, so it should actually work! However this also raises the question about the necessity of solar panels if he's got a device that draws energy from the vacuum...so his products don't really even make sense to me. So again, what is not to ridicule about this obvious contradiction of including solar panels in a device that allegedly draws its energy from "the vacuum"?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


  1. Your post was on the topic of Sterling Allan's website and his belief that testing is a good idea but NIST would not be a good source of verification of a free energy technology.

  2. First you suggest that Allan's intentions are not honorable with your sarcastic remark about making money reporting on useless information. Perhaps it would be more constructive to suggest an alternative to NIST or to mention your previously posted suggestion of demonstrating the technology working rather than using instruments to measure.

  3. Then, you claimed that Allan's article contained no update concerning shipping by Magnacoaster, which was blatantly false.



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

That was another poster who had a problem with NIST, not me. I have no problem with NIST, and I never said I had any problem with using NIST standards. Regarding an alternative, the international standards body comes to mind, International Organization for Standardization (ISO). But in many cases, if the equipment calibration is traceable to NIST standards, it's also traceable to ISO standards, so there wouldn't be much difference.

And maybe I wasn't clear enough about what I was looking for in the updates:

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I want to hear some customer testimonials, where they have taken their homes off the grid!...
However, I haven't yet found any updates since June when they allegedly started shipping. Shouldn't we have heard something more about this after they started shipping the holy grail of free energy 3 months ago?
They HAVE shipped some units and I was looking for some testimonials of people who have taken their homes off the grid. Even the so called "friendly" recipients of the units which have shipped, haven't claimed that, at least not in that update, right?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
That was another poster who had a problem with NIST, not me. I have no problem with NIST, and I never said I had any problem with using NIST standards.


Arbitrageur,

Are you being purposely confusing?

I'm well aware that you have no problem with NIST. You made that clear. Sterling Allan has a problem with NIST and I clearly referenced that.


Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Regarding an alternative, the international standards body comes to mind, International Organization for Standardization (ISO). But in many cases, if the equipment calibration is traceable to NIST standards, it's also traceable to ISO standards, so there wouldn't be much difference.


I would love to see a constructive discussion about how to go about verifying claims, but if Sterling Allan does not post again here it will be very understandable in view of the tone that has been set.


Originally posted by Arbitrageur

And maybe I wasn't clear enough about what I was looking for in the updates:

I want to hear some customer testimonials, where they have taken their homes off the grid!...
However, I haven't yet found any updates since June when they allegedly started shipping.


So, you're playing dumb now? Insulting everyone's intelligence?

Clearly the postscript which was flagged in red updated the article and makes your remark about customer testimonials nothing but counterproductive sarcasm.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I would love to see a constructive discussion about how to go about verifying claims, but if Sterling Allan does not post again here it will be very understandable in view of the tone that has been set.
He's welcome to post again, but I don't think the comment about NIST was helpful. Even if he's right that there are problems with the NIST report on 9/11, I don't see how this will affect the definition or measurement of a volt, amp, or kilogram among others. It is the latter which is relevant. The only other relevant standards body that I know of in the US is ISO, and that uses the same measurements and definitions as NIST, though there are minor differences. Collectively I think there are something like 20 different "kilogram" standards internationally, and NIST has one of those. There are slight differences between those 20 standards, but they are all pretty close.

And if the excuse wasn't NIST and 9/11, some inventor would have some other excuse, like "standard measurement methods using known physics don't apply because their invention uses new physics". While that doesn't seem too likely, I wouldn't rule it out, and if that happens, there's really only one way to prove it's really a game changer and that's by shipping working units, to customers who verify they work and use them to take their homes off the grid or something similar.

Hence I really am serious that seeing working units ship and having real customers (rather than shills) verify they took their home off the grid may be the only real confirmation we will have. In the meantime, history has taught us (some of us, at least) that a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 01:13 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I've glanced at the responses to my comment about NIST no longer being a reliable source of scientific measurement. Their name used to be NBS: National Bureau of Standards. They set the standards of measurement for the nation, and often set the example for the world. The most accurate measurement known to man is of time. That is the field where my Dad has left his mark and has been recognized as "Time Lord" for his efforts.

Now, enter politics. The National Government has been involved in the crime of the century: the Attacks of 911. They helped prepare the demolition charges that brought down all three World Trade Center buildings. If you doubt that, in the context of science, let me ask you a very simple question. How could a building fall in free-fall speed without help? Any thinking person, let along PhD scientist at NIST, should know that this would be impossible without removing the obstacles from the structure below, through controlled demolition -- a science that is very well understood. Building Seven not only had signs of such help, it was a picture-perfect execution of the science.

And NIST was tasked with explaining how building 7 came down. Their missive was completely political and completely non scientific when it comes to addressing the key points. They said there was no reason to suspect explosives, when there are numerous witnesses, crime scene evidence for it, recordings of explosions, videos of explosions, etc.

They were sissy lap dogs for the complicit government cover-up when it comes to their reporting of why Building 7 came down. Science went out the window completely, as did all my respect for that institution. And what have they received in return? Some very nice upgrades to their buildings in Boulder Colorado. Their wallets might be happy, but I doubt their conscience is.

So now, back to the question of validation.

In the question of overunity, we're not talking about ultra-precise measurement capabilities. We're not talking about pushing ever closer to 100% efficient, where one thousandth of a percent might define the momentary leader.

We're talking about a complete revolution of science. We're talking about rewriting text books. We're talking about getting so much more energy out than in that you can self loop the input so that you have a base load power generator with no input required.

And when we talk about revolutionary science that makes the powers that be obsolete, do we want to turn to the very prostitutes at NIST who so willingly sold themselves to parrot the official narrative that any honest, thinking person can see is a bold faced lie?

Nah. We don't need NIST for this. They trail in the dust of history. They have shamed the world of science. They have pissed on the very high reputation that their mission implies. They have bastardized their legitimate claims forever. To hell with them.

As for Magnacoaster, I spoke with Rasa a few days ago, and he said they would be rolling out the product the next day. Then the next day he said they were postponing for a while longer.
edit on 5-10-2012 by sterlingda because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by sterlingda
So now, back to the question of validation.

In the question of overunity, we're not talking about ultra-precise measurement capabilities.
How about getting 35 watts out from 6 watts in, as shown in the following graph at 30 volts? You would think that's not a measurement issue, right? But it turns out that it is a measurement issue.

In Disdain of Garbage Physics - Shawn Bishop



We're talking about a complete revolution of science. We're talking about rewriting text books. We're talking about getting so much more energy out than in that you can self loop the input so that you have a base load power generator with no input required.
Before we re-write the textbooks, shouldn't we make sure that the existing textbooks don't really apply?

It turns out that Naudin's replication of Bearden's MEG really didn't get 35 watts out from 6 watts in, even according to his own data. So Naudin's over-unity claim is in fact a measurement problem which would be solved by using NIST definitions of units. Clearly, Naudin (and probably many others in the field) apparently doesn't have a grasp of NIST units because his own raw data shows Shawn Bishop that in actuality, the output is the same as the input when NIST definitions of units are applied.


Nah. We don't need NIST for this. They trail in the dust of history. They have shamed the world of science. They have pissed on the very high reputation that their mission implies. They have bastardized their legitimate claims forever. To hell with them.
We obviously need some type of standards to be followed, as Shawn Bishop illustrated. I asked before and I'll ask again...do you have any alternative suggestions besides NIST? There is certainly no alternative to them when it comes to standards for what a watt, volt or amp is. But even if they certify a meter is calibrated to their standards, this won't stop someone like Naudin from misinterpreting the measurements. My guess is he may have been one notch off interpreting the oscilloscope scale setting since I don't think it's likely the scale knob was one notch off, though I suppose that might be possible if the knob was mounted on a round shaft.


Originally posted by sterlingda
As for Magnacoaster, I spoke with Rasa a few days ago, and he said they would be rolling out the product the next day. Then the next day he said they were postponing for a while longer.
Since Magnacoaster claimed in the dragon's den episode on youtube they get 50,000 watts out from 18 watts in, any idea why their top-of-the-line unit needs solar panels? If you don't know maybe you can ask them next time you talk to them? However I'm not sure if any answer will be logically consistent with their claims?



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by primalfractal
He is a good man who means well with a bad temper and cognative dissonance. You hit a nerve because he had no logical reason to disagree but still gave the idea no possibility.


I am interested in that term "cognitive dissonance":


n. Psychology
A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between one's beliefs and one's actions, such as opposing the slaughter of animals and eating meat.


In the context you're using it, you're saying that your father feels confused, or, you think he's confused but he doesn't think so?


Sorry, missed this one earlier. Meant I think he's confused, he doesn't think so but I have evidence to back it up.

I have a theory that what most percieve as "reality" is actually a cognitive illusion bought about by dissonance. A gap in perception between left and right brains creating a blind spot. "Head gap" I call it, the Toltecs use a similar term for the same thing.

In this gap, the zero point, lies perception of interconnected waveforms and 3D-n effects, the REAL world.
edit on 6-10-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Cognative illusions are very interesting.



The human eye has a blind spot – a small portion of the visual field, about the size of a pencil eraser – where the optic disk is located. We aren’t normally aware of this blind spot, but with one eye closed, any object passing through this small area will disappear momentarily. Our visual field appears seamless because of an optical illusion: Our mind conspires to fill in the blank area with the colors of what surrounds it. We have other blind spots too – a whole series of what psychologist Daniel Kahneman calls “cognitive illusions” – that our minds and our culture work to obscure.

Link



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
My idea for a free energy device is to make this shape/pattern with 3D-n curved light wave paths.


Originally posted by primalfractal
I think these gyrotwisters help give an understanding of the principles and feeling of a vortex. You can start them without the cord if you have a real feel for the shape and timing of the movement.



I think this might make a black hole.

This would come about by accelerating the light using the shape for leverage on itself through the tiny mass.

You could use it to hyperjump/warp and also as propulsion or free energy device.

The free energy and propulsion could be generated on this principle –



The source of the light is pulled into the black hole along with the light...


kindly provided by truthinfact on my thread “curving light waves”

edit on 6-10-2012 by primalfractal because: Spell



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
In Disdain of Garbage Physics - Shawn Bishop


"Critique of Shawn Bishop’s Paper 'In Disdain of Garbage Physics'":


©Cyril Smith, March 2003

1. Introduction

Shawn Bishop has published a paper1 debunking the claims of Tom Bearden regarding the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG)2 and Jean-Louis Naudin’s replication of this device3. This paper is my response to Bishop, demonstrating that his arguments are seriously flawed.

2. Some Basic Physics Theory

I have used the above section heading to replicate that used by Bishop. . . .

5. Conclusion

Bishop’s paper is flawed on several counts

His equation (3) is incorrect.
He has not included the DC component of the input current.
He has not used the actual load resistance value.

For these reasons his calculations are not valid and should be ignored.



posted on Oct, 6 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by sterlingda
 



The matrices correspond to the polarization of a static infinite state of potential.This polarization, sometimes referred to as yin and yang, creates an expansion and contraction of this infinite potential into a finite kinetic state. These states of existence correspond directly to information systems. Thus the numbers represent the compression of the information in the system, the dense masculine aspect. Physicists tend to get stuck on this part by focusing solely on particles.


Looks right to me

edit on 6-10-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 217  218  219    221  222  223 >>

log in

join