NO EXHAUST Engine - Closed loop Pantone Geet engine

[GeekMan]

This is real basic - an engine has to have oxygen - therefore ask yourself where the oxygen comes from. I've seen this myself and came to the conclusion that it comes from crankcase
leakage up past the piston. Remember a gas engine is a vacuum sucker when the piston goes down. I doubt that you can do any more than run a stationary engine this way. Driving down
the highway is probably not possible due to more oxygen is required than would be possible to leak past the piston.
  My real problem with GEET is that I know of no dealer driving a GEET vehicle and saving gas even though I have personally known 3 dealers who gave up on GEET.

I made a GEET mower and bought and paid for Pantone plans and the result was not better than a vapor carburetor at 30% longer runtime than stock gas and carb but Coleman camping fuel will get double the runtime on a vapor carburetor on a small lawn mower with a govenor.

Norman

I believe you are correct, Norman.

I developed the first closed-loop lawnmower for Paul Pantone. It was the first in the world at the time. All others I've seen online use my same basic design with small modifications such as to the bubbler. Paul's probably made a fortune selling my plans knowing him, lol.

I demonstrated that lawnmower at a some alternative energy conference in CA, at a gas engine fair in PA and later for three NASA scientists at my friend's house in MD. Two of the NASA scientists were amazed, one was rightly skeptical. All three should have been skeptical. The exhaust/air had to come and go from/to somewhere. The crankcase is most likely.

I also demonstrated it at a university (NJIT) for a professor. We fired it up inside his lab. After closing off the exhaust, there was no exhaust smell at all yet it ran for 5-10 minutes very quietly. However, I now attribute the lack of exhaust smell to it being run off a bubbler which is cleaner than running off the straight gasoline fuel. And yet it never would have had the power to mow a lawn. That's the problem with all bubblers so far as I'm aware... greatly reduced power. The power was reduced substantially, as it is with all the GEET engines I've ever seen and worked on -- especially so-called "closed-loop" motors. GEET, to me, is pure sleight of hand. It works because it's a bubbler, not because it's a "GEET reactor" or any such nonsense. I've never seen anyone prove the GEET itself does anything except maybe get really hot and vaporize the fuel some more, but that's nothing esoteric or new. Again, to me, it's trickery.

I was also commissioned to create a "closed-loop" generator as well (extremely finicky). While it worked, the power as with the lawnmower, was greatly reduced.

That was a long time ago, so I can't provide many more specifics from memory, but suffice to say, Dennis Lee is running a carnival sideshow act with this stuff (as usual). Let's see him mow a lawn and prove the crankcase isn't allowing air to come in an escape. He won't be able to without some form of deception or B.S.

Also, while I did not patent the design (there's no point, as the power loss was huge), I can certainly prove I was the first to develop the closed-loop lawnmower design, as I got my plans notarized long before anyone else was doing this stuff.

I appreciate when people interject common sense into discussions like these, as this stuff is hard enough without getting into fanciful thinking about it. One needs to be very skeptical and discerning, especially when working on it themselves. It's easy to believe something's happening when it's not. Real scientific thinking is important. One should be very skeptical of all claims and they should be backed up by an independent lab if possible, else you can end up wasting a lot of time, money and energy as you try to reproduce something that never worked in the first place.

All this said, there are some cool technologies that do use vacuum chambers that can effectively transmute elements at low temperatures (which Paul claimed, yet never proved). Walter Russell demonstrated this to Westinghouse around 1930 and it was repeated by Toby Grotz and Dr. Tim Binder in the 90s.

[ramset]

GeekMan
quote
and it was repeated by Toby Grotz and Dr. Tim Binder in the 90s.
end quote
Sir ,thank you for your input and contribution here, do you have any more info specific to the above reference ?


respectfully

Chet K

[GeekMan]

GeekMan
quote
and it was repeated by Toby Grotz and Dr. Tim Binder in the 90s.
end quote
Sir ,thank you for your input and contribution here, do you have any more info specific to the above reference ?


respectfully

Chet K

Here ya go, Chet. Let me know if you need anything further:

http://merlib.org/node/5070
6. A METHOD FOR TRANSMUTATION OF ELEMENTS
Changing atomic elements or making elements appear mysteriously? It sounds like impossible alchemy, but experimenters recently did this, without Big Science particle accelerators. These scientists learned from a metaphysician, Walter Russell (1871-1963). During vivid spiritual experiences, Russell had seen everything in the universe, from the atom to outer space, being formed by an invisible background geometry. Russell not only portrayed his visions in paintings, he also learned science. He was so far ahead that in 1926 he predicted tritium, deuterium, neptunium, plutonium and other elements.

Recently, professional engineers Ron Kovac and Toby Grotz of Colorado, with help from Dr. Tim Binder, repeated Russell's 1927 work, which was verified at the time by Westinghouse Laboratories. Russell found a novel way to change the ratio of hydrogen to oxygen in water vapor inside a sealed quartz tube, or to change the vapor to completely different elements. Their conclusion agrees with Russell: the geometry of motion in space is important in atomic transmutation. Kovac shorthands that idea to geometry of space-bending.

These modern shape-shifters speak of Russell's feats such as prolate or oblate the oxygen nucleus into nitrogen or hydrogen or vice versa. To change nuclei, they change the shape of a magnetic field. Although they used expensive analyzing equipment, it is basically tabletop science. No atom-smashing cyclotron needed; just a gentle nudge using the right frequencies. Focus and un-focus light-motion, create a vortex and control it.

Cold fusion researchers are also running across strange elements popping up in their own electrified brews. No one is proposing to make gold and upset world currencies, but some experimenters aim to clean up radioactive waste by their novel processes.

-----

Toby Grotz article:
VIDEO PRESENTATION

A complete explanation and visual presentation is available from the SPA video tape library. Order the presentation made by Toby Grotz at the Milwaukee conference titled, "Transmutation Of Elements Using Dual Polarity Control And Walter Russell's Experiments With An Over Unity Device" The video is available for $20.00 plus $3.00 shipping from: USPA Tapes, 993 West 1800 North, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062, Phone: (810) 785-5130.

Further information may be obtained by contacting the author, Toby Grotz (303) 824-6834, or by writing to 820 Bridger Circle, Craig, CO 81625

----

Grotz, Toby, Tim Binder, et Ron Kovac, (1992), "Novel Means of Hydrogen Production Using Dual Polarity Control and Walter Russell's Experiments with Zero Point Energy," 27th IECEC, pages 4.339-4.344.

Binder, Timothy, (1993), "Transmutation of the Elements, A Modern Alchemical Team's Experiments with the concepts of Walter Russell", Proceedings IANS pp.107-134.
Binder, Timothy - Russell's Nuclear-Magnetic Transmutation Experiments - ISNE 1993

Grotz, Toby - Russell's Power Multiplication Principle Experiments IECEC 1992, ISNE1993

[norman6538]

Thank you Geekman for your excellent down to earth common sense comments.
Its hard to get that kind of report among all the hype that Pantone drummed up.

The French have done some enhancing on tractors and are having good results.

But I like Naudin's bingo fuel that is made by an elec arc welder that is powered
on that same bingo fuel by a gas engine generator.  But I can't figure out why
no one has done anything further with that idea.

Thanks again.

Norman

[ramset]

GeekMan
I echo Normans post and add many thanks for the links
do you still experiment?

some of us have a strong affection for the ICE and variants and are working on emulsifications, Papp and similar  type systems, all for open source .

respectfully

Chetkremens@gmail.com