Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

[Grumage]

Hello Grum,

By the way on one of your vids you had a MOT did you try putting a large cap in series with it's supply ?

Dear AlienGrey.

By, MOT are you abbreviating for motor or Microwave oven transformer? As I can't recall doing anything to a transformer other than carving one up on camera for Verpies!   

https://youtu.be/6MdCkLMEv2E

Cheers Grum.

[justawatt]

Nickz Hi I didn't see the cable Hoppy or others saw as 'branched' but that does not mean it 'wasn't' their! to produce energy you need fuel but don't ask me where it is coming from

While I have your attention, some time ago last year or 2014 you put a link up on this thread where a Rusian guy had a tesla coil and a receiving tesla coil build for free energy=, any chance you know i one i mean ? have you still got that link please ?? it's of interest as it was not unlike the one we are talking about with a feed back circuit.

The guy you talk about ,this is his youtube channel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRAoNVb6SaQ


And guys nice work there ,with group work we can solve the Roma circuit.
i have contacted with the person who you see in Akula video "Arthur "German guy.
He told he will contact the person and see if he can visit this person and give a video.

[justawatt]

Explanation of getting Free energy kapanadze style according to him .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXl3ezA_Vgg

https://plus.google.com/+ilirjanmerollari1/about
https://www.facebook.com/imerollari
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Earth_Generator_(QMoGen)_by_Devis_%26_Marios


Bonus

another replicator of ruslan akula
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsAJeNn9eVE

[verpies]

That's not a question that I would ask myself, as I know the answer.

What is it?

Nor do have a need to ask for an opinion.

I had a clarification question in mind since you wrote that you do not understand my original question

I know what current science thinks they know about it, already. And I don't need to hear about that same theory, again.

I do not represent the mainstream science.
I merely use what works in engineering.

The cause of movement of an inanimate object is directly related to the Fields that surrounds them.

The essence of my question was: Can motion exist without an "object" ?
Citing objects hardly constitutes an answer to it.

My answer was,  that not even a rock can MOVE by it's own power. 
Throwing a log into a river...

Notice that you always invoke an abject such as the "rock" or "log" when referring to motion.  It seems that you cannot imagine a motion without an object.
My question was whether you could consider motion without an object, such as a piece of space per piece of time?

Same answer concerning where the extra energy is coming from. The surrounding fields. Now we see that an earth ground may not be needed, at all, which just threw the idea of energy coming from the ground, to the only thing left, again the surrounding energy fields. Or NMR, but, as there is no ferrite anywhere that can be seen...

I was not asking for your consideration of energy nor NMR.
I was asking whether you can consider motion without an object.

But, if people have a problem with that idea, and would rather choose to follow what we are still being told, that's not my problem.

What idea?
Again you are assuming that I am trying to push the Standard Model on you and defending yourself from non-extent attack.  I am not. I do not represent the mainstream science.

Nor do I need to prove it to anyone, but myself.

That type of defensive attitude prevents you learning anything from others.

That is why I'm here, and not in "that thread".

I suggested you move this discussion to "that thread" because "this thread" is for replicating Dally's type devices not discussing the basics of physics.  I you refuse to move there, this discussion will just pollute this thread with this off-topic subject.

Verpies, I also know what you think about all this, as we've been through it all, previously. 

I don't think you do, since you did not even understand my questions about motion.

But, material causes can't account for non material existence,

That's not true. For example the beta decay of matter can give rise to non-material entities - electrons.
Conversely, can non-material causes account for material existences ?

nor include the Aether into the whole picture.

If you are proposing Aether as the source of all things than you must show how Aether accounts for material existences as well.
...but first of all you should be able to define the units of Aether and properties of Aether.
An esoteric pie-in-the-sky concept that has no properties, no units and cannot be measured is not engineerable into a practical device.

If you consider Aether as the primary/primordial entity that you must show how the observable universe arises from it, including matter and energy.  Can you do that? Can you even explain to me what the difference is between Aether and energy?

Any theory of the universe must start somewhere, it must have at least one axiom.  This does not mean that this axiom must be unmeasurable.
Some people consider matter to be primary,
some people consider energy to be primary,
some people consider motion to be primary,
some people consider Aether to be primary,
some people consider beer to be primary...

Whatever you choose as your staring concept, it must be developable into everything that is observable, including matter.
I start with motion @ c and can develop it into matter and energy, with cogent units, properties and all.  Can you do the same with your Aether?

So, now look at that last self runner device, no ground, no battery. And still self running. From what source?

How about the primordial motion @ c ?
...or form unwinding matter's motion.
These propositions are as plausible as your Aether.   The difference is that I can describe the units and properties of the former but you cannot even write units of your Aether, which makes it as good of a source as love.

Or are you also going to cop out like Hoppy, saying it just has to be a fake.

To be fair, I have to consider it, until I eliminate that possibility.
Even if I do that, it will not mean that the source of energy is some indescribable and unmeasurable Aether.

Even though he still offers no proof, just a weed stem, again, as being the not so hidden secret source or power to the device.

Well, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.  A video is hardly that proof.

Anyways, I won't bore you all with my opinions, as it seems that they aren't well received, by some at least, although not all.

So that Aether is a subjective opinion of yours that is unsupported by any evidence of logic ?
If you can reason it out and support its existence with observations and logic, it ceases being merely your opinion and becomes a scientific analysis, which I hoped was the discussion we were having about.

[MenofFather]

Menof, TomTech, or anyone who can understand some Russian:

Can any of you confirm that this is what Roma Grits/Andrei Bryukhovetsky stated in
the following video regarding how the tesla coil is supposedly configured? This is what I understood from
Menof's previous comments on this video, but I am not sure if I understood Menof correctly or not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GMmIslMhrg

The above video may provide some clues about basic device details, as this is an older video and
the person who made the video apparently provided some details about the device in his comments
in the video. Any other details about the device that are mentioned in this video might prove helpful
as well in trying to figure out this device.

I have attached a screen shot with some questions indicated on it, based on what I think Menof said previously.

P.S.   What does the guy say in the video at about 7:20 about the component covered in green tape which I have
shown in the second attached screen shot? He makes some specific comment about it.


Geo, Urfa, Skywalker:
It looks like everyone has somewhat different guesses of how things may be connected together...
I think it is at least worth trying anyway to see what we might figure out...

On 7 20 he say. "Here is detail. Covered. That means you can not paten that. I many see in internet. Some of they is fake. Is and who must have respect..."
But how you gays see, strengh how he run asinchronous motor? If he use DC when on DC motor not run. If he use hight frenquency, then on it motor also not run, so how he get 50 herc. who needed for motor?