Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

[AlienGrey]

I m almost there....  little bit more efficiency to improve..

are you using a pulse driven katcher ?

[Hoppy]

   What do you mean by a "latching circuit"? Used where?

Nick,

This is the basic circuit also used by Kapanadze to start his devices using a 9V battery. One relay contact set latches the relay. The other set switches the device on, which stays on once the 9V battery is removed. The NO latch switch would be replaced with the 9V battery.

[SolarLab]

F.Y.I.

*** For those following the Ruslan, Kapanadze design have a look
at the first video under Examples below; note the S-Parameter window
(upper right) and observe the signal (S11 = reflective)! Scale the frequencies...

The "antenna" part resembles the Tesla coil "Antenna" end - no conventional
current - it's open circuit... high voltage pulses... electrophoretics! ***

** this post was submitted to another thread re: scalar discussion **

Transverse waves versus Longitudinal waves:
https://montalk.net/notes/transverse-longitudinal-waves

Note the "V" (pulse?) versus "Sinusoidal" (alternating?). Also, if your
an RF type, consider Near Field vs Far Field.

Transformation of Traversal waves into Longitudinal waves (magnetic):
http://gorchilin.com/articles/free/magnetic_P?lang=en

Don't confuse "Scalar" with "Longitudinal"...

Scalar Physics Research Center:
http://scalarphysics.com/

Example(s) - Why bother trying to understand all this?

(Videos) Helical Antenna (or any helical structure - coil - for that matter):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prQ8ZjYiUSw

Electric field of a Helical Antenna in 3D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgR2YcVB6pI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bByO4XQtOKc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x2Rw32Wf4Y

A look at some math might help a bit:
http://scalarphysics.com/resources/thomas_minderle/thomas_minderle-a_brief_introduction_to_scalar_physics.pdf

FIN

[stivep]

F.Y.I.

*** For those following the Ruslan, Kapanadze design have a look
at the first video under Examples below; note the S-Parameter window
(upper right) and observe the signal (S11 = reflective)! Scale the frequencies...

The "antenna" part resembles the Tesla coil "Antenna" end - no conventional
current - it's open circuit... high voltage pulses... electrophoretics! ***

** this post was submitted to another thread re: scalar discussion **

Transverse waves versus Longitudinal waves:
https://montalk.net/notes/transverse-longitudinal-waves

Note the "V" (pulse?) versus "Sinusoidal" (alternating?). Also, if your
an RF type, consider Near Field vs Far Field.

I did not read yet the rest of your post but here I have objections:
Is see the material  in this link  not only esoteric but  conflicting with  known science.

If longitudinal electromagnetic wave was such as described  in the article why wasn't  yet utilized by communication?
If longitudinal  electromagnetic wave was  in existence why it was not conformed by science?

So major conflict of this article is lack of fundamental basis.
By that from scientific point of view it is bunch of scientifically conformed physical phenomena wrongly applied and that makes this particular article   piece of trash or intentional action to  create wrong  conclusions and wrong basis for these not skilled in art.
So far the most frequent activity in disinformation  on this forum was provided by Russian Trolls, most of them  have been terminated from here.

As everything is relative this post remains valid till is proven wrong. Till now there was only
Eric Dollard & Thomas Brown 1988 - Transverse & Longitudinal Electricity who where trying to  prove its existence , the rest of other guys They  are just fascinated individuals with an idea of "Longitudinal"  electromagnetic waves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwFWx5RkwDE
They did not  provide sufficient lead to an army of researchers around the  world to be able to conform it  till today.
As far  as VNA and S parameter   - I have plenty of VNA's in my lab and nothing strange I have found in this area at all.

With respect

Wesley
 

[stivep]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgR2YcVB6pI
This is valid representation for circularly polarized  electromagnetic wave coming out of  helical antenna  in Near field only https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_and_far_field
This video does not demonstrate  wave propagation in Far field ''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bByO4XQtOKc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x2Rw32Wf4Y
Both of the links from above represent  valid representation for circularly polarized  electromagnetic  properties of electromagnetic wave in Near field only.

=====================================================================================
The article:
http://scalarphysics.com/resources/thomas_minderle/thomas_minderle-a_brief_introduction_to_scalar_physics.pdf

along with yet another one included here by me:
https://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0002/0002028.pdf
are in direct conflict with  official science.
Here is article that you may take for given.
https://www.quora.com/How-are-gravity-and-electromagnetism-related

To the best of our (present-day) knowledge, no special relationship exists between gravity and electromagnetism,
above and beyond the fact that gravity couples universally to everything, and electromagnetism is no exception.

Shortly after general relativity was developed, there have been several attempts to unify these two classical fields,
gravity and electromagnetism, into a single theoretical framework. A few worth mentioning are the five-dimensional spacetime of
Kaluza and Klein; Weyl's attempt to treat the metric and the electromagnetic 4-vector (or, as he called them, the quadratic and linear ground-forms)
on the same footing as describing the fundamental geometry of spacetime; and, last but not least of course,
Einstein's own attempt to derive a unified field theory from a non-symmetric metric tensor, splitting it into a symmetric part (gravity) and a non-symmetric part
(corresponding to the electromagnetic field tensor). None of these attempts were successful.

Meanwhile, particle physicists discovered new particles and new forces, which eventually found their place in the theoretical framework that
we now know as the standard model of particle physics, which integrates three of the four fundamental forces (specifically, it unifies electromagnetism
and the weak nuclear interaction into the non-Abelian gauge theory of the electroweak interaction). Gravity, meanwhile, serves as a background,
which couples to all fields universally and minimally, but without singling out any specific component of the standard model, be it electromagnetism or something else.

This of course is not the final word, since the relationship between the (classical) theory of gravity and the standard model's (quantum) theory
of fields is uneasy at best. If/when an improved theory is found that treats gravity and other fields on the same foundations, perhaps there will be
new relationships uncovered. But that's speculation. What I described above is what we presently know.

Wesley