Free Solid State/mechanical energy

[nat1971a]

Keely's definition of neutral centre
http://www.svpvril.com/definitions.html#NeutralCenter


"Every molecule, every mass, every moving body in space, every solar system, every stellar system, EVERY ROTATORY SYSTEM, is built about a NEUTRAL CENTER. It is the indestructible unit around which all that we recognize as matter is built. Immovable itself, it moves all things. Indestructible itself throughout infinity of time, it creates all things. It produced and preserves the incalculable energy of motion of the entire Universe. It bears the unthinkable burden of the mass of the Universe. It is the most wonderful thing Man has discovered in the Universe since he discovered fire.

........Through its inflow of sympathy, through the solar intermediate, the sun, it receives the life flow from the SUPREME NEUTRAL CENTER that enables it to perpetuate its existence. Thus through the outflow from this Supreme Neutral Center that pivoting point of the Universe controls the existence and motion of not only every stellar, solar and planetary mass in space, but also the rotatory vibration, in every individual molecule, intermolecule, etc. through all the subdivisions of matter, thereby sustaining their existence and motion with the life flow.

..........No machine heretofore constructed has been made with a neutral center. This conception of mechanics has never before dawned on man's thought field. Had this been done, perpetual motion would have become a demonstrated fact. Were a machine so constructed as to use its properties, an introductory impulse would suffice to run it for centuries

[Maximumgravity1]

Nat,

Thanks for the info, some new sites to mull over.

It appears by the silence that people are reading and thinking...LOL

I too went back through some old links (for barbosi, sorry most of them are dead, rehashes, or irrelevent), and re-read some things trying to get to the base and start with a firm foundation.  In my mind it is becomiing apparent that what has been said about mistakenly identifying magnetism, electron flow and electricity is ever more bluring the lines, and I am begining to see all current flow as just an exchange of magnetic field flow - in the coils, in the core, in the air, in the wire - it is all just at various levels of resistance and ease of flow - which I guess is the point. 

In checking an old link, I had found an interesting patent by Daniel McFarland Cook (http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm).  I believe the author of the site made a few too many assumptions and that is why he failed to reproduce the experiment, but I have been unable to get my mind off of this and on to anything else for the last few days, so I had to get back to basics of how this device would work - at the "flux" or "field" or "individual magnet" level.

I went back through Leedskanlin's "Magnetic Current" text, several things poped out to me in regards to this thread, the PMH, ERFINDERS diagram, and the Cook pattent.  Since all of these deal with flow via induction, that is the areas that caught my attention.  In short, there was one basic truth, that seems overly obvious upon first reading, but most of his experiments and remainder of the text deals with this one statement:

"Magnetic currents are made by concentrating. then dividing and then shifting the existing North and South Pole individual magnets from one place to another."

This takes on subtle nuances in his explanations of how flow occurs, but it all revolves around concentration, division, then shifting the flow ( and in many cases the individual poles).  This smacks of the point that ERFINDER was pushing with neccesity of the 8 neutrals and instantaneous pole reversals with simultaneous flux flow in, out and within the same plane...we have concentration (the magnet, battery and capacitor), flow (because the magnet is in a circle, all flux flow radiates through the edges of the magnet on the same plane and will be spun), and shifting the flow (I believe all done through the primary and secondaries and makes me wonder if the spinning of the magnet is necessary)

"...When currents reverse they reverse the magnet poles in the coil..."

"...When you were making the small magnets with a single copper wire you wasted too many North and South Pole individual magnets. You only got in the steel wire very small part of the magnets that came out of the copper wire. You are still wasting the North and South Pole magnets. You do not get one-half of the magnets in the steel or iron bar from those which are in the coil.

To get more magnet out of a coil put the coil in steel or iron tube, then the tube outside the coil will be a magnet the same as the coil's core, but the magnet poles will be opposite. it means at the same coil end if the core end is North Pole the tube end will be South Pole. In this way you will get almost again as much magnet out of the coil and in the core and tube. You can do better yet, join one end of the coil's core end with the same metal, joining core with tube. make two holes in end of metal for the coil wire ends to go out, fasten a ring on top, now you have the most effigy client electric magnet for lifting purposes. It wastes no magnets that come from your battery or dynamo..."

"...All currents are made in the same way by filling the coil and iron core with North and South Pole individual magnets and then giving enough time for the magnets to get out and then start over again..."

"...Now you see those little individual magnets ran out of the U shape magnet and ran in the soft iron core, but the soft iron core never held the magnets, it pushed them out..."

"...As soon as those little individual magnets get pushed out of the soft iron core then they run in the coil. When they run in the coil they are in bulk form. The coil's part is to divide those little individual magnets from bulk form in small paths. The coil is not necessary to make magnetic currents. Currents can be made with a single wire. The coil is necessary to increase the amount and strength of the currents..." 

"When the magnets that are in bulk form enter the coil then the coil divides them in small paths.... Now the wire in the coil is one continuous magnet. One side of the wire is South Pole and the other North Pole. Now we have those little North and South Pole individual magnets in the wire, but they are not running in the way we want. They are running across the wire. We want the magnets to run through the wire lengthwise, but there is only one way to do it, we have to increase the number of those North and South Pole individual magnets. To do it the coil will have to approach and enter the U shape magnet, but when the coil reaches the middle of the U shape magnet the limit is there so the running of the currents stop. In the core and the coil there is plenty of those little magnets, but they stopped to run through the wire length wise, now they run only across the coil's wire, to make the magnets run in the wire lengthwise again the coil will have to get away from the U shape magnet. As soon as the coil begins to move away from the U shape magnet. then those little North and South Pole individual magnets begin to run again through the wire length-wise, but in opposite direction until the magnets in the iron core are gone."

"...When the individual North and South pole magnets are running through a wire lengthwise they are running in slant and whirling around while running ahead..."

"...It is well known that it is many times easier for the magnets to run in metal than in air, now you see when the magnets run in the wire they hesitate to run out of the wire across the same way as they came in, so more of the new magnets are coming in the wire crosswise, then they can get out crosswise, so they get pushed out through the wire lengthwise.  Now you know how the alternating magnetic currents are made..."

"...The reason I call the results of North and South Pole magnet's functions magnetic currents and not electric currents or electricity is the electricity is connected too much with those non-existing electrons. If it had been called magneticity then I would accept it.  Magneticity would indicate that it has a magnetic base and so it would be all right.

I know Leedskalnin is a bit basic and simplistic in his descriptions, but to me that seems an ideal re-starting point.  I promise my posts will start getting shorter.

[nat1971a]

Hi,

The key points to read & understand as I see it are (and this is directed at the magnet ring as this appears to be the missing piece of the puzzle):-

1. the definition, concept & process of a neutral point or neutral centre or void or bloch wall or neutral polarity - they are all the same thing to me
2. the concept of path of least resistance
3. magnetic current flows from the north pole to the south pole
4. the definition and process of implosion and how that relates to vortices

If one can focus on these 4 points and apply it to the magnet ring then it should slowly become clear what the process is and how it works as it has for me. Mind you I dont think I understand all of it but some of it. And a lot more research is still required.

It will also help to temporarily forget about mainstream principles while applying and thinking about the above points. It may also involve a lot of thinking as it has for me.
It will help to think of the magnet ring as a body of water and to think of the individual magnets like Leedskalnin did and how that relates and forms a vortex.

It appears that this knowledge has been with us for a long time but the information is scattered all over the place and people have been refering to the same things but using different names and hence can be confusing.

Regards,

N.

[nat1971a]

This will help also. Build the vortex bottle using two water bottles and give it whirl a couple of times. Then relate that to the magnet ring and think of the magnet ring as a body of water and the individual magnets are floating in there.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/vtxbottle.htm

[nat1971a]

To clarify point 4....when i say implosion .....i mean implosion & explosion (centripetal & centrifugal)