Wanna do something useful on FE? Study a lot

[Kator01]

Bugler,

your answer tells me that you have not understood the principle, Dr Jeong is speaking about and therefore you should abide by the principle of your topic-name: study a lot ... and not reject the idea before you grasped the key-points.

Even, if you neglect the self-energy.. the main point is the asymmetrical capacitor.
The asymetry of a spherical condensor is the main reason for the high electron-pressure because of the smaller area of the inner sphere. The amount of energy to load two condensers ( a standard cylinder-wrapped foil-condenser and a sphere-condenser ) is equal but the charge-density on the inner sphere is much bigger thus leading to more kinetic energy of the electron-flow which means more output-energy This pressure - if let go - can not develop the necessary kinetic energy for cop > 1 if it is directed through a resistor or ohmic load.
For best practice it must be released through a plasma-device

Regards

Kator01

[forest]

Kator01


What about time ?  Is that time of releasing energy the same in both examples ? Interesting....

[tim123]

It is pointless trying to do something useful in FE without a good background in science & engineering. If you don't understand the basics of electromagnetism, etc you are just losing your time. A deep study of official science is a must.

Hi Bugler
I tend to agree with your position, but I think it's a complex situation... Here's the logic as I see it:

- Official science teaches that OU is not possible. So, to believe in OU - you * must believe official science is wrong *, or at least incomplete.

- To go through a scientific training - while not believing what you're being taught - would be very difficult, if not impossible. Many millions of people start off studying the official science - and they tend to conclude that OU is impossible.

- So (generally speaking) you * have to start off * as non-scientifically-trained to even bother in the first place. So it is inevitable that most people will be scientific dunces - when they start out. However...

- When you start experimenting, you find much of official science is the best model available, and you start to use it and learn it.

- When you have learnt a decent amount of science, you realise just how clever good scientists & engineers are. If you're not in awe of people like Faraday, Maxwell, Tesla etc. it's because you don't yet understand what they did.

- Genuine searching for OU * inevitably leads to studying official science *, but it doesn't work the other way around - official science doesn't prompt you to search for OU. If it did - these forums would be a different place for sure.

- I personally think searching for OU is a very healthy thing to do - mentally, emotionally and spiritually. You have to learn by facing up to having been wrong in the past. Most people *never* do that... Facing up to being wrong is necessary for learning, and the better you get at it - the faster you learn. Ultimately, we're here to learn about ourselves.

- Official science, is very accomplished, but it is still fundamentally incomplete. Lacking a Grand Unified Theory, science is only able to describe effects, but not causes.

- The only thing that has remained constant about science over the centuries - is that it has always been proved wrong by subsequent generations of scientists. (Or at least incomplete / an approximation)

- So, given science's lack of completeness, who can say which parts are essential learning, and which are just dogma?

- For example: If RAR Energia's gravity powered machine works - as they claim it does - then how does that fit with current mechanical engineering knowledge? Where does it leave Newtonian mechanics? (That's a genuine question, I'd like to know...)

- The greatest scientists have always seen reality in a fundamentally different way than everyone else. So, perhaps there is some validity in ignoring official science - but only if you're aware enough to come up with something better... I think that's exactly what people like Keely, Schauberger, Walter Russell, Tesla did.

BTW, have you heard of the Fifth Element, and do you have any favorite Unified Theories?
http://www.halexandria.org/dward124.htm

Regards
Tim

[TechStuf]

 
Much truth there, Tim.

It is clear that the greater viewpoint comes from without organized science.

At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,
because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed
them to little children. Matthew 11:25

There is something wholesomely gratifying that history is seasoned with many such examples.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMwEhrRmIVE

http://www.gustave-whitehead.com/

In fact, one may not be indicted in saying that the great majority of the most influential inventions in history came from minds that were molded outside the indoctrination centers of "higher learning".

I wonder, how much "original thinking" is really done on our planet....
And how much of it actually comes to us through that "wireless connection" we all share, but most are taught to ignore?

One has only to look at key technologies at key points in history and the stories of just how and when they fortuitously came to be....

In order to expand one's viewpoint about a good many things.


TS

[profitis]

and quantessential to beginners for a serious quest for the frei energie is a thourough understanding of the basics first.you have to build a pyramid of knowledge upon the most fundamental laws of physics,the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.you have to know what you are looking for before you look and many a misjudgement or error can be eliminated this way.im an expert in the area of electrochemistry for example and yet i still make many a misjudgement in experiments.you have to be ruthlessly self-critical but self-criticality is quite useless without the basic knowledge.@bugler yes unfortunately when money and power and greed cross the path of science then sparks fly against truth,usualy but not always.