Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


Nuclear Resonat Battery test soon to come

Started by pomodoro, September 28, 2014, 08:06:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

profitis

You should be examining f.e.t. too.field enhanced thermionic emissions of uranium.

pomodoro

The increase in charged emission is supposed to be measured by an increase in the Q.  I will rig up the geiger counter underneath the coil to check the difference. However a bigger problem has surfaced.  To put some descent power through the coil, I have a 15kV 100pF capacitor being charged up to about 9 kV and a spark gap which discharges into the coil.  The big problem is that the circuit that once had a Q of 150 now is lucky to have a Q of 10. The reason being that the spark gap chews up all the power. So instead of a massive current peak through the coil, the spark acts as a resistor.  How do I get over this hurdle?  Using a mouse trap as a fast switch didnt help either.

profitis

The goal is to basicly hysterisis the paramagnetic domains in the salt to the point that the atoms get angry,unstable.I'm not sure if it will even be registerable on the Q-scope but might be registerable on the geiger.

Kator01

Hello folks,

just was busy with other things but I do not forget this topic here.

No difference ? I see a distinct difference but not where I expected it.

You have to look at the envelope of the damped oscillation
The nourane-oscillation shwows a more rugged or better irregular damping.
See edited pic.

The urane-socillation is much more smooth.

But in order to be sure about this one would nee a similar nitride wich is non-radioactive, because using a crystal
as core-material might offer some unsuspected effects.

I agree with profitis : any of those inventors like moray, Floyd Sweet, Stanley Meyer etc can not be trusted because the CIA has taken over the control of information presented at the web and elsewhere.
This is the reason why we have to be the pioneers again ( reinventing the wheel) no other way. Lot of work

By the way, pomodoro, why do you use such a high voltage burst as the effect might be well
hidden under this powerful energy-level you apply here ?

I would use the rc-trigger-method presented in the german paper. trigger with an squarewave-signal and use a
copper-coil ( 3 windings max ) as a trigger-coil - magnetic loose coupling to your LC-tank.

Edit: some other user posted this here in teh Helium4-Thread ( because Profitis talked about beryllium )
http://www.qsl.net/k0ff/Manipulating%20Neutrons%20in%20the%20Home%20Rad%20Lab/

Kator01

pomodoro

Thanks for the help kator and profitis but after trying many more experiments including some with thorium compounds I was unable to notice anything OU. If Brown really did build a NRB then the secret died with him.
After a small break I will tackle the Correa abnormal discharge tubes, as the patents are quite detailed. Keep an eye out for that one in a few weeks, as I work my way to building one of Morays sparking condensers.