Gyroscopic Inertia Generator

[Scorch]

None of the coil pairs are actually supposed to be twisted. If they appear twisted; it might just be the small, low resolution, photograph.
Or merely some twisting of the last two inches of all the pairs from each set just because that's how I tied them all together and soldered the final connections but do not know if this a good or a bad thing to have the last two inches of these leads twisted. 

The instructions do not indicate the pairs should be twisted at all and, in fact, includes a photograph of merely tying them all together as straight lengths of wire and only two conductors for all twelve coils to be connected and permanently crimped only after assembling the stators and rotors.

In the interest of merely replicating the original experiment; I intend to stick to the original blueprint as much as possible.
The only thing I did different, in this electrical aspect of the stators, was to tie them separately with two separate leads for each stator so they may actually be separated in the event the device has to be disassembled.

Not sure if I want to worry about EMF shielding... and if we desire to gather energy from the source field (including stray EMF), that we might be able to collect and use, do we want to actually shield the wiring? 

Is it possible that some people actually get better results of collecting 'energy from the vacuum' because their prototype wiring is a very sloppy pile of spaghetti everywhere?
I have no idea but do believe JB has reasons for using Litz wire for certain applications to collect more energy from the vacuum-ether-dark-source field or whatever they call it these days.

*shrugs*

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch:

From the picture it looks like the wire pairs from the far pick-up coils are not twisted.  It's a minor thing but if they were twisted it would reduce any pick-up of EMF that is extraneous to the the main signal from the pick-up coil itself.  Just like networking cable.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Scorch:

You shouldn't buy into JB's line about "energy from the vacuum."  Same thing about "open systems vs. closed systems."  That's the real disinformation.  All that you really have is energy flowing out of the battery and wiggling it's way through the coils, capacitors, rotor, generator, and so on.  Most of the time it reaches a final destination of heat.  Nor do you have to worry about any MIB bogeymen like you have posted "warnings" about half a dozen times or so.

Is it possible that some people actually get better results of collecting 'energy from the vacuum' because their prototype wiring is a very sloppy pile of spaghetti everywhere?

I think that's called an "argument from ignorance."  It doesn't get you very far.  Just like Captain Zero stated that there may be a "magic box" inside the alleged GDS generator.

MileHigh

[synchro1]

Compare this magnet backed magnetite (Fe3O4) powder core GAP motor coil to Doug Konzen's magnet backed ferrite core output coil:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxrJoGZy1to

He shorts one of these magnet backed coils in this video and gets the same rotor speed up Doug Konzen demonstrates:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UlwdLXO3AI&list=UU3v-1RhhS50L5H2_FYFFBqQ

@Milehigh,

You're the Bogeyman!

[Scorch]

uh-huh; whatever. 

I accept all your claims upon proof of your claims. 
Is there a verifiable proof of claim, beyond a mere opinion or disagreement, the "energy from the vacuum" educational DVD series (38 DVDs so far) is 'disinformation'?

With regards to nomenclature-
Please replace "energy from the vacuum" with whatever your preferred term may be such as: "source field" or "torsion field physics" or "dark energy" or "ether energy" or "magic" or "pyramid energy" or "flower of life" or "power of God" or "sacred geometry" or "Grand Unified Field" or "flux fields", gravitons, tachyons, etheron energy, God particles, solitons, quantum energy, the philosopher's stone, Dragon Power, gravity waves, dual currents, tree of life or whatever else they call it these days. . . 

Take your pick or create your own term for IT.   

Albert Einstein called it "Inertia Ether".
Nikola Tesla called it "Radiant Energy".
Tom Bearden calls it "Energy from the vacuum".
MileHigh calls it "disinformation"...

Doesn't matter! It's ALL the same stuff!!
The fabric of space... that which powers the universe, galaxies, solar systems, gravity, electron spin, thought processes, power creation and all life. 

TED talk-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhBymLCRIU8

Articles or web sites-
www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/tesla-vs-einstein-the-ether-the-birth-of-the-new-physics
www.coralcastlecode.com
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-physics-mystery-solitons-vortex.html
http://crossingtheeventhorizon.webs.com
http://resonance.is

Open source study forum-
http://vortexspace.org/

Source field investigations-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR-klTa1y54
www.furaffinity.net/journal/6131859/

Experimental kits-
www.quantamagnetics.com

Kindest regards;

}:>

Scorch:

You shouldn't buy into JB's line about "energy from the vacuum."  Same thing about "open systems vs. closed systems."  That's the real disinformation.  All that you really have is energy flowing out of the battery and wiggling it's way through the coils, capacitors, rotor, generator, and so on.  Most of the time it reaches a final destination of heat.  Nor do you have to worry about any MIB bogeymen like you have posted "warnings" about half a dozen times or so.

I think that's called an "argument from ignorance."  It doesn't get you very far.  Just like Captain Zero stated that there may be a "magic box" inside the alleged GDS generator.

MileHigh

[TinselKoala]

There is a big difference between a "TEDx" talk, like the "Free Energy" video above, and a true TED Talk. It is a misrepresentation to try to legitimize the content of the TEDx presentation as a "TED Talk".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TED_%28conference%29#TEDx

You can find all kinds of nonsense in TEDx presentations. You are shooting yourself in the foot, twice, by posting that particular video of nonsense. It is not a "TED Talk" and it makes false claims for which there is no evidence.

Why don't you ask Marko Rodin, or any of the Rodin Coil claimants, where they get their electricity? I know where they get it and so do you. Not a single one of them has ever shown any real evidence of a single Joule of "free energy" or even any unusual electromagnetic phenomena from a "rodin coil". They are works of art, nothing more.

ETA: Let's review. If you think you have a new "theory" that is different from, say, Quantum Electrodynamics, then you have to be able to show several things.
1. Your new theory has to fully account for everything covered by the old theory -- AND --
2. It must make testable predictions NOT already made by the old theory -- AND --
3. Those predictions must be found to be true, by properly constructed experiments.

So go ahead and demonstrate how "vortex based mathematics"  does these things. Please.  Demonstrate something that a Rodin coil does that cannot be described fully by ordinary A-level electromagnetism. Present something that "vortex based math" predicts that is not predicted by standard physics/maths and then demonstrate that the prediction is accurate.  But of course you cannot.