Kapanadze and other FE discussion

[blueplanet]

IEEE is not a corporate body.  If you have difficulty in downloading those papers you can seek help from the corresponding authors. Or just use the DOI number of the paper to retrieve the original copy in the internet archives.


My partner from Ukraine and I are among those who have contributed to IEEE but I am not an expert or savior. The reason why I have to be here is because the reputation of this alternative energy is getting too low. Nowadays everyone can claim to be an expert in the field of free energy.   Even the copy cats having no contribution to the body of the knowledge can be in charge of this field. All the functional OU machines are now being labelled as scams. Whenever a real researcher comes up with a really functional devices, these greedy trolls become so agitated to an extent that they need to kill the researchers.


Take no offence. If I were given an mission to save this planet (which I admit I am not qualified to), my first priority would be to save those honest contributors to the body of knowledge who are starving to death. I would not be interested in giving a treat to the greedy trolls who have chosen to destroy humanity.

BP your bedside manner is atrocious and rude and your hyperlink points to a commercial/corporate charging information center.and does nothing to help people on this DIY thread.

The thing is Wesleys Film covers a lot of ground in his coverage, the first part is obviously about a different concept ' surface waves.
I was asking you about the Don Smith, Dally, Ruslan device. Since your 'Handle' leads one to assume your a 'Save the planet', 'Guru'
Perhaps I should have made that clearer.

What a wonderful helpful being to society you really are!

AG

[Belfior]

Frequency

Hmm those values are so close to powers of 2 (2,4,8,16,32,64 etc) that I wonder if the startup freq is inaccurate? When all the freqs match powers of 2 then you got the starting freq right

[Belfior]

It is customary in science when someone is submitting a scientific paper for peer review that readers
will respond back with frank and sometimes harsh criticisms. Sometimes the criticisms are
valid and sometimes the criticisms are not valid at all, but if that which is being submitted for review
has real merit it should be able to stand up to close examination. No one ever gets to the truth by
pussyfooting around it. I don't think harsh criticisms are really ever necessary however, but being frank
I think is necessary if a person really is interested in getting to the truth, so I try to be frank when
giving people feedback. 

I don't think that it has been convincingly demonstrated by anyone in the several posted videos here where LED lights are being
lit up due to a strong HV EM field, that some unusual wave type or form of energy is being generated in those demonstrations.
Not saying it is necessarily not the case. I am saying I don't think it has been convincingly shown so far, IMO.
If someone thinks there is good reason to think that an unusual type of wave is being generated in those demonstrations,
then I would suggest that they consider taking a step back and try to think of ways to conduct tests that show that those
special waves or unusual form of energy they think they are generating really does have unusual properties that
differ from 'normal'  EM fields and transverse EM waves. Think of ways that those unusual properties can be tested and
demonstrated in a test setup, would be my suggestion.

It is known that sparkgaps and corona discharge in general will generate high frequency radiation in the range of UV thru X-rays
and even higher in the range of gamma radiation, but the X-Rays and other radiation such as gamma radiation are typically
not at a high enough level to be dangerous unless the corona discharge itself is really high energy. If you think a setup similar
to what Wesley has described is producing very high frequency radiation of some kind, you could possibly employ a
spectrum analyzer that goes well into the GHz range and/or a radiation detector to detect alpha/beta/gamma radiation levels.
A really good high frequency range spectrum analyzer is probably quite expensive however.

I have already commented previously that I have seen some potentially promising results in the past in
some of my tests regarding combining two waveforms at different phase angles to each other (such as at 90 degrees).
In one of my test setups I was able to see the same sort of unusual extra 90 degree phase shift occur
in the output waveform when the two input waves were combined that Ruslan had demonstrated in one of his early demonstrations.
What I found is that there is one extra 'feature' I needed to employ to see that effect at the output. I have not heard anyone
mention that extra 'requirement' so far in terms of how to apply it to this particular type of arrangement. I have been hesitant to mention that openly
so far because there is often so much mudslinging and BS flying here, and also times in the past when I have pointed out some other experimental observations
I thought were interesting here it is either completely ignored or one or more people make some braying donkey comments in response. 
I can fully understand why people hold back on sharing some stuff like that when so many are just here to troll and bray. Ha ha.   

My testing so far (in the last couple of years) was done at too low a power level to be able to draw any definite
conclusions at all about whether what I was seeing could produce anything along the lines of OU, but it seems
to at least hold some possible potential. Because of those tests I have done, what Wesley has detailed about
combining two waveforms at ninety degrees seems to me to very possibly hold some real potential, since I have
seen some interesting things as well when experimenting along the same lines. I think Wesley may very possibly be
on the right track in regards to that, but the surface wave stuff and requirement for a special dielectric
arrangement I am not convinced about yet. I am currently working on a unrelated concept I have of my own
design, not related to this stuff, which so far is not producing even near OU, but it should be increasing efficiency at
least compared to a more conventional approach, but still need to do a lot of testing and think of ways to try to improve
the setup to have any chance at OU. No one ever said this kind of research should be easy going. Ha ha. Stick with it guys.
I think you may be closing in more on Mr. Kapanadze. Just maybe need to put the pieces together now in the right way. So easy, right? Ha ha. 
Maybe your lucky day is coming soon...

I think in any research there is always room for criticism, when it is based on some grounds. If people criticize just because this goes against their belief, then it is just BS. I feel that people get also offended way to easily, when they hear any criticism. I think we are at a point where any new invention comes from either intuition or pure luck. We have made up all these "laws of the universe" and we don't even understand magnetism yet. I think everybody should go to the roots when this phenomena was found and start from the ground up. They need to understand what is actually happening and not learn electromagnetism from a book that says something like "PM cannot do work"

Here is my logic again:

1. If there is free energy, there is active suppression in place
     - it has already been found before and energy industry needs it go stay hidden

2. If this suppression has vast resources, then all school books, science and schools are tainted
    - Energy industry will use their resources to keep it hidden. Best way is to teach something that checks out (math), but has little or nothing to do with reality. Some things you lie about and some things
       you just don't tell. You make it a religion and you call others crazy.

3. If we were put on this planet and we need energy, the universe will provide it for us without us destroying this planet. Radiation (ambient energy) from space, Sun being the largest contributor, seems to be the way to go. It supplies almost all energy we got here in different forms.
    - Looking at the devices we already have, it seems to me that we already know how to disturb the ambient and collect energy. It is just hidden behind jargon and we do not realize it

4. Energy can't be destroyed or created. Seems to me like it was all created in the Big Bang, so it is everywhere. Sometimes in matter and sometimes heat&light, but always in a vibration. When last of those vibrations diminishes, this universe collapses to a singularity. We do stupid things to the energy like dissipate backEMF with a diode over the coil. People really need to think what they are doing. They are repeating stuff they were taught in school without realizing, what they are actually doing.
    - L2 in a transformer already collects energy from the universe. You are told it comes from L1 and you can't ever get 100% conversion. Well the only reason is that there is a return cable in L1. You owe
      that energy immediately and since ideal components or wires are hard to come by, you always get less tan 100%
    - same thing with caps. Displacement current is energy from the ambient. You create imbalance between the plates and the universe tries to compensate. What every you gain, you put back into the negative terminal

@Void: many people here do not want to understand for various reasons. Somebody just wants the device and schematics. I can understand if this feels a bit rude towards the inventor. Some people are just trolls. They say nonononono and then some BS or try to get an argument started. some people are after money and they won't give you the actual secret. They might give you a schematic that is missing the principal bit and they hope you fix the problem he could not. Then he applies for a patent and tries to get rich, but he gets killed. If somebody thinks that people would not murder anybody because of free energy, please fill your pockets with rocks and walk into a lake. Save everybody some time

What I really want is a forum that behaves like Aristotle said "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." but it seems those are hard to come by. That would be a forum where intuition ignites the intuition of others. Ideas would be proved on a bench and not by saying "everybody knows, that you cannot go faster than light"

[stivep]

Here is the link :
https://patents.google.com/patent/US4751515A/en

Wesley

[Hoppy]

It is customary in science when someone is submitting a scientific paper for peer review that readers
will respond back with frank and sometimes harsh criticisms. Sometimes the criticisms are
valid and sometimes the criticisms are not valid at all, but if that which is being submitted for review
has real merit it should be able to stand up to close examination. No one ever gets to the truth by
pussyfooting around it. I don't think harsh criticisms are really ever necessary however, but being frank
I think is necessary if a person really is interested in getting to the truth, so I try to be frank when
giving people feedback. 

On the subject of being frank and honest, I would like to know how electrically efficient are the demonstrations in Wesley's 'bombshell" video?