Universons

[tinu]

Thanks argona369,

I will start experimenting, hopefully as soon as next week.

I fully believe that the first applications will start as soon as possible under the granted patent but those applications will cost heavy money and they will be copyrighted. Meanwhile, well ?let?s say that there are more ways to get to the same results.

The effect on the weighted lever is definitely not a repulsive kick (like Lorentz or something). In supporting this, there is another video (in the protected area) showing that nothing happens with a similar setup but without the ?emitter?, as Mr. Poher calls it.
Also, the force is felt on a distance of 150 meters at least (that distance was tested). No electromagnetic impulse can travel that much and remain coherent. Of course, laser does but this is not laser. In fact, the ?universons beam? crosses through matter (and it accelerates matter) without loosing its properties. Now, that?s really something to reflect upon!

All in all, the effects are genuine and I intend to replicate them by all means under my power.
I can not set-up a cryogenic enclosure and I surely don?t have for the time being the necessary equipments and enough knowledge to bake superconductors but that can be done too. Let?s see what happens in the future.

Respectfully,
Tinu

[argona369]

.

[tinu]

Cliff,

This is not a joke. It may be anything else, but it is not a joke under any circumstances.
And I?m not trying to convince you.

I was reading and working during almost three continuous days through the theory and equations behind it. It holds. There are some approximations and there will be some adjustments to be made in the future (in my view) but most of the equations as well as the logic behind fit together in a nice huge picture, from lab scale to galaxies and beyond. And it starts from electron and sub-atomic particles. Second Newton (F=m*a) is not only theoretically deduced but it is even corrected for already observed deviations at solar scale and at galactic scale. Even the attraction constant (G) is deduced along with F=G*M1*M2/sqr(r). What can I say? This is heavy, serious stuff. No jokes, no fakes, no amateurism, nothing of this kind. Not even a shadow of it.

What I?m doing here, is pointing out toward the right direction in what I believe to change the way humankind will look in matter of years, at most. Free energy is coming along with this discovery. Like I said above, I?m not trying to convince you, but to keep alive (for this very moment) what I consider to be the most promising thread of the moment. (A thread which almost went unnoticed, otherwise). Similar theories exist and, as physicist, I am in direct contact with several of the sharpest and prominent minds of the world today. (I?m not one of them but I try to do my best). Some of them are clearly approaching free energy but their experimental results are still very pale in comparison with what Mr. Poher demonstrates. That?s why Mr. Poher can?t talk with many. What he has discovered and patented is simply overwhelming.

What you see in the two public pages is almost nothing but a glimpse.
It?s fine with me if you are not attracted to the subject.
I will experiment by myself anyway but the effects are soooo small at first that one can not progress with ease. It is though normal that the effects are very small. If it was otherwise, it had been long discovered.

So, what I am doing here for the moment is nothing more than inviting very determined and skilled fellows to join what is supposed to be a team effort. I won?t do it entirely by myself because I most probably can?t do it all along.  I?m specialized in some areas and that?s all. I?m only one person with limited ideas, resources and time.
It?s fine with everyone who doesn?t want to get involved. There is no offense in anyone making his/her own choice.

In the invitation for support and for joining this thread, I started with the tubes section because experiments with tubes are possibly among the successfully approach I foresee achievable in a regular/modest lab or at home.
But this is not the only reason. The tube fellows experiment with tubes mostly because tubes were also pointed by SM. That?s why the tube interest exists right now. Although I don?t see at the very present any connection between SM and Mr. Poher, it is possible that the two have the same deep roots. Anyway, Mr. Poher comes forward with almost everything he had discovered while SM with almost nothing?

For the time being, please let the word spreading around.
I?ll keep this thread alive until more people come together. If a senior member (and good experimentalist) would like to take the lead here, I?ll step back, fully supporting him/her from background.

EnergieLibre, I owe this to you.
Can you tell us more about the subject?
Are you somehow in contact with Mr. Poher?
Can you keep us updated on the evolution in France?
Please tell us more about you and about the subject, if possible.

Tx everyone,
Tinu

[provencale]

Ok tinu let's play together.

I've found this this forum because i'm interested in the Universons. I'm french. I've got a very basic background in physics (bac S or A-level in physics). However i believe that what a fool have understood another fool can understand it as well  .

First i'd like to understand the information and keep what i understood and share it.

Therefore an information structure is needed.

We can keep exchanging ideas on this forum-thread and create other structure like a wiki-universons and/or a universons-mailing-list. What do you think about it ?

And i've got a question regarding the theory :
The universons are an isotropic flux moving at speed light. When an object is moving in one direction, will it "capture" more universons in this direction ? i guess yes.

to simplify the situation :

Be A and B , 2 sources of universons and C a universon-collector between A and B , moving toward B :
A____C------>B
C is expected to collect/pass through more universons coming from B. Is it right ?

P.S : PM me if you want my e- address.

[tinu]

Welcome aboard, Provencale!

I apologize for not being able to speak the French language.  I barely read some, with a dictionary close to me?

Regarding the wiki-universon structure, I really don?t now what to do at present. This is a public thread. I don?t want to impinge the life-time work and the intellectual proprietary rights of Mr. Poher in any way, neither to create any legal difficulties or embarrassing situations for overunity.com.
Yet, as soon as Mr. Poher will conduct a net-survey about Universons, I am pretty certain that he will find about us and hopefully he will see that there is a large interest and an ongoing and well-intended effort in replicating his discovery and effects (which should be all-right from all points of view: legally, morally etc.). Hopefully, Mr. Poher will then take the right decisions is supporting us in the ways he will consider appropriate. Those decisions must logically depend on our overall behavior, respect and decency. I therefore suggest everyone posting on the subject to keep all of these aspects in mind.

However, my personal file about Universons is currently 350+ pages and counting. I will not post the pdf files inhere, because it is clearly stated that any use of those materials or part of them without the written agreement of the author is strictly prohibited. I do not have such an agreement. I therefore recommend those files not being posted by somebody else either (unless the agreement is granted, of course) but kept for personal reading and for personal use. All documents are very well written and you already know enough physics to follow them, I promise. All it takes is some patience. Some explanations/files are in French language and I suppose they are much easier to read for you.

What do we have for now is the possibility for every one of us interested in the topics to create an account on http://www.universons.com (the access is automatically granted) and to lecture the files and/or to locally save them for later reading.

We also have the patent, which is a public document and I think I?ll copy it here in a short while, if no justified objections from the site administrator or from other members exist. By the way, the patent is in French only. Other than that language aspect, it is very self-explanatory. You may want to read it first. Also, if you?ll accept for the future, some of us (the English language speakers) might have some questions about the exact meaning of various words.

The question you have is very profound!
To my understanding, the answer is yes, it will capture more universons. But that would be just for a tiny fraction of time (when you start accelerating the C body). Then, the captured and emitted universons balance, becoming equal.
Actually, there are several close related questions that I couldn?t find myself the right answer up to now. One would be: what is the difference felt by C if a) A and B are massive masses, present there and b) there are no masses present at all around C. In a), there is an anisotropic flux of universons between A->B and between B->A; so, the ?wind? is blowing harder on the A-B direction; but this is not a ?regular wind?; it blows from the front and from the back in the same time. (It?s like an electric current: electrons flow in one direction and ions or holes in the other direction, except that here we have universons in both directions and they do not cancel each other). Anyway, the question is: what would be the effect of the presence of this ?wind? on C body? According to the equations of Mr. Poher, C-body should weight more in a) than in b). Slightly more, but still measurable.

I?m not sure I?m correct in my above deductions and that?s why we need to firstly discuss among us, and then to get in contact with Mr. Poher himself or with one of his closest team members.

But for now I still have to read&study more.

Tinu

P.S. I?ll surely need your e-mail (tx for offering it) but lets collect and exchange contacts when a group nucleus forms here, ok?