Nathan Stubblefield Earth battery/Self Generating Induction Coil Replications

[hansvonlieven]

G'day all,

I think we should get Scotty Lang of Leedskalnin.com in on this discussion. This thing with the bi-filar, bi-metal coil is right up his alley and would certainly interest him. I will write to him and invite him into this discussion.

Hans von Lieven

[Pirate88179]

I have a question.  I have been thinking a lot lately (which might be considered dangerous by some) and I want to raise this issue.  We can continue in another topic so as to not clutter this thread, but I will ask it here.  Have I achieved O.U. by lighting an led from an earth battery?  I am obviously not the first, Stubblefield,( and others) localjoe, and the guy on the video with an led in his bathroom, etc.  What I am asking is this:  Is putting some rods in the earth and obtaining electricity (at any measurable amount) O.U.?  I have always thought of O.U. as getting more out of a system than you put in.  If this is the definition, I would say, yes we have.  But, (there is always a but) if true than what about solar power?  Take a few silicon wafers and stick them in the sunlight and...bingo....electricity.  Would solar also be considered O.U.?  If not, why not?

If both questions above are answered in the affirmative, then what is all of the "debate" in science about O.U. being unobtainable by "known" laws?  If the answer to the above questions is no to both, then, what is O.U.?

As I said, this might need another topic created to discuss but, I would like the people working on these experiments with the earth batteries to respond with their opinions.

I am already planning a field trip to Murry, Ky, to check out Stubblefield's museum and possibly view some records and maybe some saved devices.  Thanks.

Bill

[hansvonlieven]

G'day Bill,

If a light burning because of a solar panel is OU then of course you have it.

The problem with OU is that no-one is game to define UNITY !

Without that definition the label might be politically correct though scientifically it is meaningless. Since we do not know how much potential energy is contained in anything ( all we know is what the theoretical maximum of the energy we are CAPABLE of extracting is ) the whole discussion of overunity is academic.

If instead we apply the idea that overunity is extracting more energy than WE put into it then the problem has been solved long ago, all we are trying to do is to find cleaner ways of doing it.

Setting a match to crude oil is extracting more energy than we put into it. We are simply supplying the introductory impulses to liberate that energy.

With water, for instance, we know it is there. It does not respond to lighting a match, we have to be a lot more cunning to extract it.

It's the same all down the line. Energy from nothing is a wank.

Nothing comes from nothing is a philosophical expression of a thesis first argued by Parmenides, often stated in its Latin form: ex nihilo nihil fit. It was true then and it still is.

There is sooooooo much energy lying around out there, all we need to do is gather it. There is simply no need to create it from nothing.

Hans von Lieven

[akashh]

Here's something off the web on Stubblefield:

---

Nathan Stubblefield's observations of natural electrical manifestations led him to consider the taking of "free" electrical energy from the earth. His excessive study of theoretical literature taught that no such advantage could be obtained by using earth batteries. Writers contended that vast amounts of energy could never be used to drive the engine-works of industry by earth battery power. He saw that, unless a new breakthrough in the art could be found, the theoreticians would be correct.

Older linesmen taught Stubblefield about sensitive ground spots: how "uncommonly great" electrical activity had to be patiently searched out. These electrical hot spots, when compared with most adjoining ground, were like electrical oil wells. Finding the "right spot" would do more than simply insure good ground connection for telegraph lines. Certain ground power points could actually power the lines! Motivated toward deeper research by his own natural observations and intuitive sensation, Stubblefield devised several earth batteries. His own peculiar ability to sense earth energies taught that it was vast in quantity, yet untapped by humanity. The means for drawing out the energy could be found!

Stubblefield knew that ground probes, placed into various spots, reveal an amazing degree of electrical activity. These currents varied across any chosen plot of ground. Wet soils often reverse the expected electrical strength; weakening rather than strengthening their magnitude. Stubblefield knew that a proper placement of metallic ground probes could produce stronger currents for use. But he did not anticipate what he then accidentally discovered. His initial experiments involved the development and examination of simple earth batteries: buried metallic arrangements, which produced weak electrolytic power. Mr. Stubblefield observed a strange "earth-charging phenomenon", reporting that the burial of an "earth energy cell" required time to build up charge. During the first phase of this charge building process, the characteristic weak output was observed. This was usually a volt at half an ampere, the general electrolytic output of buried metals.

From his linesman mentors, Stubblefield knew that placement of any grounded metal was the key toward deriving power. If properly placed, the energetic output of his cell would be phenomenal. Finding such a power point, he buried the cell. The process took a week or more to build strength. Once the cell was "saturated", however, it became (in his words) "a conduit of earth charge". This mysterious transition from weak battery to energy conduit required time.

Typical of his curt statements, Mr. Stubblefield simply stated that the fully saturated coil suddenly "manifested an electromotive force far greater than any known wet-cell". This state being achieved, the cell flowed over in "commercial electrical volumes".

He did not claim complete knowledge of the phenomenon. He observed that the activity "reached into weeks and months of continuous work night and day".

Stubblefield envisioned the energy cell as a "plug", drawing out the electrical charge of the ground. The cell coils acted as a lumped conductor. Charge saturated this conductor and flowed up into it, powering any electrically connected appliance. After repeated exhumations, the copper element of these cells was found "not acted on in any perceptible degree ... even after repeated renewals".

Mr. Stubblefield described means by which such cells could be connected in series at short distances from one another. "With these, acting as electrodes ... you draw from the electrical energy of the earth a constant E.M.F. of commercial value". That phrase... "acting as electrodes..." is the heart of the Stubblefield energy cell. It is not a battery. It absorbs and flows over with the stupendous energy of the earth's charge.

This device, an earthed electrode, drew up enough natural electric charge from the earth to operate motors, pumps, arc lamps, and all the components of his ground telephone system. The implementation of his earth energy technology would have changed the nature of American Society, were it permitted free market expression in its day.

Mr. Stubblefield later stated in very plain language that the earth was filled with "an electrical ocean". This electrical ocean was surging with huge "electrical waves" which could be felt, brimming over in certain places. No doubt, he was one who felt the ground energy. Stubblefield sensed that the ground currents arrived in powerful electrical waves. In Stubblefield's visionary approach, the electrical waves permeated the ground. These electrical waves were like ocean waves: ceaselessly surging and cresting over.

---
Source: http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/history/nathan-s.htm

[Localjoe]

Bill ,
     I think we could look at it this way.  As far as im concerned theres two major alternative energy sources available to the public. Solar and Wind. Were delving into a third,  In my eyes,  because done right this baby should be self sufficient and not need  external input to start producing power, just that of a few ground rods.  When i think over unity i think of combining mechanical and electronic ideas to achieve an efficiency greater than 100.00 %

A simple way to start is a magnet motor, most here have dabbled a bit but its defiantly possible.  Bedini theoretically layed it out for folks great maybe not all his designs but in essence the guy has a pulse motor which has a few coils that send bemf pulse while running into a secondary sub system that has a motor and spins what he calls an energizer and we call an alternator to produce a bit of power, he then has a switching setup to charge the battery or cap for the initial motor that way the setup would be self sufficient.. Plus nefb mags weren't as prevalent in the 70's and 80's these magnets have way larger flux densities..  And will probably usher in a new gen of pulse motors as were seeing now.... But I say the most promising things out there to work on, are  This project just because of simplicity and mother earth, The tpu modled after a particle accelerator, and a real working homopolar  motor.  My first experiments were with the homopolar motor and it gives off some sort of plused dc or what not when you run it through a coil.. Awsome blue plasma at night tooo