Resonnant circuits in cascade.

[thrival]

Magnetoelastic:

You said:

(sigh).  Your equation E=Pf does not contain Plancks constant, how can you assert that you can discover something about Plancks constant in an equation that has nothing to do with Plancks constant?

Back to Physics 101.  Energy = Joules, Power = watts = joules per second.  Frequency = cycles per second.
Power x Frequency = joule-cycles per second squared, NOTjoules.

This proves nothing about zero-point energy.

QED  -  NOT.

Uhh, everything you said above is correct, as far as it goes, but I'm not about to show you what you're missing.

and...

When the testatika inventors publish a paper in a peer-reviewed journal, like Randell Mills, or publish a book describing theory of operation, like Joe Newman and T Henry Moray (for crying out loud!)  it will be easier to take seriously.

_Nature_ is purist and anal, to anthropomorphize.  F = MA, and there is no 'fuzzy physics'. (Except, perhaps, quantum mechanics).

The methernitha community and many free energy inventors alive and past, are beyond you. To publish in your reviews would
only add to your already over-inflated egos, suggesting or inferring an authority you don't have. You are not their peers. Many
have already "published" in the global patent archives, and you had the least incentive to learn something, could go there if you
can raise a finger to click a mouse. And it's not even necessary to understand a thing fully to USE it. I mean look at all the crap
written in scholarly journals about gravity, yet have yet to see one published academic demonstrate a practical anti-gravity engine.
Now water-wheels have worked fine for centuries. Gravity is very reliable, even if Hawkings et al, think they understand it.

But the testatika isn't hard to figure out because engineers have visited the community and posted lovely exploded
diagrams. The truth is out and here it is: electrostatic wheel feeds cascade capacitor that feeds resonant stage. There. Are
you satisfied? I thought not.

[magnetoelastic]

Uhh, everything you said above is correct, as far as it goes, but I'm not about to show you what you're missing.

Won't - or can't?

[thrival]

Won't, because you're boring and my proof is proprietary. But take heart--
there's plenty of other public domain stuff you can glean principles from
when you overcome your ego fatness.

[magnetoelastic]

There are still iconoclasts and maverics within the world of electronics and physics who dare to try to shake the foundations of science as we know it.  I would point to Ivor Catt, Tom Van Flandern, and Harold Aspden as prime examples (and worthy of further reading by the visitors here).  They, however, are well-versed enough in their respective fields that they command the respect (if not agreement) of those who challenge their assertions.  They have earned their credibility because they have the ability to logically defend their hypotheses using the tools of classical science.  None of them need resort to defensive snarkiness as an alternative for logical rigor.

I would also point to the example of Stanford Ovshinksy, founder of Ovonics, who despite being self taught, became a leading expert in the field of amorphous semiconductors - a technology which at the time was viewed as impossible.  He achieved this through his own research, hard work, and following established scientific procedure, and triumphed despite heavy criticism of his ideas.  His is an example that should be emulated by the OU community.  Compare his demeaner - and credibility - to Joe Newman, or Dennis Lee.

[magnetoelastic]

Won't, because you're boring ..... ego fatness.

(sigh).  You should realize by now that lobbing ad hominem attacks is a tantamount admission of a depletion of intellectual ammunition.  Or, as my ex-wife's shrink used to say, "The one who yells loudest - sounds wrong-est!"