If an Earth battery were to be constructed beneath power lines, would it recapture power lost by radiation?
Quote from: czimborbryan on January 17, 2010, 12:58:09 PM
If an Earth battery were to be constructed beneath power lines, would it recapture power lost by radiation?
The frequency of the overhead lines and the earth's natural frequencie(s) are different. If I'm not mistaken, unless there's some frequency resonance, there should be no interaction at all.
--Lee
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on February 04, 2010, 09:10:51 PM
The frequency of the overhead lines and the earth's natural frequencie(s) are different. If I'm not mistaken, unless there's some frequency resonance, there should be no interaction at all.
--Lee
I agree.
Bill
As I understand it, the draw from the line is insignificant amounts of current with moderate amounts of voltage.
I would try this, but I fear controversy.
I think the idea would be to use a coil for a source, and an iron rod which is grounded, I suppose you would need to place the coil parallel to the line, and have a wire off the core to ground. This may help conduction, but any significant losses CAN be detected by the power company, ..so installing something permanent is a bad idea ...for experimental purposes..
and legally, ..honestly, anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter, the transmitter assumes that the waves will be harnessed by something, therefore, ...it seems logical that the electromagnetic energy from it is intended to be free.
Good luck arguing that though, ..audio is one thing, hertzian chaos is another.
We are subjected to it, therefore we should be able to utilize it, otherwise it is unwanted, and therefore harassment of sorts. Such things have to be proven with malice, though, and intent.
Ahha, jadaro2600, you get my point.
Instead of drawing more power from the lines than what would normally be radiated or lost, I would like to recover the loss - for free and in no way be taking anything that wasn't lost to the electric company to begin with. Kind of like scavenging the decomposing energy that runs over my property.
Please explain this.
"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter, the transmitter assumes that the waves will be harnessed by something, therefore, ...it seems logical that the electromagnetic energy from it is intended to be free."
Quote from: czimborbryan on February 05, 2010, 05:42:24 PM
Please explain this.
"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter, the transmitter assumes that the waves will be harnessed by something, therefore, ...it seems logical that the electromagnetic energy from it is intended to be free."
Yes, I don't think this is totally true. I am bombarded with cell tower waves yet if I receive them, it is against the law. Same with the wi-fi signals from my neighbors and also their cordless phone signals.
I do agree that, morally anyway, if the power company see this as a loss and is basically "discarding" it, then there should be no problem. I have seen several youtube videos where folks walk under high tension power line holding a 48" tube that lights right up. In my opinion, that guy was not stealing anything as those lines ran in his back yard and the power is radiating out there whether if used or not.
Just my thoughts.
Bill
Quote from: czimborbryan on February 05, 2010, 05:42:24 PM
Please explain this.
"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter,..."
Take a look at this:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Smith.pdf
Refer to pages 117-119.
Smith can receive resonant energy from coils surrounding a transmitter. On page 3-26 of the manuscript, it's said any number of coils can be placed around the transmitter. That's potentially unlimited power. It doesn't load the transmitter, according to Smith's paper.
--Lee
OK, now I'm sure there's some genius hillbilly out there living under high tension power lines and running his entire house off the radiation.
Well, the idea here comes from the fact that anything transmitted can be received, there's nothing stopping this from happening except laws ...which, I argue aren't valid, because I'm getting them now, I'm just not interpreting ... therefore, the interpretation is illegal, not the device that receives them unless the device interprets them.
Trees receive radio waves, among ALL other types of electromagnetic radiation, but a radio station cannot sue a tree farm for losses in electrical signals because of it. Argue all you may, but that fact is the farmer could claim that the signals are unwanted - and then blame some malady on it, prove it circumstantially or scientifically, and be done with it.
Something which does not interpret the data or what have you is harnessing the presence of the transmission and not the content. SO I say that anything transmitted can be legally received, ..cell phones signals aren't cell phone conversations. If I have something tuned to 60 hertz, it's going to be interpreting electricity, ..however, if it isn't tuned to the frequency which is intended to be transmitted AS electricity, then there's no legal basis for calling it an illegal reception of electricity.
It's a transmission of information, and unless they can prove that the receiving of the electricity somehow impeded or burdens the transmitter, which is hard to as it is, then they have no standing to do, as no harm is done.
This is why the receiving of informations considered private is different from say, harnessing the energy of the envelope its in as it zooms down the road.
We couldn't assume that, say, if I were to place a wind energy device near a road, every passing driver couldn't charge me for their efforts in their passing because it's generating electricity because it's not in the way and i'm not impeding traffic with it - no harm done.
The aesthetics of it are another story, but this is just part of the basic example.
Part of an argument against the reception being called illegal is the LEGAL position of the lines ...if a line, within regulation, must be placed a certain height and distance off the ground, then the distance, radially from the wire to ground and in all directions should / and could, be considered the distance within which they're legally in the right to take action, HOWEVER Those distances beyond this are outside the regulator limit.
The idea with a radio transmission is similar, However, the intent of public radio is that it is paid for by the transmitting agent and intended to be free.
There other types of transmission, satellite, military, etc etc etc! ..those are illegal to interpret without a permit, but everyone receives them as a standing body.
In my opinion, there presence is unwanted BECAUSE I don't have a permit to do so - is a statement of intent that I don't want them; not a criminal position.
The ideas set forth herein can be expounded upon.
I agree there could be lot of controversy here.
Twenty years ago the power companies spent a lot of money to produce expert testimony in several cases where people who lived near power lines were suing for damages for being stricken with cancer. They believed the cancer was from the AC power radiated from the HV power lines near their homes. Ultimately the expert testimony convince the jury that there was NO power leaking from the lines and every thing was safe. We all know that this is not true. Power can be scavenged that is radiating from ac power lines. It needs to be the really High voltage ones though. If you were to set up a 1 strand electric fence along a length of power line with the wire suspended on insulators and a large ground rod driven to the earth at one end, you will get usable power between the wire and the ground rod. The length of the wire determines voltage and the diameter determines current.
What you have built is a very large air core transformer- very lossy but effective.
How could you be stealing power if they have proven in court that they are not radiating any power???
A bit of a rub for the utilities.
To quote Pirate "I am bombarded with cell tower waves yet if I receive them, it is against the law."
This is a misconception the big corporations wants everyone to believe.
The truth of the matter is the radio spectrum is owned by the the people, at least here in the USA.
The FCC law basically says that- The spectrum is auctioned (Leased) off in slices. and if someone wants to transmit a secure signal it is up to the transmitter to make it secure. If someone detects and recieves the signal it is not the FCC's problem. Is is after all Public airwaves.
That is why Dish is peeing its pants with some of the FTA satellite crowd, they have full dish service for free.
If you live near big microwave transmission towers you can easily light strings of Christmas lights using a simple loop and diode detector.
My 2 cents-
OK, so all I would have to do is set up a long heavy gauge copper wire under an electric line and use this as the hot wire in a circuit?
What if I set up a hundred of these around the same power lines, would the power be compounded in voltage and amps?
That said, I would have to be careful not to touch those wires - ZAP!
* OK, if trees receive radio signals, can a tree be tapped for the energy?
Quote from: czimborbryan on February 06, 2010, 10:59:16 AM
OK, if trees receive radio signals, can a tree be tapped for the energy?
Yes, a few years ago in our Earth battery topic, I read about tapping trees for electricity and did a few experiments which are documented over there.
If memory serves, I was able to get about 1 volts or so from the single tree in my front yard. The thing that amazed me which I do remember exactly is that my tree was negative. I impressed and confused a technician friend of mine by showing him this. I held the minus probe to my tree array and stuck the positive probe from my DMM into the ground and it showed the energy on the meter. The ground was positive. He said that ground ALWAYS had to be negative and this could not be. But it was. He even checked it himself. Very cool to see.
Bill
Why would a tree be negative?
Maybe it was on top of a gold seem or something...
Is it possible for the tree to be acting as a transmitter?
All the other trees I tried in this area were negative also. I have no idea why. I asked others around the country to try it to compare and no one else did so I have no idea if all trees are like this or just some.
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179 on February 06, 2010, 04:43:44 PM
All the other trees I tried in this area were negative also. I have no idea why. I asked others around the country to try it to compare and no one else did so I have no idea if all trees are like this or just some.
Bill
Very interesting indeed! ...it would be great to know more some time.
Just about anything can be used as an antenna - the idea is an ideal conductor though. ..having a tree as antenna means unusual electronic distribution.
I built an array, which was basically just nine nail driven slightly into the tree to reach below the bark, and wired them together with copper wire and tested to the ground using only my probe tip.
But, anyone can test this using only their probe tips. Stab one into the tree and the other into the ground, if you get a minus sign on the reading, reverse the probes.
I remember catching a lot of crap for "injuring" the trees although when I was done, I was able to pull the nails out by hand and I am sure the tree suffered no ill effects. If the tree did scream, I did not hear it.
Folks should still try this simple test.
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179 on February 06, 2010, 06:27:45 PM
I built an array, which was basically just nine nail driven slightly into the tree to reach below the bark, and wired them together with copper wire and tested to the ground using only my probe tip.
But, anyone can test this using only their probe tips. Stab one into the tree and the other into the ground, if you get a minus sign on the reading, reverse the probes.
I remember catching a lot of crap for "injuring" the trees although when I was done, I was able to pull the nails out by hand and I am sure the tree suffered no ill effects. If the tree did scream, I did not hear it.
Folks should still try this simple test.
Bill
This probably has a bit to do with the chemistry of the nails vs the tree sap, it is interesting that ground was positive though, did you try a nail to nail measure where one was in the tree and the other nail was in the ground _ this would effectively neutralize that sort of phenomenon wouldn't it?
How about cabbages?
Quote from: jadaro2600 on February 06, 2010, 08:26:06 PM
This probably has a bit to do with the chemistry of the nails vs the tree sap, it is interesting that ground was positive though, did you try a nail to nail measure where one was in the tree and the other nail was in the ground _ this would effectively neutralize that sort of phenomenon wouldn't it?
Good question. But, no, I did not. However, I did try just the meter probes before I made the array. You can do that too. Anyone can. I think it would be interesting to see results from others around the globe to see how that compared with mine. Just use your probes off the DMM and see what you get?
Bill
Quote from: jadaro2600 on February 05, 2010, 11:22:10 AM
As I understand it, the draw from the line is insignificant amounts of current with moderate amounts of voltage.
Here you go, look at this:
http://www.pureenergysystems.com/news/exclusive/wireless_transformer/
Pounding two rods into the ground would have the same effect as an earth battery, even without the power lines overhead or using house wiring to do the same thing inside a building with a long, insulated wire.
I build an earth battery setup in a large city surrounded by power lines and still got only 2 volts on an analog VOM.
--Lee
I think we had already determined that the earth battery would only produce the same low output as in any other earth battery location. The folks above mentioned that a suspended set-up would yield better results.