Free Solid State/mechanical energy

[allcanadian]

In my last post vacua or vacuum was refering to the fact that a Bemf or negative discharge may render space(expansion) as the dominant force over matter(contraction), less matter means more space--- more space means a greater physical vacuum. Like outer space, no air present.

@barbosi
allcanadian, you really need to look for your old setup to give it a try. A push button and a fast finger will do it.

I have been experimenting for years, basically to prove what I read as fact. The one lesson I have learned, is what erfinder said, you cannot successfully build something you do not fully understand. You could be "guessing" for years, so I want to understand this first before I lift a finger. I have been reading more of walter russells work and it seems more sensible than anything I have ever read in the science journals. As I said the correlations between the work of tesla, schauberger and russell is impossible to ignore.

[barbosi]

The whole trick is to do the opposite way you have been thought.
What is a capacitor good for? To store charge/energy? put a battery at its plates and it holds it?
Yes.
How about to suck charge/energy from where is none? Is this the opposite way?

Now: In every patent there is a tiny EMF flowing in the coil (in parallel with capacitor). You abruptly cut that flow and you got BEMF in quantities depending only on the storage device you have (capacitor). You put switch ON again, EMF will attract EMF and repel BEMF. so EMF again. Cut => BEMF. Compression, depression...

allcanadian, if you still remember details of your setup, please give some details; it was exactly fig.2-685958? We may analyze the setup and how did the experiment failed. I'm not saying I have the ultimate truth, but it may help to understand.

[Maximumgravity1]

One other thing I have noticed, but I think someone else mentioned this.  The capacitor seems to be being charged by inductance.  In most instances, it seems to be in parallel as well.  As Erfinder pointed out previously, Tesla refers to the secondary as the "working circuit".  I believe this is to denote the primary circuit, and the main power (if any) is to be a separate function from the secondaries.  I think the reason being because the electricity is manifesting in a different way in the secondary.  In most of Tesla's patents, it seems to be manifesting in the higher potentials - more "stressed" toward one inclination then another.

One thing that is confusing me as of late, as I am having a hard time thinking of electricity in plus and minus.  As I begin to scratch the surface into Russell's work, it becomes clear that all electricity interactions are either manifested as Positive (compressive, inward, etc) dominant, or Negative (radial, outward, centrifugal) dominant.  The underlying theme is there is no distinction or separation of "current" - it is all the same thing - just "manifested" in different forms - stronger dominance then the other.  It just depends on the nature of its flow - what work it is performing at the moment. But electricity or magnetism - no matter what our perception, is flowing exactly the same way, functioning the same way, and doing the same thing in a circuit.  The only distinguishing characteristic is which one is dominant at that particular time. 

Moreover, it is hard to see any of the BEMF, EMF, Current, Voltage etc as separate manifestations - they are all just CHARACTERISTICS of electricity and electrical flow.  Therefore, the more we talk about positive and negative, the more it seems there really is no distinction - they are just opposites - just like "in" is opposite of "out", "up" is opposite of "down", "far" is opposite of "near".  To describe something as more "up" then something else is only a point of perspective.  Thus, negative potentials, negative fields, negative charges just don't seem to make any sense.  Everything has to be positive - at least in the cumulative sense.  Even space - vacuaa - is not a void - not a negative - it is as allcanadian described - just "less" matter - or "more" space.  More of a particular manifestation of one condition over another.

Therefore, when discussing electrical flow, Positive indicates that the electrical flow is more cumulative, generative, compressive, inward, then an opposing condition.  As such, when we talk about BEMF and EMF we are talking about flows that are more compressive. spiraling in on itself (electrical like) verses ones that are more radiative, spiraling outward (magnetic like).  Depending on the current situation in the circuit, one is predisposed to be more dominant then the other, but is subject to change and reverse instantly.

Maybe I am rambling, but these concepts seem to be prevalent in many of the others works we have been reading about - like allcanadian mentioned.  Keeley especially seems to share many of these traits, and to some extent Schauberger.  Anyway, whats my point??  It seems we need to keep these things at the front of our mind when discussing what is happening in these circuits.  If we migrate away from these concepts and back towards the mainstream view, I think we are drifting away from understanding what is happening.  If we aren't able to describe what is happening from this perspective, we may not be thinking along the correct lines.

At least that is my take

[barbosi]

... The capacitor seems to be being charged by inductance...

Here is the catch I see:
The capacitor is being "discharged" by inductance. By "discharge" I mean sucked the heck out of it.

[Charlie_V]

Hey guys, been gone for a few days helping my wife with her art show.  I didn't feel like reading everyones postings since most seem to be arguments.  I did however, read what Erfinder has posted. 

I really think new names need to be given to the "positive charge" and "negative discharge" terms.  This is rather confusing, atleast to me.  Only through reading the explanations do I see what is being talked about - mostly. 

I definitely think that Tesla found a way to use high voltage/high frequency (different from how we use it today), and I can somewhat see what Erfinder is talking about - though, I need to think about it more  (that positive charge/negative discharge stuff is a brain full).  But I think - from the Tesla literature I've read - that you don't absolutely need a spark gap or rotary switch for this effect to work.  He only used those when he didn't have stable, high frequency dynamos.  The spark gaps are only used to produce the proper oscillations in the circuits. 

Its like the water hammer valves.  Water in our pipes flows DC.  The water hammer valves convert things from DC to AC.  If your water flow was already AC, you wouldn't need the valves.