Free Solid State/mechanical energy

[samebarbosi]

If  it helps you, yes, then forget.
But rather think in terms of charge, potential, ELECTROSTATIC.
Voltage is defined as difference between two potentials. When you put a voltmeter you create current flow, thus discharge.

"puts 6000 volts across it" => would be like 6000V potential pressure / stress

It will help to think ELECTROSTATIC. As someone said, think the other way arround.

[Maximumgravity1]

I still think this is too complicated.  I think we are still missing the point.  I am beginning to see something coming through all the past posts.  I am having a hard time putting my finger on it, and hope others will take the time to read through the attached file I include in this post.  I think it will begin to clarify a few things.

The key to this entire thread, Erfinder's device, the Tesla 464666 patent, Tesla's logic - EVERYTHING - revolves around the interactions of the fields.  I think at this point we do not have a clear understanding of what a field is, nor what exactly it does.  I see many of the explanations - and tangents that we went down - were inspired as attempts to get us to understand what this field is.  We are still looking too microscopically - I believe we need to be more macroscopic.  To parlay into simpler terms, we need to think in broad abstracts - keep things at the conceptual level - of the whole unit.  The individual components have their own deeper meanings, and that I believe is where Erfinder was trying to get us to - but we can't get past the basics.

I am starting to further understand that anything we try to explain in mainstream terms will not really help us - AT ALL !! !! !! !!

The file I have attached is a TEXT document of highlights out of the first 300 or so posts - most of them Erfinder's, most of them pertain to explanations of his device.  However, that is irrelevant.  The important thing is the message that starts to come through.  There is a definite focus on the fields, and how they perform work, what they do when they collapse, and how they are created.  It is becoming clear that our entire basis is wrong.  Our entire understanding of fields do not apply nor help us in any way.

I started this thread as an attempt to put those quotes here for further open discussion, but they are too lengthy to post at one time.  I will try to highlight some of the thoughts upon rereading this file, and hopefully add some of my thoughts to spark some discussion.  It is clear in reviewing why Erfinder got frustrated and turned us toward other sources.  We aren't n the same page.  I don't think we are even in the same book.

As a side note, it appears the discussion about EMF and BEMF and the Water Hammer was beginning on the right track.  However, it seems to have petered out quickly - I believe - because our understanding of (and interactions with) the fields are incorrect.

Anyway, this is my take, I hope someone shares the same views and we can begin a dialog on the right track.  I am still organizing my thoughts, not really sure where to jump in.  I am off to do some further reading - hopefully that will help.

[Maximumgravity1]

Sorry to do this to you all, but I completed the entire thread to this point, and tried to continue the thought rolling through the more recent posts.  The attached file is the complete summary to this point.


A few things are really starting to materialize for me.  The collapse of the fields ties into the BEMF - which is where the magic is coming from.  The BEMF tries to return to the void.  In Erfinder's device in particularly, this is the reason for the arrangement of the magnets - the nodes - the voids. 

Most all of his commentary pertains to fields - not individual charges.  Thus, comments such as:

"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. 

Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."

                                                                           
                The Universal One

Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF

This attracting and repulsing is dealing with the fields - not the individual coils, or charges on the coils, or polarities.  The fields themselves don't exist INSIDE the coils, or the cores or anywhere else.  They reside in the same area, but the fields themselves are just that - fields.  They radiate out past the wires.  Thus, when we talk about reversing, collapsing, etc, the BEMF and EMF that can do the real work through the voids, are following the flow of the fields.  I don't know if I am saying this right, but the fields do all the work.  The "other half" of the story that mainstream is telling seems to be the "effects" of these fields in the conduits - nothing more.  Therefore, focusing on these pieces, is of course going to be a dead end street.  Somewhere quoted in all this is about referencing the fields from the fields perspective.  The conduit just exists at a point in space - it doesn't matter to the field that the conduit is there.  It will act as it will act - regardless if there is a wire there or not.

I now have many, many more questions.  I do see the concept as the lines of flux being more of a measurement or indicator of the fields - more then anything else.  I don't believe this is entirely correct, but I am beginning to understand why Erfinder stated that if asked, nature would not know what a line of flux is.

I am now more aware of what he means by magnetism belonging to the divine - the Still Magnetic Light.  This is the nature of the Divine.  This is the canvas - so to speak - of the Creator.  This is the imovable - the foundation in his words.  It has nothing to do with us - at least not at this point.   Electricity, the oils and paints - they are ours to experience, and manipulate.  Anything we see of them is all the same - all chickens... I am still having trouble wrapping my head around the concept of why what we perceive as magnetism appears to differ from electricity, but I believe I am headed in the right direction.

Lastly, when we begin to discuss diamagnetic verses paramagnetic materials - strictly in the sense of fields - things begin to take on a different meaning - at least my perspective is different.  I am STILL pretty clueless as to what these can do for us, but I see that they have a different role when they are interacting with fields.

As for what all of this has to do with the patent, and the simplicity of the concept we are to get at - I am still trying to figure it out.  I do see that the focus should be on exactly what these fields are doing when they collapse.  What happens within the field when it is energized or collapses.  How they add to each other when they change and return to their sources.  I believe the Water Hammer analogy is on the right course - but in a broader sense - the coils and the cores really aren't involved - if that makes sense - they are the means to an end - for lack of better explanation.  The field is working with or without the coil.  What happens inside the coil is only our way of creating change in the field (or extracting change from the field).  Ergo, what we understand as electricity really isn't important.  We need to understand what electricity is doing to the field.

I still think we need a good solid foundation.  I believe we are still going to be throwing darts at a non-target if we aren't careful.  I think we can understand the fields effects - and their interactions - but it will be forging into unknown territory.  IT will be difficult not to continue to interject what we "know" from mainstream teaching.

Anyway, getting late and I am starting to ramble.  I hope others that see things more clearly then I do will begin to chime in and help provide a starting point.

[samebarbosi]

Sorry to do this to you all, but I completed the entire thread to this point, and tried to continue the thought rolling through the more recent posts. 
...

With too much information, you may not be able to understand. As I see you hurt yourself, as frustration is growing.
I will try and recommend (again) to stay with patent 646666 only. When you will understand the mechanism, you may go forward.
Myself I need to understand what is diamagnetism (and so many other). I'm convinced that taking one step at the time I'll comprehend that too. For now I just love (Erfinder was right, I love it) the beauty of simplicity in 646666. I didn't find the key to the Heaven. But hey, this is just first step.
Try to understand schematic and the working on pat 646666 only. When you need, ask just one simple question (related to 646666). Just one. Which do you consider is most important to you. I'm sure anyone who can answer it, will be happy to respond. Might be a situation nobody knows. That means we didn't pay enough attention and we missed something. Might be important for later study, so I'll think to find an answer.

Good luck!

[allcanadian]

@samebarbosi

Victor scauberger said his machines were negatively supercharged and produced diamagnetic fields. Let's look at the following statement.

Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEM

- Where in conventional machines do you see large potential negative discharges? nowhere
Diamagnetism must expel magnetic fields, an area having no magnetic fields present, but to a magnetic field what would a diamagnetic field look like?. A collapsing diamagnetic field would look like a hole in space, an area the magnetic field would rush into fill. So a Bemf can expel a magnetic field through it's diamagnetism.
Let's start by asking the right questions.
How could I accelerate a medium like in Victors machine without drag?
- I would create a vacuum so there is no turbulence-no drag like in outer space.
- I would negatively charge the media so it repels from the negatively charged machine walls and cools itself, this cooling creating a centripital contracting inward force- inward and forward.
- I would have this huge negative electrostatic field of millions of volts move or spin creating a diamagnetic field. This diamagnetic field would repel all magnetic fields, so my media could not interact with nor be hindered by the magnetic fields of other matter having magnetic fields.
- This negatively supercharged media when leaving this internal void would be attracted to all external positively charged media like air surrounding the machine, so the media is not pushed out of the machine it is pulled!
- Victor said the air/water leaving his machine did so at four times the speed of sound but made no noise, how could this be?

All of these thoughts can be applied to Tesla and erfinders machines, cause and effect, transformation. All we need to understand are fields and how they interact and motion.