BRAZIL - Company is building a Gravity Generator http://www.rarenergia.com.br/

[Red_Sunset]

So where is the evidence of the elusive back door?  If one wishes to convince others that there is a pony in that closet, some evidence would be nice.

MarkE,
You do not need to have the proof of the back door, in order to search for it.
The path of Discovery is to allow your mind to roam the expanse of the unknown and IF there is a door, sooner or later it will be found.  Discovery throughout history is based on need, intuition and drive (and enduring the opposition of  impossibility)

As an example,
Think about Magellan's voyage into the red sunset, on a passage around the bottom of South America. Totally unknown, with only intuition and determination with great risk. (back in 1519)
Columbus knew India & China was somewhere across the ocean,  the question to find out was where, how, what. 
He did not discover India or China. It was no problem that he discovered something totally different. It was the start of the process that achieved the set objective, through this drive, China & India and the rest of the world was discovered.

At the time Columbus most likely heard the same slogans, "impossible", "can not be done", the physics of the world don't allow it, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE...ect

I am sure you get the gist, and I am sure you knew the same before this post

Sure lets be realistic and scientifically precise but at the same time, BE OPEN, aware of the limited knowledge we have and the expanse of knowledge waiting out there to be discovered.
Don't kill the spirit of discovery & determination, allow some leeway within context.

Red Sunset

[Red_Sunset]

Strange things are going on! That's my point and that puzzles me! Because ...

But this implies (illustration b) that removing the LC circuit completely should result in having infinite impedance for ALL received frequencies, thus we should hear all nearby transmitting radio stations at once, but we don't. Why?

Because now we don't have the energy amplifying feature of the LC circuit anymore!?

So, who is willing to adjust this reality in order to comply with the textbooks?

Zeit,
In general textbooks are there to teach, and it is for the reader to learn from a written explanation.
Not understanding the text or explanation, does not directly imply that the text or explanation is wrong.

An LC circuit is also called a tuned circuit because it has a specific time constant which equals a specific frequency.  Therefore it acts as a frequency filter. It might appear that it amplifies, but in reality it doesn't add anything to the signal, no FE input. Your earpiece will load the LC circuit and lowers its selectivity effectiveness and de-tune it, the reason your picture uses a crystal earpiece because it has high impedance.  A standard dynamic earpiece as you use for your cell phone wouldn't work here because of its low impedance and it contains a coil which would change the freq of the LC circuit in a big way.

When it comes to hearing all stations without filter seems to be well explained by MarkE above. I would guess you would still hear a strong/near station above all else. It is all a matter of composite signal strength

Red_Sunset

[Zeitmaschine]

This is a fail on so many levels it is difficult to choose where to start.
Broadband energy summed together appears to an indiscriminate receiver as noise.  The tuned filter discriminates energy within a narrow band.  Impinging energy within that band passes on to the output at a small loss.  Crystal radios work because the human ear can detect pressure variations of 1E-9 BAR.  It does not take a lot of power to make sound that is audible in headphones.

An LC circuit is also called a tuned circuit because it has a specific time constant which equals a specific frequency.  Therefore it acts as a frequency filter. It might appear that it amplifies, but in reality it doesn't add anything to the signal, no FE input. Your earpiece will load the LC circuit and lowers its selectivity effectiveness and de-tune it, the reason your picture uses a crystal earpiece because it has high impedance.  A standard dynamic earpiece as you use for your cell phone wouldn't work here because of its low impedance and it contains a coil which would change the freq of the LC circuit in a big way.

I see! MarkE and Red_Sunset have decided to adjust reality to the textbooks. I never thought something different could ever happen!

So then explain this: Free energy from air TEST

First explain where this energy (charging a capacitor for free) is coming from and why it should perhaps(?) be considered as NOT free. Second explain, why a crystal-radio (also working with an antenna and ground) should not make use of that energy?

Actually this arrangement consists of two Avramenko Plugs connected together, principle explained here: The Work that is Created by Means of Potential Field - Alexander V. Frolov

The energy to bend the beam in the children's swing comes from absorbing some of the energy of the fall of the pedulumn. The beam stores this energy as strain and return most of the energy to the pendulm as it flexes back.

Any attempt at extracting energy from such devices is pointless.

As I said earlier: Reality is adjusted to fit the textbooks. How can extracting energy be pointless, when it is obviously done and shown in the Milkovic video?

As one can see, it is not so easy to deceive Zeitmaschine, especially if one evidently can't even debunk a simple free energy lever device scientifically.

Now - just for fun -  let me debunk the power of the wind (scientifically).

A windmill or wind wheel can't work, despite we can see it working every day!! The wind commonly blows in one direction (like gravitation). So if we take a sheet of paper, then this paper is blown by the wind in one direction a few meters. Hence we can get some useful energy out of it. But after that few meters we have to put that sheet of paper back to its start position and that means pushing it against the force of the steady blowing wind, so all energy gained in the first step is lost in that second step and thus the overall energy gain is zero. Quod erat demonstrandum!

Now show me a working windmill and I'm sure it's fake, maybe it works with a hidden motor.

[Red_Sunset]

I see! MarkE and Red_Sunset have decided to adjust reality to the textbooks. I never thought something different could ever happen!

So then explain this: Free energy from air TEST

First explain where this energy (charging a capacitor for free) is coming from and why it should perhaps(?) be considered as NOT free. Second explain, why a crystal-radio (also working with an antenna and ground) should not make use of that energy?

Actually this arrangement consists of two Avramenko Plugs connected together, principle explained here: The Work that is Created by Means of Potential Field - Alexander V. Frolov

As I said earlier: Reality is adjusted to fit the textbooks. How can extracting energy be pointless, when it is obviously done and shown in the Milkovic video?

As one can see, it is not so easy to deceive Zeitmaschine, especially if one evidently can't even debunk a simple free energy lever device scientifically.

Now - just for fun -  let me debunk the power of the wind (scientifically).

A windmill or wind wheel can't work, despite we can see it working every day!! The wind commonly blows in one direction (like gravitation). So if we take a sheet of paper, then this paper is blown by the wind in one direction a few meters. Hence we can get some useful energy out of it. But after that few meters we have to put that sheet of paper back to its start position and that means pushing it against the force of the steady blowing wind, so all energy gained in the first step is lost in that second step and thus the overall energy gain is zero. Quod erat demonstrandum!

Now show me a working windmill and I'm sure it's fake, maybe it works with a hidden motor.

Zeit,

I know you are taking me around in circles and I will play your game a bit longer

1..  Energy out of the air, sure that is very possible.  But that is not likely the same energy than your radio signal (energy), the one you are receiving from the sender antenna. I have no reason to believe different to my knowledge.
Re energy out of the air,  Tesla proposal for wireless power transmission relied on input energy from solar winds into the ionosphere, as far as I gathered,  that looked very possible as a tapping method in a theoretical sense.  Several practical aspects are  intimidating to my view.

2.. Your fun for wind energy,  energy extraction out of anything requires movement.  Wind is a circular circuit between hi & lo pressure, there is actual air movement between these pressure points. The heat from the sun is the pump that is driving it.
You do not need to move the paper, tape it to a rotor and it will spin

In comparison to any other field you are referring to, magnetic or gravity, the apparent consistency of the field is static. 
This difference can be demonstrated, just for comparison by trying to get lift in a FIELD vs. wind, 
example, try to install a magnetic Narca foil in the magnetic field, and see what happens?  Doesn't work as intended.
The same problem in a gravity field ?  Now try the same in the wind, that works fine?

You will notice that the apparent difference is that a field has no physical property compared to a wind flow.
There is a good reason these fields are called "Conservative",  and the wind is not conservative

Regards, Red_Sunset

[Zeitmaschine]

Actually this is all about shielding. If the gravitational field or a magnetic field could be shielded (or switched off temporarily) with less energy necessary than the energy that could be gained because of that shielding, then we would have a surplus of energy.

Hence show me a law of physics that states, that shielding must always consume more energy than the energy that could be gained because of the shielding. The law of conservation of energy does not count towards this, because we do not want energy from nothing, but from an already present energy field.

Now analysis of a video:

When the lever moves and hammers against its counterpart then the energy for this is taken from the pendulum's movement? That would mean, a moving lever should slow down the pendulum and reduce its amplidude fast. But it does not. Taken from this video I have superimposed two clips (one clip has been move 9 pixels downwards). One shows the pendulum with a freely moving lever, the other with a locked lever. Both videos are 56 frames in lenght and they are covering two oscillating periods of the pendulum. The pendulum's amplidude and frequency are exactly the same in both cases, whether the lever is locked or not. Amazingly the two superimposed pendula are just looking like one single pendulum.

So, what's next? Rewriting some textbooks perhaps?