Successful TPU-ECD replication !

[Bruce_TPU]

@ Stefan,
Yes.  I could not tell you how, this tech being so new.  This is why I want to make another coil shortly wrapped in teflon tape.  This is also why SM recently wrote to Lindsay stating they had even tried oxidized copper wires.  Oxidation release many more free electrons.

You see, what I think, is what SM stated.  If the magnetic flux of the wire can be "disabled" then the electrons float free, and we get into all sort of new territory, including Einsteins SR (special relativity), and SM's own story of the canons trying to explain SR and the process of free electrons exploding into the air molecules producing more free electrons.  This IS the cascade effect or avalanche as some have called it.

Now, if anyone googles Mobius, you will find that it is used to "disable" the flux.  There is another way to do this I have found but will not post it yet, because I do not want to distract from the replication of Otto's at the moment.  I have told Jason of it.  But that is why ONLY with the mobius or similar method to disable the flux, will this work.  All of this fits SM's words.  But we will be tweaking mechanics and electronics for a long time.  Keep it simple is my only advice to our electronic guru's.

Thank you for your time,
Bruce

[bob.rennips]

@ Stefan

Otto said the heat sink ONLY was hot, but NOT the MOSFET.  He and Roberto were amazed by this, because where the Mosfet was seated was only warm to the touch, but the "exposed" aluminum was very hot, giving off electrons.

Cheers,
Bruce

What tests have you done to be able to say the heated aluminium gives off substantial numbers of electrons ?

Do you any scientific/engineering references for this effect ?

Tubes have a vacuum for a reason. They also have high potential gradients for an accelerating field and optionally heated THIN wires.

I trust you're not just makinga parallel between a vacuum tube and hot piece of metal.

[kames]

@All

I am not trying to replicate this test, therefore, trying to stay quiet and avoid any arguing.
But when one says that a hot aluminum releases a lot of electrons or any other charged (even not charged) particles and one is working with it with ?naked? hands, one should have got cancer by this time if the output power of those released electrons can power  a 40W bulb.

Kames.

[z_p_e]

??

I had also read his patent - which is using 6 poles to roll a field about <just checked - got it in front right now - yep, Fig.1 of US 2002/0125774 A1 has 6 poles>

That's not SM's patent as far as we know. The patents (several) are apparently on the control circuitry only, and not on the coil configuration at all. So I'd say this patent is not a candidate as SM's.

And. Have read a book by Tom Bearden (Free Energy Generation) in which he discusses a circuit working by creating a deep magnetic field as hard and as fast as possible - for a short time - and gathering excess energy on the rebound.


Seems to me that - the replication is working more like TB's design then SM's.

Possibly, but I have not seen that circuit. Sounds like capturing bemf, which in itself, is not free energy.

Darren

[steve_whiss]

Hi Bruce,

yep - a confusion about patent there - but I was trying to express a something.

Patents link to intellectual property - and serve (as far as I understand) 2 functions:

1) to say "this is the thing being discussed, and this is how it is built"
2) to make money either by manufacture or licensing to make.

Agreed people here (...?) not out for (2).

Would not it be best to use patents for purpose (1) - so it is logged and published for all around the world- and then Open Source it i.e. allow unrestricted use?

Otherwise there is no definition of the tech in public.

Me, I'd want patents + licensing for petty amounts - so that a reign is kept over those who will gouge or hijack the tech with their own patent (..and that will be tried, Open Source or no).

I see patents + Open Source as a way to liberty.

Steve