Bird on a wire

[BEP]

I joined your community in admiration and excitement of what you are attempting and in the hopes that I could contribute and apply what I learned from you.  I have spoken out of turn, possibly disrupted and unintentionally misdirected some. For that I offer my apologies. Almost all of my comments were based upon thought models and past experiences. None of my posts or communication were lies. I am not SM and I have never had the privilege of meeting him.
It is clear to me that he was absent for some time but I am sure he is watching now.

I have been experimenting and theorizing almost my entire life. It is the only way to understand what you learn completely. Until a couple of weeks ago I did not know you existed or the TPU, MEG, etc.

Many of the devices I have built succeeded in the original intent but were eliminated for other reasons. Some are still perking along after many years. When word of one gets out my family and I always suffer. This is why I have stopped work on my unique form of what some would call a TPU and others a MEG.

Now that the results confirm almost all my wild theories and I see that E=mc^2 is completely redundant it is best for me to take what I know and go ?off grid? (I think that is the term?).

I believe Otto is on the right track. The other things I mentioned also play a part but will only confuse the initial development. I suggest you use the ?kiss? method and interpret SM info as best you can ? as I have. For those that do not have the expertise to make things work from the currently available information it is very likely that you should not attempt it. For those learned physics dogma repeaters I wish you a long and happy life, even if it begins to close on you like Einstein?s box on the pole end of the TPU. When you are squirted out the other side from the ?slap? you will certainly see the light.

Correct ? over unity is not possible on this plane but beware, you are not considering all possible sources of usable energy. You are also part of that spectrum. 

I am certain SM has suffered more than folks know and I cannot stand to loose anymore.

You are so close. When you figure it out stop and think about the next step clearly.

I wish you all a safe journey.

BEP/WaveWatcher

[Motorcoach1]

@WaveWatcher Thank you so much for the insight. In beam5 technologies (microwave) the mobius quadrapole send and receives lighting speed and the rings in front and back act as a current dump. I believe as when drilling for oil the gas just gets burned off. the waveguide I'm not sure of at this time but I'm sure it plays a big part in dumping the electromotive current. I believe Leedskalin years ago said something very close to what you have said about the 1-4-7. and the harmonic 33 theory. I'm still researching Tesla's duel cone apparatus that uses copper tubing as the guide. Mike         edit; in SM 15in TPU the radient coil is not actualy a coil , but a plate at the bottem  of the unit , this is a radiator (wave guide) as in toriod amplifiers in the center the fields bounce due to there relation , the capacitors regulate the feild , the upper coils , are formed in narrow band with as are this type of coil. (mostly found in VHF marine band withs) the upper coil bounces to the lower guide at this time the 25 degree rule comes into effect (as we know it in rule 45dr) in effect as you say , one half of the dia. is the rule in reception (parker flat wind says ,yes -start snoiltal curvature, no flux , second wave start 180dr - not interactive , reverse wave starts 3 wave .(congagate) TEM wave devlopes , Lmd wave doesn't start to exist until full wave of spiral exixts. This means that the ground wave has to travel 1/4 wave leingth for the spiral to exist. so the ground wave fixes the snoidal confrence in the outcome of the total spiral,  but heres some thing else that is not in the text book .!  if the spiral is in the model only exist on the top -then it has to exist on the bottom ! diotomic flux without magnatisim mmmmmm Torsion?

[gn0stik]

Wavewatcher. I don't know if you got some hatemail from someone or what, but you need to understand that there are always trolls on the internet. Ignore the trolls. You are a useful member of this community, and your theories and stories are quite interesting.

If you have done some of this work, and can save some of us the distress that you have gone through, and we will go through (undoubtedly) by cracking this thing, by keeping an eye on what we are doing and giving an experienced opinion that would be great.

Packing up and bailing is not, in my opinion the right course of action. If this thing really is as dangerous  as all that, then someone WILL get hurt when the egg is cracked. If you can help prevent that, then there is a spot for you here, regardless of what people say. I would suggest rolling with the punches, and either ignoring completely, or taking the flames as constructive critisizm.

I personally have been waiting for an experiment based on something that is in your lab to test your theories, a proof of concept, as it were.

I mean. I have to remain objective and cannot follow someone down a road based on words, regardless of how interesting those words are. I need something to do. There has to be something to SEE. Something documented, and quantifiable. Otherwise, from a scientific standpoint, I have to go with what I know, and what has been documented and experimented with.

Just tough it out man.

Anxiously awaiting something to replicate,
Regards,
Rich

[MeggerMan]

@Wavewatcher,
I too would like to have a bit more info on what your experiments have revealed and how to re-create them.
If you can disconnect the power from a TPU and for it to carry on "running" even if it is trying to destroy itself then this is a fantastic break-through and goes on to prove that there is substance behind what we are all trying to achieve.

If you want to PM me directly in confidence I can carry on where you left off, put together some simple plans for people with the right skills to assemble a proof of concept device.

Have a think about it, but I will understand if you do not want to go this way.

Regards
Rob

[BEP]

I appreciate both comments and understand them. The trolls are a bit more than Internet based and I know them well. What I do know is that the results Otto's work is providing the correct direction. At this point, my results would only serve to sidetrack his direction.

As far as I have seen the same tests have been performed by others. I interpreted them differently when I did them before you folks were around.

The only one I have done that I do not see here was an attempt to determin the relationship between RF propagation and gravity. It was simple - two plates 1 xmit the other xrcv. I went from zero to 2.4gHz. What I found was low freq were prone to follow the surface and even dive while high freq were more reflective and bent less over the surface of the Earth. Nothing new there except one thing. These signals were longitudinal and the shift between to two tendencies was much more pronounced than when using conventional antenna. Longitudinal performance dropped drastically while increasing to 300kHz.
What does that mean? All frequencies have both types of waves. Long. waves are extreme performers at the lower end. Long. waves at that end loose very little of their energy as compared to currently used portions of signals. My theories start to evolve from there and the implications that gravity, matter, waves are all one in the same at different states sends me over the deep end.
In my mind this explains the 'slap' effect. And the fact that just before the 'slap' the factors used to explain magnetic attraction and the resultant speed become identical to the same for gravity and that makes it possible for particles to travel faster than light even in a vacuum. It goes on from there but I've done it again. Try to put into words that which only confuse most.

As I have PM'd some - I am in the process of creating documentation but it is evolving as I stop to try new thoughts. Right now I am waiting on replacement frontends for my spectrum analyzer.
I know the time for words is gone and you are correct - seeing is believing.
Like everyone else my priorities are elsewhere as I work 5/12's and am on-call 24/7.

As an aid to understanding the dynamics of this thing - those with high-end scopes may wish to simulate the TPU's two shperical fields in action. This will show you why I am starting from scratch.

Mohr's circle - X-Y plots to show phase relationship/rotation. If you have the knowhow and the right scope you can add the Z axis to create a 3D model. That is for the result we want.
For the control sigs I am attempting to find the right combination of signals and there phase relationships to one another that will allow me to repeat the Three sister effect I saw on my earlier device - the one that crowbarred my spectrum analyzer. The one that was the result of a base of around 170kHz.

If you can obtain results for the above the info would help the more advanced folks when modifing designs.

I do this type of work with thought models before I heat up the soldering iron. Although I could never fill either man's shoes - I tend to work the problem more like Tesla than Edison.

I haven't had the time to do this yet.

The results will give me numbers to calc coil design info.

I avoid detail on my use of 147 because I look at this issue as 3D not 2D. When 147 includes angular differences between the numbers that are (what I think will be the correct phase relationship) 147 will translate to 139 in 2D space. A perfect 139 is 'what I believe to be' the point we must avoid. I also shoot for a 147 relationship because of a common truth - two antennas communicating with each other usually perform best when they are the same polarization and based upon the same design philosophy. The core is round so our resultant antenna field should also be round or some fraction thereof. By antenna field 'I believe' this would not be the coil design but the field resulting from the coil.
All of that and when you start spouting mystical numbers and then try to explain reasons by comparing different dimensional planes you instantly become a nut.

I've made that mistake too often here.

Suffice it to say that I am redoing all coil designs I had to adjust for the Earth's mag field energy required for this will be longitudinal. They will look the same to most but they will look like they have a braid/fold-flip at the begining of each turn in the winding. This because that type of winding looks at the difference between opposite sides of the turn as does a mag loop antenna but it will be functionally, perpindecular to the Earth. So I'm going from two larger mag-loop antennas that were polarized for the magnetic plane of the conventional used wave to many small loops polarized for the magnetic-only longitudinal wave.

Ironically -only in my mind's eye right now- it is beginning to appear more like the SM pics I have seen.

Right now I'm on break from trying to hack code that will correct for some Fanuc anomolies that screw calcs for multi-joint moves.

OU devices are my relaxation but we still must pay the bills.