David Bowling's Continuous Charging Device

[Farmhand]

bboj, this is kinda off topic here, continued discussion on this subject should go to another thread, to respect the topic at hand for this thread, David deserves to have his thread topic respected.. Fairs fair. Umm and I think it's my bad so I must apologize to David. Sorry Dave. 

I am quite willing to discuss how I "see" things and give my opinions in an appropriate thread, bboj, I actually really enjoy talking on the subject. 

If you can jump this discussion to an appropriate thread then we can all discuss it, or at least those of us who wish to, can. Maybe a thread started by me is appropriate, I'll need to check.

Still not well, so I can't really do much at the moment other than "discuss" or "conceive".

Cheers

[a.king21]

OK  Well Tesla's main principle was resonance. He understood it from his early days when "practicing on skyscrapers". He also discovered "standing waves". He knew that he could create a resonant state which caused energy to appear from somewhere other than the circuit. I am not going to get into an argument about how. The point is that the phenomenon exists. In my opinion it is related to the law of entropy. 
In Tesla's writings he states plainly that his Wardencliffe device lost absolutely no power and sometimes gained power.
So it's all down to perceptions and schooling. It's very difficult to overturn a lifetime's education and there is no point in going there. I base all my statements on either experimental results, other people's experimental results or patents.
I count Tesla's experimental results as the no 1 source.
Hope this helps.
The reason I like the 3 battery thread is because it is related to Benitez's 4 battery patent which I have replicated, as have other experimenters. Benitez's device is approximately cop 2 less system losses. ie different battery behaviour; impedance miss-matches and the like.

[Magluvin]

Farmhand:

It's not quite as simple as that.  If I say, "The idea of chem trails is nonsensical foolishness" and you believe in chem trails then I am not calling you a nonsensical fool.  I did not attack anyone personally, and I have the right to express my opinion.  I was personally attacked repeatedly and viciously and sometimes rather ridiculously with some crazy and offensive metaphors.  You had nothing to say about that either.

So you have to distinguish between discussing ideas and even the expression lots of derision about them, which is fine, and discussing people and attacking them, which is not fine.  If you believe in something that somebody else does not believe in and they state their opinion, you just have to deal with it in a normal way and and not spiral downwards into some dark cavern.

A.king made some nonsensical comments about Tesla shaking a building with some unknown device that are completely untrue and I said as much.  He is not responding and I don't care.  It's the truth that matters and when people irresponsibly say that resonance is an over unity process sometimes it's worth it to set the record straight and say that it's not an over unity process.  If that prevents some unknowing person from sending money to somebody like Daniel Nunez then so much the better.  That's a small victory for the truth and a victory for the person that did not fritter their money away on a coil for $600 that doesn't do anything remarkable at all.  They can buy a spool of wire at their local electronics store for $8.99 instead and chances are it will outperform the $600 Nunez coil.

MileHigh

"If I say, "The idea of chem trails is nonsensical foolishness" and you believe in chem trails then I am not calling you a nonsensical fool."

If Farmhand believes in chem trails, then you are calling him a fool. What is nonsensical is making a statement like "The idea of chem trails is nonsensical foolishness" as if the "idea" and words like "nonsensical" and "foolishness", to describe what exactly? A rock? A wall? A wall and a rock, with ideas, a lack of sense and full of foolishness??? Then basically telling the person you are saying that to, that you didnt mean them, even though they believe in chem trails while being in the same conversation??  Yeah right.

"A.king made some nonsensical comments about Tesla shaking a building with some unknown device that are completely untrue and I said as much."

Prove it.  Prove that it didnt happen. You cant. You have no literature or facts to back up your statement "completely untrue".   

But yet you are sooo sure of yourself. Its a good thing many here know your ways, and see through the weeds that you try to plant.


"It's the truth that matters and when people irresponsibly say that resonance is an over unity process sometimes it's worth it to set the record straight and say that it's not an over unity process."

1  Show me the 'truth' evidence that Tesla never had a pocket sized tapper and never put it on that building. Where is your truth that proves the story never happened???  I mean like, you say the truth matters. Well, other than what 'you think' or 'feel' or 'imagine' where is your proof that the tapper story didnt happen..   lol. You cant.   So its not truth. It is only your opinion.


"sometimes it's worth it to set the record straight and say that it's not an over unity process."

When is it not worth it?  Maybe your "sometimes" should be "always worth it" , as that is your game.

Mags

[Magluvin]

I have the right to express my opinion. 

And so do I.    No matter what PMs you send me not to respond to you.   

Mags

[Magluvin]

OK  Well Tesla's main principle was resonance. He understood it from his early days when "practicing on skyscrapers". He also discovered "standing waves". He knew that he could create a resonant state which caused energy to appear from somewhere other than the circuit. I am not going to get into an argument about how. The point is that the phenomenon exists. In my opinion it is related to the law of entropy. 
In Tesla's writings he states plainly that his Wardencliffe device lost absolutely no power and sometimes gained power.
So it's all down to perceptions and schooling. It's very difficult to overturn a lifetime's education and there is no point in going there. I base all my statements on either experimental results, other people's experimental results or patents.
I count Tesla's experimental results as the no 1 source.
Hope this helps.
The reason I like the 3 battery thread is because it is related to Benitez's 4 battery patent which I have replicated, as have other experimenters. Benitez's device is approximately cop 2 less system losses. ie different battery behaviour; impedance miss-matches and the like.

Hey Aking

I got a few things together today to build what we were talking about earlier to simulate the tapper and a resonant structure.  Will be trying either a tall plexi strip with a weighted top and maybe try weighted top and middle, for a resonant wiggle. lol  I imagine the building may have had some standing waves and not necessarily just a waving of the top.

This will be a neat lil project and wont cost much or take too much time to do.

I thought about repeated bending of the plexi strip maybe causing stress cracks at the square edges, so Ill be rounding the long straight edges. When bending plexi with heat, rounding the edges helps the bent edge not bulge out beyond the planned radius, as there are different stresses at the edges than the middle of the bend. So the rounding should keep those bending stresses down when the thing gets swingin.


Should have a base and upright pen together tomorrow at lunch or after work. Ive got a coil I made that I want to try here for a gen pick up that is wound with 42awg. Its 4.49kohm 1.63 H.  It produces nice high voltage in a small cap with one pass of a mag. So we can use that charge to pulse the drive coil near the base.

 

This will be fun.    

Mags