Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[NoBull]

Wait is this not what I have been suggesting and TK is doing the whole time?

No, your take on the operating principle was quite different.

Excitation of the copper to output more then it takes to cause the excitation. The gain medium is the impulse across the gap.

Then decide whether the gain medium is something across the spark gap (impulse discharge) or the copper itself.

The exciter is around a copper coil connected to a load. Wow so now that you have found a French patent that says the same thing you give credence to what I have been saying the whole time and TK has been doing.

You may be talking about a device that is constructed similarly, but you had never written about energy from induced beta decay in copper, zinc or iron. 
You only wrote about energy from vacuum and aether - never about the conversion of matter into energy.

Wow talk about bringing up the same exact method and then saying look what I thought of...

A couple of commonalities in construction does not make it the same exact method of operation.

[Grumage]

NMR as a prime candidate for Modus Operandi?

Hi All, I posted this with Energetic Forum, it died a death, what do you think?

"My reason for this post. I first trawled the web to find out the NMR of Fe 56.
This apparently is 3.237778,Mhz but this value is related to magnetic field strength. The field strength being 2.35 Tesla. If one increases the field strength so increases the Resonant frequency.
Looking at it in the other direction, Global magnetic field strength taken as an average is around 50 micro Tesla and at that field strength the NMR of Fe56 is only 68Hz!!!!

With this in mind there is always going to be a shift in field strength due to the alternating nature of the Bias coil. It makes me wonder whether a softly softly approach is the answer?

It may also be the reason why someone quoted the phrase "you find the target, but it moves"

This was a little museing on my part but it might spark an idea, padon the pun!!!

Technical data provided by webelements.com and Geotech-LRLs-info-NMR"

How difficult could it be?, the answer seems like childs play to acheive, especially when you look at the diagrams of Patrick Kelly's E book.
Does the Iron require massive amounts of energy to start emitting beta particles? Or does it just happen once the resonant frequency is found?

What do you think?

Hello to all,

This was a post I made some time ago and from what Verpies replied to, it was considered a "Taboo subject".

Any how Taboo or not NMR would really seem to be the way forward. Take a look at this, I read it some time ago http://tesla3.com/free_websites/zpe_meyer_mace.html

Mr Brown however seems to think there is something wrong with the mathematics.... You decide?

Cheers Grum.

PS. There are a number of elements that share this trait, Copper is another. But Iron with it's great abundance would be a really cheap fuel. Just watch the price rise 

[verpies]

Hi Verpies, I would think the 173 kHz of the copper method would be more in the reach of most of us.

Perhaps but low frequencies usually require larger sizes of the Gain Medium.

Is there any stringent requirements for the experiment except the frequency ? Is a certain type of copper needed or anything ?

There are not that many restriction on the composition of the Gain Medium, just improvements to their bulk resistivity and permeability in order to minimize their RF self-shielding by the skin effect. 
Of course not all elements can be stimulated to decay and some will get stimulated better than others.  The best ones are the ones where the initial and final product of beta decay are prohibited by a difference in nuclear angular momentum and parity, such as the decay of ⁹⁰Sr into ⁹⁰Y.  The NMR excitation of the nucleus (by an RF EM perpendicular to a polarizing magnetic field) brings the angular momenta of the initial and final isotopes closer together, thus making the beta transitions between them more probable (i.e. faster). 
I strongly recommend reading the Reiss Howard patent EP0099946A1 for a list of materials that can be stimulated by RF to undergo beta decay.

Any tips for the coil design or how much power should be input ?

I think the design of the pick-up coil is not critical, however the gradient of the polarizing magnetic field and appropriate flux density is critical to achieve the proper confinement of beta particles.  Any change in magnetic flux density will immediately affect the frequency of the RF needed for stimulation of the Gain Medium.  Because of this this frequency will be a "moving target" and very hard to hit.  Hitting it reliably will require the generation of many frequencies simultaneously (the gunshot approach) by a short pulse (e.g. quenched spark gap or DSR diode) or better yet, frequency modulation (FM) around the anticipated frequency.  Stimulating power levels around 10s of Watts should be sufficient and I would not be surprised if someone was successful with 1W.

I'm not asking for any hard facts, just you're opinion.

I like to post hard facts on public forums.  For conjecture I will have to PM you.  Check your messages.

P.S. Is there any translation to English of the French document ?

I don't know of any such translations

Or is there a patent for the copper method ?

There is

[verpies]

Mr Brown however seems to think there is something wrong with the mathematics.... You decide?

Mr. Brown is not even wrong
The reason for this is that the average nuclear binding energy is average and does not represent the binding energy of individual nucleons.  Apparently they are not always the same. See this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy#Binding_energy_for_atoms]
...the listed mass deficits are not a measure for the stability or binding energy of isolated nuclei, but for the whole atoms.

When ⁵⁶Fe undergoes beta decay to ⁵⁴Fe, only one neutron gets converted to proton and beta particle and neutrino.
The binding energy of this neutron does not have to be equal to the average binding energy of the nucleons in that atom.

[Grumage]

Mr. Brown is not even wrong
The reason for this is that the average nuclear binding energy is average and does not represent the binding energy of individual nucleons.  Apparently they are not always the same. See this:When ⁵⁶Fe undergoes beta decay to ⁵⁴Fe, only one neutron gets converted to proton and beta particle and neutrino.
The binding energy of this neutron does not have to be equal to the average binding energy of the nucleons in that atom.

Dear Verpies,

Thank you for your reply. I am but a humble electrical engineer not a Nuclear physicist  Could you explain in laymans terms?

Also "Not even wrong" ?? Not right? or Not wrong? Or both??

Cheers Grum.

PS. I shall be the fall guy for everyone!! How will this energy manifest itself? As bursts of EM? I have a Geiger Muller counter but test's that I carried out late last year using HV/HF just fooled the detector into thinking there were Beta particles being emitted!