Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[forest]

W Polsce nie ma klimatu do dyskusji o FE  , gdzieś na forum elektroda.pl były działy z pogranicza nauki ale tam głównie dołują chętnych którzy chcą się tym zajmować.
400Hz jest dobrym kompromisem ale 50hz jest po prostu łatwiej dostępne prosto z gniazdka.


Jeśli chodzi o teorię to wszystko rozchodzi się o to czego nie uczą w szkole - spintronika. Ładunek to nie to samo co elektrony, pole magnetyczne to właśnie spinowe prądy w pętli. Prawo indukcji  Faradaya to czysty generator energii, minus reguła Lenza. Itd. Jednym słowem jeśli byłaby wola, prawdziwa wola zmian dla dobra ludzkości moglibyśmy ....ale na razie nie widać woli.... nawet tzw OZE to tylko próba przetransferowania pieniędzy na nowy rynek ekonomiczny i "dojenie" ludzi od początku.


SPINTRONICS people ! 

[stivep]

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/McFreey.pdf

Mobi Gozer
23 hours ago

So from the McFreey-pdf it reads the devices (could) become radio-active, in due time? Does that make sense?

Reply ·

stivep1
2 minutes ago

from Wesley  to +Mobi Gozer


Partially it makes.
In the body that is immersed in magnetic field during injected  mechanical influence(vibration) beta particles can be released  and transmutation of material is happening.
That is either in NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance)
or
NAR ( Nuclear Acoustic Resonance).due to precession of nuclei  radiation of Betas can be as long as as influencing factor is present.
Precession is a change in the orientation of the rotational axis of a rotating body( nucleus)
By that process the  byproduct of transmutation can be isotope of primary material, or it can be  change to another periodic table component.( another atom of different mass)
If isotope created is "unhappy" of its form and is decaying than we dealing with permanent radiating particle( determined in  activity - measured  by its half-life).




If there is the change to other form it than becomes  atom of properties different  to the original atom and not decaying.
During transmutation and Beta release there might be strong presence of gammas and attached to the process X-ray radiation.
The amount of energy released is greater than initial stimulating energy, however the laws of thermodynamics are preserved.
There is no overunity present. That energy is free for you to be used.


By that:
Lithuania                       Experiment can be  explained.
Steven Mark                   Experiment can be  explained.
Tariel Kapanadze            Experiment can be  explained.
Don Smith                     Experiment can be  explained.
Floyd Sweet                   Experiment can be  explained.
SR193                           Experiment can be  explained.
Wesley's/Colman            Experiment can be  explained.
Wesley's  electrostatic      Experiment can be  explained.                  https://youtu.be/Mn8TLBsR3r0?t=704

Akula                             Experiment can be  explained
Ruslan                           Experiment can be  explained.




Wesley

[TinselKoala]

So let me get this straight.

There is a "theory" of nuclear reactions or transformations that "explains" all those claimed results from all those different places and people. Right?

What is the evidence for this theory? Why... look at all those results from all those different places and people !! There's your evidence !! We don't need to show you no stinking gamma or beta evidence! We don't need peer-reviewed scientific publications! Just look at Ruslan and Akula, there's your proof!

Therefore the theory must be correct, and all those results are therefore correct as well.



Let me tell you about _my_ theory, which explains all those claimed results as well. A herd of invisible pink flying unicorns are flapping their wings, and the thermoacoustic vibrations of their crystal wing scales acts through the Aharonov effect to induce negentropy in the insulation of the wires in the various devices.
This fits the data even better than nuclear transmutation, resonance, etc. since nobody has suffered from radiation sickness by trying to reproduce Akula/Ruslan devices.


But wait... there is an even simpler theory that fully explains all those claimed results too, and does _not_ rely on anything magical or on improbable, unsupported ideas about physics. This theory also explains completely why there have been no credible replications, or even first-party demonstrations that are convincing. This theory could be very easily _disproven_ by Ruslan or Akula, simply by sending one of their working devices off to be examined by some credible laboratory or individual researcher. Yet they have never deigned to do so, and I predict they never will.

And we all know what that simple theory is.

[stivep]

So let me get this straight.

There is a "theory" of nuclear reactions or transformations that "explains" all those claimed results from all those different places and people. Right?

What is the evidence for this theory? Why... look at all those results from all those different places and people !! There's your evidence !! We don't need to show you no stinking gamma or beta evidence! We don't need peer-reviewed scientific publications! Just look at Ruslan and Akula, there's your proof!

Therefore the theory must be correct, and all those results are therefore correct as well.



Let me tell you about _my_ theory, which explains all those claimed results as well. A herd of invisible pink flying unicorns are flapping their wings, and the thermoacoustic vibrations of their crystal wing scales acts through the Aharonov effect to induce negentropy in the insulation of the wires in the various devices.
This fits the data even better than nuclear transmutation, resonance, etc. since nobody has suffered from radiation sickness by trying to reproduce Akula/Ruslan devices.


But wait... there is an even simpler theory that fully explains all those claimed results too, and does _not_ rely on anything magical or on improbable, unsupported ideas about physics. This theory also explains completely why there have been no credible replications, or even first-party demonstrations that are convincing. This theory could be very easily _disproven_ by Ruslan or Akula, simply by sending one of their working devices off to be examined by some credible laboratory or individual researcher. Yet they have never deigned to do so, and I predict they never will.

And we all know what that simple theory is.

Good point my friend.
At least you are not an idiot, or not such an idiot as one might think  you are .
The same could be addressed towards me by you  or by you and others.


The difference is that I'm  NOT A "ZOMBI"//////////////!!!!
By the "zombi" description:  I understand intelligent educated  individual, who is possessed by idea, or emotion attached to that idea,
- to the extend( point)  at  which constructive  criticism is completely disregarded.




So  if one ask the question who is more of an idiot ?  TinselKoala  or Wesley
..................................
Most of the people will be right, by giving any of possible answers  if we refer to the uncertainty principals.
So rate of probability of error in any possible answer  would be similar because criteria have changed.
criteria:
1. Wesley is and Idiot
3. TinselKoala is and Idiot
4. none of them is and Idiot
5. one of them is more of an Idiot or they are equal in value Idiots.


...
does anyone ask  what is  meaning of word Idiot?


summary
It is intuitive and very much individual to understand basic foundation ( word Idiot) and that is what makes you guys right in any  possible answers 1,2,3,4,5
However approximation of  results  of that probability  calculation, will not be overwhelmingly convincing to majority of crowd around you.


SO LET ME GIVE YOU MR TinselKoala  LITTLE  EDUCATION  OF HOW  YOU CAN BE AN IDIOT(3)  OR I CAN BE AN IDIOT.(1)
AND AT THE SAME TIME  one of us is more of an Idiot or we are equal in value Idiots.(5)






Action by Wesley:
a-I want now to show that other side of the coin is more pretty ( more convincing)
b-I'm flipping coin
c-I'm showing you  exactly the same post  I have wrote from above only using opposite arguments ( NEGATION)
d-I intentionally  contradict to the value  of the text   i wrote myself in  up-above post., and I intentionally try to be  now more convincing  in that negation.
so now I act like in point 5
(5- one of them is more of an Idiot or they are equal in value Idiots.)






Wesley is posting counter-arguments:  an argument or set of reasons put forward to oppose an idea or theory developed in another argument.
for that  reason I'm posting that ready to use impatiently waiting quotes from  the guys like you    TinselKoala  and in my own opinion  beautifully constructed  text. heeeeeeeee.


Let me start:

I must admit that this "joker"  (William J. McFreey) uses his pseudo-scientific terms, but it's still just nonsense.
Once again, there is no "trail" of this guy's credentials.
My guess is that he took some intro to Physics courses, or read some similar textbooks once upon a time, while he should have been busy with his decidedly non-science related occupation...


The summary (for those that prefer to jump to the end) is that NMR's DO NOT increase the decay of any nuclei, nor so does violently shaking nuclei physically! There is no indication in any real experiment that might suggest that they do, and there is no theory in Physics that would suggest how they could. Mr. McFreely takes this fantasy as an accepted fact and spews out cribbed equations and diagrams to dress up little more than a fairy tale. It is devoid of any actual legitimate facts regarding how this would occur in our common Universe (I assume he lives in this Universe?)!




It is almost like the dweeb believes that if you "shake" an atom strongly enough, its electrons fall into the nucleus with a net release of energy (is the idea that the electron supposedly combines with a nucleus' proton to produce a neutron, a neutrino and some extra energy? I don't know, this is this guy's fairy tale). This is NOT the nature of electron capture!


I find it amusing that he started to try to impress his audience with an equation describing RF "skin effect" (I used a similar equation months ago when I tried to address the mailbag question regarding "skin effect"). What it ultimately has to do with his hare-brained ideas is anyone's guess.


"By now, it is obvious to me that the so called "overunity" devices as demonstrated by Tariel Kapanadze, Floyd Sweet, Steven Mark, Don Smith, Alfred Hubbard, SR193 and others, draw their energy from the nuclei located in material which forms a part of the device. They are, in effect, conversion devices, converting excess energy of the nuclei to electricity and/or heat. In these devices, the fuel materials tend to be selected such as to have a nonzero spin, typically: copper, brass, aluminium, alloys of iron and the like.  " – This "obvious" observation is as clear to me as tar! He has no indication of any nuclear decay and yet it is "obviously" a nuclear phenomena. This is not the scientific method – this is wish fulfillment, this is "the revealed message" from a god, this is an inner voice. Perhaps he should switch to Theological Theory and leave Physics to others? You have to RATIONALLY explain what the nature of this "excess energy" is and demonstrate its absence from the system after the energy is "utilized". It is NOT surprising that any experiment utilizes material which possesses a non-zero nuclear spin.  Spins of most element's isotopes tend to be "non-zero" (see: http://www.nist.gov/data/PDFfiles/jpcrd85.pdf). The coincidence that non-zero spin nuclei are part of any device is about as essential as the fact that some non-white colored part is involved in these devices too!

"In time, after many experiments, the conclusion was that the magnetic resonance alone, i.e. flipping of nuclei (transitions between various states of nuclear precession) with radio frequency, may only influence extremely unstable nuclei and make them beta decay (beta NMR)." -  Beta decay NMR is NOT beta decay induced by NMR, but the reverse – it involves analyzing how an unstable nucleus, which spontaneously undergoes beta decay, produces a change in the atom's NMR characteristics!

"They are, in effect, conversion devices, converting excess energy of the nuclei to electricity and/or heat. In these devices..." - Not only is there no proof that this statement is true, there is no available theory in Physics that would suggest this is even possible!


"The vibrating, spinning and precessing nuclei interacting with shell electrons invoke forced transmutation of the nuclei, releasing fast charged sub-atomic particles." - Again, this statement is completely unproven nonsense phrased as a given (yet unsupported) fact!

I reject this person's conjecture that this "eddy current-like energy", if it even exists, which is very dubious, is recoverable and capable of being used productively (waste energy by definition, cannot be effectively utilized).

You can "flip" a nucleus' spin within a fixed magnetic field "until the cows come home" but a stable nucleus will NEVER spontaneously transmute just because its nuclei is flipping back and forth. Never happened before, it will never happen in the future. This guy once again makes an erroneous statement as a universally accepted fact, although it has never been demonstrated by any legitimate scientist, and certainly has never been proven!

Acoustic Nuclear Resonance has nothing to do with energy extraction, it is a field of science that demonstrates how some substances possess intriguing audio absorption/reflection due to aspects of the material's nuclear spin resonance in a strong, fixed magnetic field. Sound waves require energy to produce also! Any attempt to extract the energy out of an acoustic wave will demonstrate that it can only be done at less than 100% efficiency – there ain't no free lunch!

This gentlemen's main fallacy is that a small external amount of energy can somehow "tap" the potential energy of a spinning nucleus, extracting more energy than you began with, yet the "potential spin energy" is not diminished – it would be like going to a well that would always have the same amount of water in it, no matter how fast you emptied it! He also falls into the logical fallacy of using the quantum mechanical "spin" of nuclear sub-atomic particles as classical angular momentum, where you can withdraw part of the system's angular momentum for useful energy. This is NOT the case in Quantum Mechanics.  Protons and neutrons can ONLY possess  a "spin" of + or – ½ "h-bar". You CANNOT extract the angular momentum of Quantum Mechanical sub-atomic particles, as you can a flywheel in classical physics.


"Resonance" is a magical scientific word used by many charlatans. Resonance can NOT amplify energy more than the energy inserted into the system. Resonance CAN be used to efficiently store energy in a system, nothing more!

"In conclusion, the Kapanadze disc machine works on a principle of spin manipulation, precession, vibration and induced transmutation." -This is just unproven, without any theoretical basis. You might as well suggest that the underlying method utilizes pixie dust or unicorn horns  as a means of extracting this dubious energy.

"The physics behind all of Kapanadze's devices is the same and very interesting. It is stressed, however, that no laws of physics, as we know them today, are violated here." -  This is just false. The Writer is either incompetent or delusional. Perhaps a bit of both?

His reference sources are to be found on www.rexresearch.com, a notorious site of unproven ramblings of people with the knowledge and background of such "professionals" as Mr. Dawson. He might as well cite a Dr. Seuss book (perhaps "Cat In The Hat"?)

Centrifugal forces cannot spontaneously produce radioactive materials. There was recently a satirical pseudo-news report that the Iranians were spinning object around very quickly above their heads in hopes of manufacturing nuclear weapons grade fuel. Perhaps this gentleman would be interested in giving them a hand with this?

This is NOT a legitimate scientific research paper – it is a fairy tale (with cribbed equations that are tangential to his subject and illustrations of nonsensical machines).

Garbage In –> Garbage Out
Gunish mit gunish!

Me and  my friends John and Roy are friends in science .
Even if we have different opinion we respect each other.










Everything can be flipped !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and it can  become even more  convincing.
And that  does not contradict - interfere with universal  value of that  negation///
-I can be right
-My friend John can be Right
- My friend Roy can be right




it is up to you what  you swallow and how you process it TinselKoala.
GOT IT?




Frickin Putin says there is no Russian Army  and tanks in Ukraine and yet 82% of Russian population is supporting him in it. And in my  personal opinion Russians a better educated that  Americans  in wide area  of science in any direction.
One may ask How that could be?
The all world knows the truth...











Wesley








PS: Can I now be even more contradicting comparing to that contradiction that is now intentionally much stronger, than my previous comment  , and now I will be  supporting   lets say  TinselKoala ??





Sure I can...................
just flip the coin.....................................


and if I can not than one of my friends Roy or John can help me out..................




GOT IT NOW? ?
or it is to  much,of that  what I can expect from you?

[forest]

Well...to my humble mind  it's enough to check for radiation  around Rusla device to disprove theory, no ?