Earth Battery Beneath Power Lines

[czimborbryan]

Please explain this.

"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter, the transmitter assumes that the waves will be harnessed by something, therefore, ...it seems logical that the electromagnetic energy from it is intended to be free."

[Pirate88179]

Please explain this.

"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter, the transmitter assumes that the waves will be harnessed by something, therefore, ...it seems logical that the electromagnetic energy from it is intended to be free."

Yes, I don't think this is totally true.  I am bombarded with cell tower waves yet if I receive them, it is against the law.  Same with the wi-fi signals from my neighbors and also their cordless phone signals.

I do agree that, morally anyway, if the power company see this as a loss and is basically "discarding" it, then there should be no problem.  I have seen several youtube videos where folks walk under high tension power line holding a 48" tube that lights right up.  In my opinion, that guy was not stealing anything as those lines ran in his back yard and the power is radiating out there whether if used or not. 

Just my thoughts.

Bill

[the_big_m_in_ok]

Please explain this.
"anything transmitted via radio waves is technically up for grabs, regardless of whether or not it loads the transmitter,..."

Take a look at this:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Smith.pdf
Refer to pages 117-119.

Smith can receive resonant energy from coils surrounding a transmitter.  On page 3-26 of the manuscript, it's said any number of coils can be placed around the transmitter.  That's potentially unlimited power.  It doesn't load the transmitter, according to Smith's paper.

--Lee

[czimborbryan]

OK, now I'm sure there's some genius hillbilly out there living under high tension power lines and running his entire house off the radiation.

[jadaro2600]

Well, the idea here comes from the fact that anything transmitted can be received, there's nothing stopping this from happening except laws ...which, I argue aren't valid, because I'm getting them now, I'm just not interpreting ... therefore, the interpretation is illegal, not the device that receives them unless the device interprets them.

Trees receive radio waves, among ALL other types of electromagnetic radiation, but a radio station cannot sue a tree farm for losses in electrical signals because of it.  Argue all you may, but that fact is the farmer could claim that the signals are unwanted - and then blame some malady on it, prove it circumstantially or scientifically, and be done with it.

Something which does not interpret the data or what have you is harnessing the presence of the transmission and not the content.  SO I say that anything transmitted can be legally received, ..cell phones signals aren't cell phone conversations.  If I have something tuned to 60 hertz, it's going to be interpreting electricity, ..however, if it isn't tuned to the frequency which is intended to be transmitted AS electricity, then there's no legal basis for calling it an illegal reception of electricity.

It's a transmission of information, and unless they can prove that the receiving of the electricity somehow impeded or burdens the transmitter, which is hard to as it is, then they have no standing to do, as no harm is done.

This is why the receiving of informations considered private is different from say, harnessing the energy of the envelope its in as it zooms down the road.

We couldn't assume that, say, if I were to place a wind energy device near a road, every passing driver couldn't charge me for their efforts in their passing because it's generating electricity because it's not in the way and i'm not impeding traffic with it - no harm done.

The aesthetics of it are another story, but this is just part of the basic example.

Part of an argument against the reception being called illegal is the LEGAL position of the lines ...if a line, within regulation, must be placed a certain height and distance off the ground, then the distance, radially from the wire to ground and in all directions should / and could, be considered the distance within which they're legally in the right to take action, HOWEVER Those distances beyond this are outside the regulator limit.

The idea with a radio transmission is similar, However, the intent of public radio is that it is paid for by the transmitting agent and intended to be free.

There other types of transmission, satellite, military, etc etc etc! ..those are illegal to interpret without a permit, but everyone receives them as a standing body.

In my opinion, there presence is unwanted BECAUSE I don't have a permit to do so - is a statement of intent that I don't want them; not a criminal position.

The ideas set forth herein can be expounded upon.