RE: [Vo]:Stirling Demo
Lets see, where I live I consume 63kw/24hrs for 280 days of the year. So under ideal conditions with tracking arrays I would only need 126kw array to meet my daily need? (Night time remember!) But, even with tracking my best guess recovery is not 1kw/m2 but 650w/m2, goosh that is more than my home cost, when you even consider solar at $1 a watt. Get real, until solar gets to $0.15/W (installed), it is stupid to consider it for domestic use unless you live on the Sahara. My 25 cents look at solar. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 2:27 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stirling Demo Horace > Not at all. My argument was based on current cost per watt. This is a > highly subsidized sweetheart product development deal. All solar before 2006 has subsidized, especially photovoltaic. Here are current retail costs from solarbuzz: Average price in the USA in July 2007 - NOT installed, but just the module - is $4.84/watt. The installed cost for homeowners for a guaranteed turnkey operation is probably double that. The wholesale prices discount can be 30-40%. The module cost represents around 50 - 60% of the total installed cost of a Solar Energy System, depending on size. All prices are exclusive of sales taxes or subsidy. Subsidies have been abolished in many states, but not sales taxes which can add 8-20% to the prices. http://www.solarbuzz.com/moduleprices.htm As of July 2007, there are currently 192 solar module prices below $4.75/Wp or 13.2% of the total sample. This compares with 218 prices below $4.75 per Watt in June. The lowest retail price for a multicrystalline solar module is $3.95/Wp from a US retailer. The lowest retail price for a monocrystalline module is $4.30/Wp (€3.14Wp), also from a US retailer. The lowest thin film module price is at $3.00/Wp from a US retailer. As a general rule, it is typical to expect thin film modules to be at a price discount to crystalline silicon (for like module powers). [thin film may not last as long] IOW the *current* unsubsidized price of photovoltaic appears FAR in excess of $2.00 watt, as best I can determine - but you seem to differ. BTW - One thing that than an apple-to-apple comparison must include is the lack of tracking for panels. This lack of tracking can mean that in the course of a day, the actual wattage of electricity for panels is a fraction of the faceplate (half as much has been mentioned). Has that been factored in ? At any rate, to get to this magical $1 watt figure - you seem to quoting projections and estimates from companies that have never shipped product, rather than current prices. These estimates are notoriously unreliable - especially when they come from PR releases - and from PR designed to raise venture capital. Jones
[Vo]:unsubscribe
[Vo]:Whats with this device
A university art teacher? so does he have a good slop to the concrete floor and kitchen table not level. If you can build from wood and get it to work then the whole science community would look like BIG fools. I for the moment think this may be another Joe Cell? http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Scott_F._Hall
[Vo]:Want to get in trouble
Yesterday I ran across a new article where the New York Times wanted public submissions on the subject; 'What would I do if I were a terrorist'. They stated that the government needed all the help it could get and that with public input, maybe something would be exposed that the feds had not yet thought of. Boy, talk about inviting a visit and maybe worse... But, people did and are doing it???
[Vo]:Pulse Motor Builders
I see on the various groups a lot of people working with the so called pulse motors. In a majority of them they use a coil and a bridge rectifier to recover energy, my question to anyone that is working with such a motor is to try a little different configuration on that pickup coil. Use a full wave rectifier "just two diodes", fast diodes say 1N914's or 1N4148's and a cap of say 100uf, but leave one end of the pickup coil free "no connection". I would try this myself but have no motor to try it with and such a simple test does not encourage me to build one, yet it could show something different that might change the affect of Lenz. This open coil thing fascinates me and I see it is coming back again, just how can a transformer with low intertwining capacity work so well with one free end on the secondary. If some one tries the motor thing please post it, it should be of great interest.
RE: [Vo]:Pulse Motor Builders
See; http://keelynet.com/energy/frolov1.htm I would like to assume that if the frequency of rotation was correct that the effect would be the same from the rotation of the magnets in the motor into the pickup coil. But it looks like the requirement for standing wave is not really necessary and the secondary presents a very small load if any on the primary. >From what I have been reading this effect can be used in many different circuit configurations to produce some interesting results like claims of better than unity and self powering. The pulse motor configurations would be a great place to prove this as a battery would not be needed at all. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2007 9:50 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pulse Motor Builders --- EnergyLab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > but leave one end of the pickup coil free > "no connection". What is the purported rationale for having only one lead connected? Jones
RE: [Vo]:Let there be light
>>Anybody happen to know what it takes to drive one of those magical blue >>or white LEDs to reasonable brightness? (My knowledge is all pretty >>outdated -- with 2V p-p the old red/green/yellow LEDs I'm familiar with >>probably wouldn't light in that rig, even hooked to a perfect voltage >>source; they dropped something like 2.2 volts, minimum, as I recall...) I hope most interested people read this relay ad duplicating it hundreds of times will be difficult. In a couple of days my web site will have a section on the CE unit. There still is a couple of videos before its all brought out, wind before the storm :-) Storm being every one that calls us a kooks. Here are a few points of interest. **RANDOM Responses, I will try to answer many questions here in one mail.. The Blue LED spec sheet shows its desired operational points of 2.76V @ 25mA, (the ones I use) The values I gave of 2.73V @ 25mA were taken via digital integration across a 1ohm 1% resistor in series with the LED. Measurement at the location of the LED is (very difficult) the impedance of the circuit with reference to the surrounding environment is in excess of 10Meg. No part of the circuit can be returned to anything and when measuring extreme care is required to not stop the operation. To help out those of interest I will get some scope shots up on the site today and post links to them here. On the field, in Part#3, carefully look at the second time I show the HV using the neon in the external core. When I move the neon to the left to lie it down, it remains lit until I release it. Until pointed out to me (I even missed this). I have been able to duplicate this. The input was stated to be 2V PP, Yes it is, 2V PP, 0->+1 and 0->-1, 50% duty cycle (clean 50 ohm source with a 50 ohm termination). The semiconductor is a HF MOSFET which does indeed display a gate to drain and a gate to source capacity, (that is a given and know). The circuit will work just as well with a square wave that is 1V PP 0->+1, the negative portion of the input cycle does not aid in the phenomenon. There is considerable mis-understanding about the input and at least twenty people have already called me a fool as they connect a LED to a generator and it lights, but (NOT AT 1 VOLT). the input is indeed a 10pf capacitor and a 10K resistor, but they are (NOT IN SERIES), they are in parallel, this was explained in the preceding videos and if watched additional info is there that is not presented in each separate video. Now I will not go out any farther on this limb at this time, but I will present what is my feeble view of what is happening. SO FAR GUESS WORK! The barium ferrite core is required, I do not know what is going on here, have tried many different mixes of cores and these are the only ones that work, and they are hard to find, they are old technology transistor radio loop antenna cores. There is a parametric pumping that I believe starts in the MOSFET via capacity changes internal during the input cycle, this in combination with the core cause a 4X increased signal in the drain circuit. This is where the power for the LED comes from. The core, coil and MOSFET form their own resonant (varying) circuit, (WITHOUT) additional capacity to form a conventional LC tank. Addition of external capacity in any attempt will stop the action. Trying to tune for fundamental or the 4X will kill the action. Oh! Yes indeed the ferrite decoupling (phase shifting) circuit is needed, this is where AC phase change occurs to power the MOSFET. More on this can be seen on my site in the 'Energy Conversion by Articulated Transfer' section, pay attention to the Poly-Phase Transformer. My two site have already been dumped by perverts twice since posting the video, so if it happens to go down, it will return. -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 9:48 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Let there be light Cool video ;-) Do you happen to know -- did the earlier videos in the series say, perhaps -- what frequency this is operating at? He says the signal generator is putting out 2 v p-p, less than a mA; he also says it's going through a 10 K resistor which kind of suggests it's putting out a /lot/ less than a mA. But he never says what the frequency is; looks like a fairly HF transistor, could be 'way up there, perhaps. Anybody happen to know what it takes to drive one of those magical blue or white LEDs to reasonable brightness? (My knowledge is all pretty outdated -- with 2V p-p the old red/green/yellow LEDs I'm familiar with probably wouldn't light in that rig, even hooked to a perfect voltage source; they dropped something like 2.2 volts, minimum, as I recall...) Jones Beene wrote: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJvFd3pYBnM >
[Vo]:CE4
I do not plan on posting this info anywhere else except my web site, but for those that have interest I have listed here some links to scope pictures and a basic circuit diagram. Values of the actual circuit shown in the video will be on my site soon. www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC002a.jpg www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC003a.jpg www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC004a.jpg www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC005a.jpg www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4Cir01.gif No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Re: CE4
Hey if I can use 100 different addresses for the same fee, why not? :-) Boy I really hate to give those figures, I have enough trouble from what I have already done, stupid me. For government work lets assume we are looking at 8.3mW in and 68mW out. God help on this. Based upon input measurement across 1 ohm 1% carbon composite resistor. Output measured across 1 ohm 1% carbon composite in series with the LED, (which requires a floating scope) and even lead length will dim the light. -Original Message- From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 2:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: CE4 Ron's bad habit of never signing his emails (even private ones IIRC) doesn't help, especially when like now he uses a non-Stiffler email address... ;-) What's the power in and the power out do you reckon Ron? Michel - Original Message - From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:CE4 > Thanks much -- this is certainly a fascinating circuit. > > I didn't realize you were the author when Jones posted the link to part > 4 of the video. > > EnergyLab wrote: >> I do not plan on posting this info anywhere else except my web site, but for >> those that have interest I have listed here some links to scope pictures and >> a basic circuit diagram. Values of the actual circuit shown in the video >> will be on my site soon. >> >> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC002a.jpg >> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC003a.jpg >> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC004a.jpg >> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC005a.jpg >> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4Cir01.gif >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 >> 11:10 AM >> > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:CE4
Why I have no idea, but for years I always hear a repeating phrase in my mind; Sources and Sinks, Sources and Sinks, Sources and Sinks. Boy does that get tiring :-) Something of interest which I still do not understand (maybe I do) is that the inductor in the drain, must be on the drain side. If placed on the coil side the energy drops way down, like just leakage through the MOSFET. Now if I were to say I knew I would say phasing? -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 1:56 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:CE4 Thanks much -- this is certainly a fascinating circuit. I didn't realize you were the author when Jones posted the link to part 4 of the video. EnergyLab wrote: > I do not plan on posting this info anywhere else except my web site, but for > those that have interest I have listed here some links to scope pictures and > a basic circuit diagram. Values of the actual circuit shown in the video > will be on my site soon. > > www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC002a.jpg > www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC003a.jpg > www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC004a.jpg > www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC005a.jpg > www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4Cir01.gif > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 > 11:10 AM > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Re: CE4
Harry, yes it does but this is not indicative of anything meaning full. This is that all capacities in the circuit are affected by temperature, some have a positive and some have a negative drift and they do not cancel out. The BW for optimal brightness is very narrow. The energy is still there on both sides of the curve, but does drop off very fast. It in all honesty takes a bit of tinkering to keep the excitation on frequency. Someone posted to my site a question on why I do not have an onboard generator and I will show that later (a 5V dip oscillator), this should solves a bit of the trouble with the gen drift. Your lucky I was a bit slow on the draw (or maybe I'm lucky), I just went into email to delete all my mail. I stopped reading 99% of it when I found out one person was accusing me of using a Ham transmitter to excite the coil. Guess he found me in the ARRL database and wanted his moment in history. For any vort out there that may be so inclined NEVER DO WHAT I DID with this circuit. There has to be a better way indeed. If all the people that have figured out ways that I am faking the display applied the energy to solving real problems, we would have few. If you have another question, best wait a week or two until dust settles and someone duplicates, if they don't I heard they have a little room for me in Siberia. -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 11:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: CE4 Ron, I have a suggestion. See if the air temperature affects the brightness of the light. Harry On 12/10/2007 2:21 PM, EnergyLab wrote: > Hey if I can use 100 different addresses for the same fee, why not? :-) > > Boy I really hate to give those figures, I have enough trouble from what I > have already done, stupid me. > > For government work lets assume we are looking at 8.3mW in and 68mW out. God > help on this. > > Based upon input measurement across 1 ohm 1% carbon composite resistor. > Output measured across 1 ohm 1% carbon composite in series with the LED, > (which requires a floating scope) and even lead length will dim the light. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 2:12 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: [Vo]:Re: CE4 > > > Ron's bad habit of never signing his emails (even private ones IIRC) doesn't > help, especially when like now he uses a non-Stiffler email address... ;-) > > What's the power in and the power out do you reckon Ron? > > Michel > > - Original Message - > From: "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 8:56 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]:CE4 > > >> Thanks much -- this is certainly a fascinating circuit. >> >> I didn't realize you were the author when Jones posted the link to part >> 4 of the video. >> >> EnergyLab wrote: >>> I do not plan on posting this info anywhere else except my web site, but > for >>> those that have interest I have listed here some links to scope pictures > and >>> a basic circuit diagram. Values of the actual circuit shown in the video >>> will be on my site soon. >>> >>> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC002a.jpg >>> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC003a.jpg >>> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC004a.jpg >>> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4MVC005a.jpg >>> www.stifflerscientific.com/images/CE4Cir01.gif >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: > 10/12/2007 >>> 11:10 AM >>> >> > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 > 11:10 AM > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 > 11:10 AM > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Re: CE4
Michel; Sorry, but I'm not paying attention to much of anything other than trying to do what is normal and get the web page populated with information. I feel its counter productive to answer on an individual level until I present all available info in ONE place. Already there is so many bits and pieces around the net, some partly complete, some incomplete and some just plain wrong. In short the SS site will be the answer location. I have found it much better to just delete my mail for awhile, but I do scan where possible for ones I should maybe answer. Your question - The answer is the impedance of the secondary is well above 10meg ohm (maybe more in #4) and even a 2cm bare wire added to it upsets the readings and available power. The 10meg is a value obtained from an earlier work that will also be on the page (when finished). For why I only measure VI on a 1ohm is that the reading is in phase there. Scope readings are out of the question on the circuit shown in video #4 and there is no cap present at the output of the rectifiers. With other more productive circuits other measurements are maybe a bit better, but anything on the secondary is IFFY. I have a number of cultures to view that have been on hold for two may hours now, so things are not moving at the speed people want (so it appears). -Original Message- From: Michel Jullian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 3:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: CE4 Well spotted in any case! BTW Ron hasn't answered my question unless I missed it: what does he measure on the 1 ohm resistors, just input and output currents, or...? Maybe someone else knows the answer? Michel - Original Message - From: "Hoyt A. Stearns Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 5:52 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]: CE4 > Hi Dr. B. > > I haven't looked at the project at all yet, being too busy with my Steorn > and Noether's theorem experiments, as well as some activity with some new > tip propulsion helicopter activity. I guess I'll get to it eventually. > There's just so much material to investigate ( good or bad thing depending > on how you look at it ( It sure keeps us active and alive! ) :-) :-( ). > > Hoyt Stearns > Scottsdale, Arizona > http://HoytStearns.com > > > > -Original Message- > From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 4:29 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]: CE4 > > > So Hoyt -- > > Have you replicated this circuit using a cannibalized TV xtal ? > > > > Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. wrote: >> 3.58 MHz is probably a rounded version of 3.579545, the most common xtal > in >> the world -- the NTSC color subcarrier frequency. >> >> >> Hoyt Stearns >> Scottsdale, Arizona >> http://HoytStearns.com > > > > >>> I will show that later (a 5V dip oscillator), this should >>> solves a bit of the trouble with the gen drift. >> >> What about a X-tal OC for generating a signal at a specific frequency : >> >> http://www.t-mallusa.com/product_info.php?products_id=2894878 >> >> Two problems - there is none available AFAIK which oscillates at >> *exactly* the frequency you found for your circuit 3.58 MHz, but >> assuming that one can adjust the core (filing), or the windings or the >> beads in the circuit in order to match the OC frequency - this one might >> be more efficient than the 5V , as it is a lower voltage part (3.3). >> >> > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:New CE5 Video
Terry It is grounded, but the meaning of 'Properly' is open to interpretation. If I myself were to question grounding I would have to go back to my early days in radio. I had an FM site in an old Nike underground bunker. This bunker had 2"x2" brass buss bars running crisscross through. The bars were all connected to a 1" solid cable that ran for over 1 mile down the side of the mountain. All connection were made with heavy braded strap. I would call the site properly grounded. For 'Most' common installations in the US with the wiring in code with a Neutral, Ground and Hot it is near impossible to get a clean ground. Ground loops are multiple. So what would you call a proper ground? RRS -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 11:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New CE5 Video Not unless it's properly earthed. I don't see the ground. Terry On 10/16/07, Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hold onto your hats ... We are getting close to Wonderland, Alice > > > > To silence the skeptics, Dr. Stiffler has just now added the Faraday > cage to his circuit > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZOxvveTWPA > > > Things are getting curiouser and curiouser... > > Jones > > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:New CE5 Video
Okay, but herein is the rub, (again my radio days) its not resistance its reactance. Zero ohms and 107" gets you close to a 1/4 wave in the old CB band. When I talk about ground loops I'm speaking of different lengths of a particular ground circuit that are terminated in different impedances and form multiple resonant circuits. Hey guys, I have been there done that. When I was a young punk with a First Phone I was a AAA Equipment man with then GTE. I'm not pushing anything here, so for whoever, just take it or leave it. I hope at least you remain objective (mundane effect or not). Cheers -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:New CE5 Video On 10/16/07, EnergyLab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So what would you call a proper ground? A low enough resistance to earth so that the potential remaining on the surface of the Faraday cage could not possibly be supplying the circuit. (Smartass answer) I would suggest a tie to building steel using a very short large wire. (Practical answer) 5 Ohm (Precise answer) I don't know. (Real answer) :-) Terry No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
[Vo]:Cold Electricity
This is quite interesting, a Tesla coil (of which I know very little about) is being compared to a small radio antenna loop stick. A loop stick with that has a coil on it that if you pulled more than 100mA through it most likely would go up in smoke. (No I have not tried it) This baby little coil with an added primary over the top that has a 1:1.7 voltage ratio is what producing Tesla effects? If so why are all the Tesla people build these massive coils? Do Tesla coils have cores? My little knowledge thinks not, and are they tuned? This little coil is not, unless we figure inter coil capacity and that does not come to the same frequencies that the chart I have shown indicates. Gee anyone working with RF has seen these effects. Back in the CB radio days it was great sport to put a neon on the tip of a 1/4 wave whip antenna (gee the high voltage point) and every time you keyed the old transmitter guess what. I would have thought that before one rests on taught (rather than factual experience) that they would invest the time and a couple bucks to show someone how stupid they are? But over the years I have learned on thing for sure and that is that if I could get 100 people to duplicate anything I have shown, it would be LUCK if even one of them (Duplicated) it. I would expect to see everything from the cheap clip leads all over the kitchen table to the full blown hand made circuit board and none worked, why, because no one duplicated it, get it. If you can put 1-4 volts into a baby antenna coil like this and pulse a 15W light with a couple of watts at a 50% duty cycle, what this is not strange when the primary is open? I have done the math, no I won't post it, do the math and see or have we all come to mind experimentation only? Don't ask me how I measure power, hint that it is wrong, how do you measure power, I'll do it... but you know what if the answer comes out not to match your expectations, I will hear I did it wrong or I mis-read or I had this or I had that. What? The vorts have been silent, why show me wrong, I can take it. It is so funny indeed, the last three videos I had planned on putting up are covering a large strip light and a desk top lamp with over ten ultra-bright whites in them. But gee whiz guys when someone sees no power source they will go back to the beamed micro-wave crap. I KNOW for sure why we have not arrived there yet, this is the show piece example. It is against physics, against EE, LoT, well just about everything so it does not exist RIGHT. Please no one, run to the table with a handful of clip leads and some old transformer ferrite to prove me wrong. I think I have given all information and photo's need to DUPLICATE it. Until such time, I don't think I need fight the so called fight, because there is none. So far its talks show folks. Oh! to the fellow vort that thinks I made a remark that applied to him on how a Faraday cage must be grounded to earth. The comment was not directed to you, you were far from the only person that said something. Additionally the RF people as I so said, insist that the ground I did make a point to show is worthless. Well folks guess its up to you, I can't figure how to make everyone happy. This is just a rank out of total frustration and wondering about the void of the dead field of science for the sake of science.
RE: [Vo]:Cold Electricity
Thanks for asking the question, this is one I have no answer for and the following are some of the reasons. 1) I'm retired, not rich but comfortable. 2) I'm at an age where on the tables each day is great, although in good health, what ever that means. 3) Would not be around long enough to enjoy much of a monetary gain. Insure continued comfort would be nice. 4) Don't think I have left a mark, good or bad. Get the idea, it's what you call end of the road syndrome, the thinking that maybe the fight to get there was not so bad after all. What are my plans? Now for sure its not to go much further. I have not plans for any business ventures, does not make sense. Anyway most of this is old hat, old circuits, old ideas that just for some reason never had a YouTube to show them. I hope the future show that this is correct, that there are other ideas that people just have not shown out of some fear of something. I'm not special, I don't have dreams of great circuits, don't have flashing lights in my head and don't hear voices telling me what to build (no offense meant to anyone). In fact many years ago after a hydrogen explosion I went over to the bio area and only maintained a dabbling in EE. In short I do not believe in luck or genius, I do believe in cycles and that maybe we are in for a repeat and I hope we treat the result different this time. I don't know if I even come close in answering the questions, hey go for it, some one take and run if you can. You cut my electric bill in half and I will be a lot more comfortable. -Original Message- From: OrionWorks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:32 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cold Electricity Dr. Stiffler, My apologies if the following questions have already been answered. What is your plan of action? What in your opinion are the next steps that need to be performed? I suspect many would like to see a scaled up configuration demonstrated - which I gather you are working on. What kind of assistance are you looking for? In what capacity. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Cold Electricity
>I believe the point was that there's [some] capacitive coupling between >the loose end and ground, which completes the apparently "open" circuit; >this is analogous to the situation with a Tesla coil. I think before anything comes of this we have to settle on one circuit, and because all videos before #7 was lead in and as I suggest near end. It is not productive and I am sure all will agree that I address all six different circuits when #7 is the only one that should e looked at from this point. >Regarding capacitive coupling in HF circuits in general, as an EE I knew >once said regarding proper ground returns, "If you don't provide a >ground return, Mother Nature will provide one for you -- but it may not >be one you like". (He was actually talking about computer data switch >design, which is a somewhat different arena...) Very, very true. I knew when the answer came back that just to ground, 'enough said' that he was not into RF to the level this circuit depends on and the questions it raises. >The fact that there's [some] capacitive coupling there is certainly >undeniable; the /impedance/ of that coupling at 4 MHz is something else >again, and is an interesting question. With the short wire you've got, >I'd have expected the coupling to be far too small to account for the >observed effect -- and your original circuit had the juice going in >through the GATE on a MosFet which already puts a really tiny capacitor >in series with the input. Okay we have to as I have asked, focus on #7, all prior circuits were lead ins and as everyone should see are all folded into thelooping of #7. At least in #7 we have no internal circuit caps, no FETs and no power supply, (Micheal take note) so it will be much, much easier to get to an end point, no wondering how this interacts with that. Coils, cores and LEDS. >The issue isn't the couple bucks, it's the time to copy your setup >carefully enough to get the result you're seeing. The more info you >publish on the circuit, the better, as far as I'm concerned, because I'd >love to try to repro it eventually. >it's the time to copy your setup >carefully enough to get the result you're seeing Okay? >love to try to repro it eventually So should I read between the lines, like you have seen something better or cheaper or with for sure more credibility? Gosh! Oh! Gosh! I guess I sure am missing the point (damn sure not trying to ignore it). Hey R.C. can you forward the directions to the Dime Box? I need a shot or to now -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:37 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cold Electricity EnergyLab wrote: > This is quite interesting, a Tesla coil (of which I know very little about) > is being compared to a small radio antenna loop stick. I believe the point was that there's [some] capacitive coupling between the loose end and ground, which completes the apparently "open" circuit; this is analogous to the situation with a Tesla coil. The fact that there's [some] capacitive coupling there is certainly undeniable; the /impedance/ of that coupling at 4 MHz is something else again, and is an interesting question. With the short wire you've got, I'd have expected the coupling to be far too small to account for the observed effect -- and your original circuit had the juice going in through the GATE on a MosFet which already puts a really tiny capacitor in series with the input. Regarding capacitive coupling in HF circuits in general, as an EE I knew once said regarding proper ground returns, "If you don't provide a ground return, Mother Nature will provide one for you -- but it may not be one you like". (He was actually talking about computer data switch design, which is a somewhat different arena...) > I would have thought that before one rests on taught (rather than factual > experience) that they would invest the time and a couple bucks to show > someone how stupid they are? Eh hrm -- IMHO this is a delightful circuit whether or not it's got a mundane explanation. The issue isn't the couple bucks, it's the time to copy your setup carefully enough to get the result you're seeing. The more info you publish on the circuit, the better, as far as I'm concerned, because I'd love to try to repro it eventually. I think you mentioned the barium ferrite cores are "hard to obtain"; the implication seemed to be that they're not currently being manufactured? Do you just take apart lots of old transistor radios and hope to luck out and find one, or does someone still sell the things? > But over the years I have learned on thing for > sure and that is that if I could get 100 people to dup
RE: [Vo]:Earth to Vortex "Cold" electricity exists
Jones is right, I was being 'cute' in a mocking way and I apologize to the professionals out there. My excuse is I just am totally burned out with the feed back, its like we have all become rhetoric and only live in our minds. I fell pain at the loss of experimentation for the sake of experimentation. The US is not (my opinion) dominate in Science and may never be again. Forgive my flippant remarks and give my work a chance before condemnation. R. Stiffler -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:29 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Earth to Vortex "Cold" electricity exists Self-power or earth power? ...or Dr. Stiffler's magnetic personality? Hey folks - he is being a little cute here, but if it has not dawned on you yet- this is the most important video any Vortician or earthling has ever witnessed! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdJm9QCVJHY --- Michel wrote: > Parallel realities? Bill exists in mine, and his > posts do show up in the archives... ;-) No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Earth to Vortex "Cold" electricity exists
For the vorts, here is a bit of information that at this time means nothing to me, yet just may click with one of you. In my video #7 the LEDS are in series across the rectifiers. One LED each circuit glows very dim, almost can not see in lab light. Two LEDS (in series) are brighter, keep adding and better and brighter to the eight per side you see in the video. What's the limit... Well so far in order to avoid the white coats I leave that up to a duplicator to broadcast. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 9:29 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Earth to Vortex "Cold" electricity exists Self-power or earth power? ...or Dr. Stiffler's magnetic personality? Hey folks - he is being a little cute here, but if it has not dawned on you yet- this is the most important video any Vortician or earthling has ever witnessed! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdJm9QCVJHY --- Michel wrote: > Parallel realities? Bill exists in mine, and his > posts do show up in the archives... ;-) No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1066 - Release Date: 10/12/2007 11:10 AM
RE: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity
Stephen; I was told to look at your post as it was insured I would want to respond. But I am not returning to the list(s)until I finish documentation that I will present at a later time. It makes no sense to have this dialog with hundreds of people that are talking only from past or similar experience. I decided it was prudent to assemble all information in ONE place and answer questions in ONE place. This removes the possibility of a question begin answered in a different way as a result of a slightly different ordering of the question, then all 'Hell' is set free again. Now for you Post. Thank You... This is the most accurate view of what was presented yet. You must have looked and thought about it before putting in your two cents. This is the response I desire in order to carry on a dialog. Everyone assumes (myself included) and we all know the definition of assume? Now I just can not obtain and have tried for many years to get anyone to understand and look at what I am saying and not implying. 'I do not believe in "OU" or "Free Energy"', I do indeed believe in the conversion of one form of energy into other forms that allow the result to be usable. In my feeble mind I do believe the Universe has a finite amount of energy, some known and some unknown. The secret is to tap and use the unknown. It is not OU or Free Energy, you pay for what you get, even if it is at the Universal level. I so wish the populace would stop this OU craziness and focus on what I am trying to do. Present a conversion from another (unidentified) form to a useful form. If it could be looked at in this way we could move forward and not be held back by the past and current knowledge and theory. If we can duplicate and see that the addition of loads (LEDS or Incandescents) can be added and not spin the meter any faster then even if all gather around some 'mundane' explanation or not, the finding is significant. Measurement errors, measurement methods, isolation ala Faraday case and on and on, varies so much across the disciplines that each view think their way is sacrosanct. This is not the case, yet some will fight to the death over their long and closely held training and observation. I think this could indeed be explained with a little work inside of conventional theories, yet if it is, without looking outside the box, it is currently headed to the grave with all the rest of past claims. I have not moved to secrecy but then again I am now working only with a select group, why, because in this way the playing field is leveled and one does not have to waste energy in defending ones self, even thought it provides additional fuel for the fires, He is gone, see it don't work, He faked it and left us hanging, He never planned on telling us. This I understand happens when you get more than one involved, but there are like thinkers and often it is required to slow down and stay in the circle. The last three videos will be shown, but are indeed videos. The written work, the procedure, the duplication or observation of similar results are what is not needed and open free dialog can follow. I agree Kits are out, public study groups are out and after the last videos to finish the ten, YouTube is out. YouTube is not the place to display this type of work, for whatever reason, be it so called protection, public dissemination, ego building or whatever comes to mind. This is not the way. Now comes the age old question, well if you can't get your peers to sign on then what can you do. I think that has been answered throughout history, it was buried either by or wit the inventor. Hope to be back soon and will have the info link posted when it reaches a mass where it will answer questions. R.Stiffler -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 9:10 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity William Beaty wrote: > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Jones Beene wrote: > >> I find Bill's T-coil comparison enlightening ;-) but lacking (in the >> sense of apples-to-oranges) wrt to the latest experiment -- where there >> is NO, ZERO, NADA, signal... merely ground, or DrS's touch. > > Ah, that's different! > > :) > > I totally missed any announcement that self-acting or "closed-loop" > operation was achieved. WHOA slow down, that's not what was said. I've lost my sound again on this system so I can't hear the sound track on Video 7 but I don't think it's vital to understand what's happening. It's in three steps: -- Apparatus shown unconnected, all LEDs dark. -- ONE wire is connected, and the LEDs light. The wire is disconnected, and the LEDs go out again. -- Dr. Stiffler takes hold of the "input wire" with his hand, and the LEDs light again, but dimmer this time than when a clip lead was connected to the device. Is the signal generator still running in the background at this time? I don't know; my /guess/ would be 'yes'. (Darn I'd love to hear the
RE: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity
Horace, Michael, etc. None of you deserve to see anything. You all cry about this measurement and that AND I specifically asked in response to guru Michaels posting, propose or present the measurement methodology you will accept. Guess what all were silent except for WB whom I took to think it was directed to him. So lets show our color here fellows, knowing the high impedance of this circuit and the obvious lack of a power source, what is your plan? "Outside of a NASA equipped lab"? PUT UP OR SHUT UP! Or is that do it out way so we can claim something. SIck! Sick! -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 3:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity On Oct 22, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > >> This is all supposition. No actual power > measurements have been made. > > What? Bullshit. That is nothing less than arrogant > stupidity on your part! OK, show me power measurements that were either posted or on the web site. That does not mean *current* measurements. It does not mean RMS i*V. It means *power* measurements. We are talking about the film clip for which I provided the dialog. However, I haven't seen *any* power measurements so anything you come up with will be a plus. > >> Have you read Bill Beaty's posts? > > Of course. > >>> Eventually - IF nothing else happens first - it > will be possible to focus the light from these LEDs > onto an efficient photocell, and thereby eliminate > ground. > >> Eliminating ground is not the problem. Accurate > power measurement, or self running is the problem. > That will require hooking up the photocells to an > oscillator to drive the system. > > Why do you assume, with such a limited knowledge-base > of what is going one here, that the oscillation is not > lock-in ? I don't have to assume anything. It is up to the claimant to provide evidence. > > >>> That is what will silence all possible doubt. > >> I hope to see a self running system, but of course > don't expect to see it. This looks like a lot of > wishful thinking. > > Yes. It is wishful. Almost all of the efforts we make > here on Vo to advance the state of alternative energy > are wishful. Your efforts towards 'deflation fusion' > are totally wishful. Does that make it wrong ?? Deflation Fusion is a speculation and clearly labeled so in the article title. It is an extended hypothesis justified by references. It could be wrong or right or partially right. That is entirely different from an *experiment* report, and different still from a request for replication. The experiment description is either adequate for replication or not. In this case not. It appears to me to be a waste of time discussing this because there is just not enough information to evaluate anything. I have at least 3 projects in the queue that deserve my time more. Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085 - Release Date: 10/22/2007 10:35 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085 - Release Date: 10/22/2007 10:35 AM
RE: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity
It gets more interesting by the day, does it not? So lets see, If I place a picture of the readings on my TriField meter and my Ham RF field strength meter what a large can of worms that will open up. May I guess? You have it positioned in a dead spot of the lab, doe a test over every square foot. You do not have the gain of the meter turned high enough. Maybe your meter does not respond to the frequency doing it. In truth the reason I am no longer participation on the thread is it is in my view pointless. I listed the conditions of the lab location to be open an honest. But it appears that was a huge mistake. Have we digressed to dishonest and partial disclosure 'Is In' and 'Honesty' is out. I wish to thank Jones for at least being objective, but are some of you running in loops? I do not belong here (on this group) and maybe there is no other either, but I think in the interest of experiment it is worthwhile going down that road. Thank you all -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:36 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity On 25/10/2007 7:08 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: > > On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote: > >> The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it you >> cannot tell anything about electric fields or electric potentials >> that exist outside. You can't tell (in theory at least) whether >> the cage you are in is grounded, or sitting at 100kV, or on the top >> of a Tesla coil and being oscillated plus and minus to many megavolts. >> >> In this Ron's case however there is an "ground" wire entering the >> cage and who knows what potential difference exists between the >> cage and the wire entering it until he measures it. This is the >> important thing - it doesn't matter whether either or neither are >> grounded - it just matters what is the AC and DC difference in >> potential between the wire entering and a well constructed cage. > > Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply > strip a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the > faraday cage at the entry point using an alligator clip. It the > lights go out then the power is from an external source. If the lights go out when the faraday cage is internally grounded it may just mean the apparatus requires an external ground but it would not prove the power source is RF. To know for sure, you would have to see how the apparatus behaves far from significant RF sources when the faraday cage is externally grounded... or have the owners of the RF towers turn them off. ;-) Harry No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085 - Release Date: 10/22/2007 10:35 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.5/1085 - Release Date: 10/22/2007 10:35 AM
