Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22-02-2011, 11:18 PM   #321
oiram
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lost Oz "Unless they oppose it, they will be blamed for it. If they defend it, they are part of it."
Posts: 9,951
Likes: 9 (9 Posts)
Default should also works if the Batteries get replaced

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
I don't understand what all this means, and what you are asking, but in the first circuit I can see an AC/DC converter at the botton (the four diods forming a rectangle); this seems to be the main generator representing the positive pole.
What the Tesla switch does is to switch over the battery from a 12volt set to a 24volt set & the switchover sequence is done with a minimum of 100Hz.

The four diodes system is only there to receives a pulse once from the left then from the right.

I'm just thinking this should also works if the Batteries get replaced with Capacitors.

It's zero point free energy; they said they tested the unit for 3 years continuously & it's self charging & creates usable excess power.

You may read the side it's very interesting.


Last edited by oiram; 22-02-2011 at 11:26 PM.
oiram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 12:03 AM   #322
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oiram View Post

What the Tesla switch does is to switch over the battery from a 12volt set to a 24volt set & the switchover sequence is done with a minimum of 100Hz.

The four diodes system is only there to receives a pulse once from the left then from the right.

I'm just thinking this should also works if the Batteries get replaced with Capacitors.

It's zero point free energy; they said they tested the unit for 3 years continuously & it's self charging & creates usable excess power.

You may read the side it's very interesting.

But it is the batteries that are generating the 24v (12v each), isn't it? If you changed the batteries for capacitors, they wouldn't even be charged in the first place; since the main generator only emits pulses.

This is how I see the subject of free energy: If anyone was really able to produce energy from nowhere they have a Nobel Prize waiting for them. Physicists, electronic engineers, energy suppliers, and so on would be studying their circuits and the implications of their discovery right now; but nobody that is qualified to understand them seems to take this claims seriously.

Is it really possible that someone had found a source of free energy and instead of showing it to the scientific community, publishes the diagrams for free on the internet from which no one is able to replicate the experiments?
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 04:25 AM   #323
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
This is how I see the subject of free energy: If anyone was really able to produce energy from nowhere they have a Nobel Prize waiting for them. Physicists, electronic engineers, energy suppliers, and so on would be studying their circuits and the implications of their discovery right now; but nobody that is qualified to understand them seems to take this claims seriously.
Thats how the Urban Legend goes!!

'That old chestnut'
(an English saying )

If someone knew how to do it then they would make a fortune, so market forces dictate, if it was possible, it would be done. Light the everlasting lightbulb, or the bagless vacumn cleaner, if it could be done, someone would have done it and made fortunes off it, so if it isn't on the market or in the science books, its impossible.

I think the opposite to you. I know there are certain things than can be done, such as everlasting lightbulbs, that haven't been done because the existing product makes fortunes.

Lets just mention consumer electronics.

I work in electronics, I'm a systems engineer (TV), and at college we are taught MTBF - Mean Time Before Failure. When you buy a peice of equipment, the manufacturer specifies its MTBF in hours so you know roughly how long a peice of equipment will last and how much service you can get out of it. In a Post Production facility this figure is used to work out how much money to charge clients per hour, in order to run a profit from the machine you are hiring out before it breaks down.

We know that electronics are built with planned breakdown, they are engineered with components and cost in mind in order to deliver a product at a price with reasonable lifespan that is worthwhile to purchase the product.

Consumer electronics are designed to last no more than 5 years (is'nt that the U.S.A's curent policy) then they break. Its usually the power supply.

The manufacturers are constantly 'updating' their models so there are small changes every year and hence a power supply from last years model will not fit this years model.

Therefore, if you buy something and it breaks within 2 or 3 years you cannot get it repaired. You buy a new one. Thats good business strategy for the corporations.

I read an article long time back from a retired engineer who worked in silicon and in a nutshell stated that for the sake of a Diode a 1cent component, put into the circuit for the Switchem Mode Power supply would stop them breaking and they would last years just like the power supply's for the old TV's we had when growing up.

I remember when people could buy TV's and they lasted for 10 to 15 years.

So, if we have planned obsolescence in our electronics, better products being deliberatley witheld, bagless vacumn cleaners were kept off the market for years, even Oysters - do you think they are rare and cannot be farmed? Yes they even manipulate that market - do you really think if they have Free Energy they would let that out?

How much revenue would be lost globally?

They're trying to tax rainwater for f*cks sake! Rainwater used to be free - a gift from the planet if you will. Not any more, apart from already being metered out to houses they now want to lay claim to the rainwater!

Nobel Peace prize? Fuck the Nobel, whats that worth these days, a million bucks? Obama gave his away to charity. Thats pennies. If somene had a device that could nullify the Billions the energy industry is worth annually, do you think they would settle for a Nobel and a million bucks?

Oh but the glory would all make it wortwhile. Give me break. A Nobel and a million bucks or a shed load more and quite life somewhere stinking rich in perpetuity? Hmm, let me think.

You honestly think will give away free electricity if a device was invented that could do it?

I don't think so and our history proves it.

Oh and by the way - yes everlasting lightbulbs exist. I've seen several designs that are not in any dispute about working.

They used to use and probably still do a, technique for extending the life of bulbs on the soft touch buttons of broadcast equipment that would light up when you touch them - leave a bit of current running through them when they're off to keep them warm. Then they don't suffer the shock of cold to hot transition when switched on and off. Extends the life of those bulbs to about 15 to 20 years.

Last edited by pi3141; 23-02-2011 at 04:47 AM.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 06:37 AM   #324
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oiram View Post
Not sure if this fits you're Capacitor issue.

Look a this it gets the power from the two negative Poles.

I'm thinking this should also works if you replace the batteries with capacitors?
Thanks

I'm quite familiar with Bedini's work. I emailed him back in the 90's and he sent me one of his circuits. I've followed it through the years, occasionally picking up bits of info and finally, having watched the Energy From A Vacum video series recently, I think I finally understand what he is talking about!!

Literally tonight, while driving into work it fell into place in my mind. Yay!

But I only undertand his battery back popping technique and I don't understand it completely, like what is supposed to be going on in the battery - just what he says he is doing to make it work and roughly why its working.

Looking at his fan with the bicycle wheel and magnets. He is forming a long South pole magnetic spike. That spike is rotating around in space and cuts through a pick up coil at 90 degrees which induces an electrical pulse in the coil (high voltage spike / sharp negative transient).

This pulse is negative as the magnetic field is South pole.

The pulse is then fed back to the battery and it is the effect of a high voltage negative pulse reacting chemically within the battery that charges the battery in a more efficient, non-conventional way.

The gain in energy from the system is realised by a greater battery capacity and more energy in the battery than the spikes that went in due to the resultant chemical reaction within the battery.

Thats my take on it anyway.

It kind of makes sense because the theory on lead acid batteries has always been that you can't fast charge them. If you did, it bent the plates and killed the battery. Well I read a white paper from a lead acid battery manufacturer that said they had tested their batteries, deep cycle discharge and fast charging methods, literally overcharging them by conventional standards and after 500 cycles no plate damage was observed. I think thats probably explainable due to the quality of battery production in the 90's as opposed to the quality of lead acid car batteries in the 50's and 60's. The point is, you can fast charge a lead acid battery with overvoltage and not damage them.

Bedini however is not overcharging with a positive energy source, he is using a negative source which probably causes less damage to the internal plates anyway.

Plus there is the effect going on in the battery due to the chemical reaction.

I'd love to know if that understanding is right or not.

Last edited by pi3141; 23-02-2011 at 06:54 AM.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 02:41 PM   #325
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Thats how the Urban Legend goes!!

'That old chestnut'
(an English saying )

If someone knew how to do it then they would make a fortune, so market forces dictate, if it was possible, it would be done. Light the everlasting lightbulb, or the bagless vacumn cleaner, if it could be done, someone would have done it and made fortunes off it, so if it isn't on the market or in the science books, its impossible.

I think the opposite to you. I know there are certain things than can be done, such as everlasting lightbulbs, that haven't been done because the existing product makes fortunes.

Lets just mention consumer electronics.

I work in electronics, I'm a systems engineer (TV), and at college we are taught MTBF - Mean Time Before Failure. When you buy a peice of equipment, the manufacturer specifies its MTBF in hours so you know roughly how long a peice of equipment will last and how much service you can get out of it. In a Post Production facility this figure is used to work out how much money to charge clients per hour, in order to run a profit from the machine you are hiring out before it breaks down.

We know that electronics are built with planned breakdown, they are engineered with components and cost in mind in order to deliver a product at a price with reasonable lifespan that is worthwhile to purchase the product.

Consumer electronics are designed to last no more than 5 years (is'nt that the U.S.A's curent policy) then they break. Its usually the power supply.

The manufacturers are constantly 'updating' their models so there are small changes every year and hence a power supply from last years model will not fit this years model.

Therefore, if you buy something and it breaks within 2 or 3 years you cannot get it repaired. You buy a new one. Thats good business strategy for the corporations.

I read an article long time back from a retired engineer who worked in silicon and in a nutshell stated that for the sake of a Diode a 1cent component, put into the circuit for the Switchem Mode Power supply would stop them breaking and they would last years just like the power supply's for the old TV's we had when growing up.

I remember when people could buy TV's and they lasted for 10 to 15 years.

So, if we have planned obsolescence in our electronics, better products being deliberatley witheld, bagless vacumn cleaners were kept off the market for years, even Oysters - do you think they are rare and cannot be farmed? Yes they even manipulate that market - do you really think if they have Free Energy they would let that out?

How much revenue would be lost globally?

They're trying to tax rainwater for f*cks sake! Rainwater used to be free - a gift from the planet if you will. Not any more, apart from already being metered out to houses they now want to lay claim to the rainwater!

Nobel Peace prize? Fuck the Nobel, whats that worth these days, a million bucks? Obama gave his away to charity. Thats pennies. If somene had a device that could nullify the Billions the energy industry is worth annually, do you think they would settle for a Nobel and a million bucks?

Oh but the glory would all make it wortwhile. Give me break. A Nobel and a million bucks or a shed load more and quite life somewhere stinking rich in perpetuity? Hmm, let me think.

You honestly think will give away free electricity if a device was invented that could do it?

I don't think so and our history proves it.

Oh and by the way - yes everlasting lightbulbs exist. I've seen several designs that are not in any dispute about working.

They used to use and probably still do a, technique for extending the life of bulbs on the soft touch buttons of broadcast equipment that would light up when you touch them - leave a bit of current running through them when they're off to keep them warm. Then they don't suffer the shock of cold to hot transition when switched on and off. Extends the life of those bulbs to about 15 to 20 years.
I agree with you, everything is made on purpose with a limited life-time to have clients constantly buying new stuff. But this has nothing to do with free energy. It's not about Nobel Prizes or about money and fame either; it's about those circuits/devices not producing any free energy, it's about all these people who claim to be able to produce free energy not being able to prove it, and it's about this urban legend (mostly linked to Tesla) for which absolutely no evidences exist.

Even if someone was powerful enough to bribe and shut up every single scientist, electronic engineer and physicst worldwide (including all governmets in the world); why would they allow solar pannels to be sold? You can already power you home with "free energy", and no one needs to be connected anymore to an energy supplier if they really wanted to!

Last edited by flyermay; 23-02-2011 at 02:42 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 07:59 PM   #326
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
Even if someone was powerful enough to bribe and shut up every single scientist, electronic engineer and physicst worldwide (including all governmets in the world); why would they allow solar pannels to be sold? You can already power you home with "free energy", and no one needs to be connected anymore to an energy supplier if they really wanted to!
But you don't need to bribe everyone - just ensure the inventor doesn't get it out.

If some do get some publicity, bury it by bribery or machevellian means and leave doubt in peoples mind about it and nobody looks twice.

How many scientists - mainstream scientists are involved in Free Energy research? Any at all. Cos if there aren't - then clearly mainstream scientists are never going to find anything because they aren't looking for it.

So its only going to be inventors and a few individuals. Thats not so difficult to control. If you make an invention for a car then logically you get in touch with a car manufacturer. They buy your idea. Your happy, they're happy and the invention/improvement gets filed away somewhere for 'future markets or research' never gets released.

It would only be a few mainstream scientists who might investigate in their spare time and stumble across something. But if you were that man, you would be in a very lonely place trying to explain to your coleagues you've done something they say can't be done. You might just shelve it and forget about it. Or present it as a discovery of some new phenomena but don't even hint that you were looking for free energy or they will probably drop the idea like a ton of bricks and distance themselves from you.

Did you see what happened with Deborah Cung when she released a statement about finding negative resistance statement on the college website, then retracted, couldn't give an interview until they figured out what it was, or the cold fusion experiments that were denounced as fraud and now 10 years later quietly accepted as true. Make a big noise it must be fraud at the time, everyone walks away and gives up, then years the later when the scientists finally get recognition there is no media interest because 'wasn't that a fraud' mentatility still exists about it - its been tainted.

Its not that difficult to control to my mind.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 09:18 PM   #327
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
But you don't need to bribe everyone - just ensure the inventor doesn't get it out.

If some do get some publicity, bury it by bribery or machevellian means and leave doubt in peoples mind about it and nobody looks twice.

How many scientists - mainstream scientists are involved in Free Energy research? Any at all. Cos if there aren't - then clearly mainstream scientists are never going to find anything because they aren't looking for it.

So its only going to be inventors and a few individuals. Thats not so difficult to control. If you make an invention for a car then logically you get in touch with a car manufacturer. They buy your idea. Your happy, they're happy and the invention/improvement gets filed away somewhere for 'future markets or research' never gets released.

It would only be a few mainstream scientists who might investigate in their spare time and stumble across something. But if you were that man, you would be in a very lonely place trying to explain to your coleagues you've done something they say can't be done. You might just shelve it and forget about it. Or present it as a discovery of some new phenomena but don't even hint that you were looking for free energy or they will probably drop the idea like a ton of bricks and distance themselves from you.

Did you see what happened with Deborah Cung when she released a statement about finding negative resistance statement on the college website, then retracted, couldn't give an interview until they figured out what it was, or the cold fusion experiments that were denounced as fraud and now 10 years later quietly accepted as true. Make a big noise it must be fraud at the time, everyone walks away and gives up, then years the later when the scientists finally get recognition there is no media interest because 'wasn't that a fraud' mentatility still exists about it - its been tainted.

Its not that difficult to control to my mind.
What do you mean by ensure the inventor doesn't get it out; there are hundreds of people on the internet claiming that they have already done it, that they found Tesla's lost invention, that they can produce free energy, zero-point energy, vacuum energy, etc... we even had a dozen diagrams on this thread already. Nobody is stopping these people; neither by bribes or any other means, because their claims are simply false...

On the other hand, there are thousands of qualified scientists looking for new and renewable forms of energy, we see the fruits of their work every now and then: solar pannels, wind turbines, waves and tides, biofuels, hydrogen cells, etc, etc... there are hundreds of R&D labs seriously looking already for the alternative to fossil fuels.

Even if there was really someone buying every single invention that produces free energy, that doesn't mean it can't published and researched; a patent grants you control over who commercialises it, it doesn't cover keeping the secret.

There are many scientists that completely lost their reputation, but that's not because they did something right, it's because they did something wrong and tried to convince their colleagues of their success (whether it was on purpose or not). There had been a few cases in the last years of supposedly genuine scientists claiming to have achieved cold fussion, but it always turned to be either a fraud or a mistaken experiment that could never be replicated again. Actually, most scientists even agree that cold fussion is impossible, since the maths show that you will always need more energy to fuse the atoms than the energy that such a reaction would produce.

Last edited by flyermay; 23-02-2011 at 09:23 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 09:46 PM   #328
oiram
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lost Oz "Unless they oppose it, they will be blamed for it. If they defend it, they are part of it."
Posts: 9,951
Likes: 9 (9 Posts)
Lightbulb You may have to read a bit more to be convinced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
But it is the batteries that are generating the 24v (12v each), isn't it? If you changed the batteries for capacitors, they wouldn't even be charged in the first place; since the main generator only emits pulses.

This is how I see the subject of free energy: If anyone was really able to produce energy from nowhere they have a Nobel Prize waiting for them. Physicists, electronic engineers, energy suppliers, and so on would be studying their circuits and the implications of their discovery right now; but nobody that is qualified to understand them seems to take this claims seriously.

Is it really possible that someone had found a source of free energy and instead of showing it to the scientific community, publishes the diagrams for free on the internet from which no one is able to replicate the experiments?
To understand any of this you have to get out of the Box they placed us all into!
Forget about all you're schooling because it's all manipulated to the core!

You may have to read a bit more to be convinced?


Yes Tesla should ends up with 100 Nobel Prizes! All he got was nothing for work well done.
That's the reality how this world mafia works just ask JP. Morgan he is one of the big, big mafia in this World blocked everything with could be totally free long time ago like in 100years ago.

http://peswiki.com/images/4/46/TS9.jpg
This simple-looking circuit needs to have an inductive load, preferably a motor. If the switching rate and
switching quality were of a sufficiently high standard, then the load could be powered indefinitely. After three
years of tests,
the batteries appeared to be in perfect condition. If the circuit was switched off and the
batteries discharged to a low level, then when the circuit was switched on again, the batteries returned to full
charge in under one minute. As no electrical charging circuit was connected to the system, the energy which
charged those batteries had to be flowing into the batteries (and load) from outside the circuit. The similarity
with the Bedini pulsed battery charger circuits immediately springs to mind, especially as no heating
occurred in the batteries in spite of the massive charging rate. If the circuit was switched off and heavy
current drawn from the batteries, then heat would be produced which is quite normal for battery discharging.
The system operated lights, heaters, television sets, small motors and a 30-horsepower electric motor. If left
undisturbed, with the circuit running, then each battery would charge up to nearly 36 volts with no apparent ill
effects. Their finding were that if the switching rate was below 100 Hz then there was no power gain and if
the rate exceeded 800 Hz, then it was dangerous, but they omitted to say why or in what way - possibly
causing the battery voltages to exceed the voltage ratings of the circuit components which they were using.
The switching used was mechanical:
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/TopTen.pdf



For those which like to learn more about this Free Energy ideas.
Hundreds of divides in detail ....
Download the PDF 30 mb file ....
PJKbook.pdf







My Personal notes:
WOW! ....How true again regarding this topic & totally appropriate!
Is my action connected, related or synchronized with Symbolic number meanings?
My Posting No. 3197 = 20 what does it say Symbolically?

Quote:
Properties of the number 20
Symbolism

Represent the God solar for the Mayas.

Represent "the fundamental differentiation which creates in the world two relatively antagonistic poles, and particularly the opposition: spirit-matter", according to R. Allendy.

J. Boehme calls this number "the Devil", that is to say the material world opposed to the spiritual world.

The number 20 is considered as ominous for saint Jerome because it indicates the universal fight, but it also represents the source of all energy of the world.

This number is represented in Hebrew by the letter caph, in form of opened hand, to seize and hold. The eleventh mystery of the Tarot, which corresponds to this letter, and consequently with this number, is "the Force" which expresses energy, the activity, the work, according to R. Allendy.

Number associated to the resurrection or to the reincarnation, according to Creusot.
http://www.ridingthebeast.com/numbers/nu19.php

Last edited by oiram; 23-02-2011 at 10:16 PM. Reason: * * * * My Posting No. 3197 = 20
oiram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2011, 10:25 PM   #329
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oiram View Post

To understand any of this you have to get out of the Box they placed us all into!
Forget about all you're schooling because it's all manipulated to the core!

You may have to read a bit more to be convinced?


Yes Tesla should ends up with 100 Nobel Prizes! All he got was nothing for work well done.
That's the reality how this world mafia works just ask JP. Morgan he is one of the big, big mafia in this World blocked everything with could be totally free long time ago like in 100years ago.

http://peswiki.com/images/4/46/TS9.jpg
This simple-looking circuit needs to have an inductive load, preferably a motor. If the switching rate and
switching quality were of a sufficiently high standard, then the load could be powered indefinitely. After three
years of tests,
the batteries appeared to be in perfect condition. If the circuit was switched off and the
batteries discharged to a low level, then when the circuit was switched on again, the batteries returned to full
charge in under one minute. As no electrical charging circuit was connected to the system, the energy which
charged those batteries had to be flowing into the batteries (and load) from outside the circuit. The similarity
with the Bedini pulsed battery charger circuits immediately springs to mind, especially as no heating
occurred in the batteries in spite of the massive charging rate. If the circuit was switched off and heavy
current drawn from the batteries, then heat would be produced which is quite normal for battery discharging.
The system operated lights, heaters, television sets, small motors and a 30-horsepower electric motor. If left
undisturbed, with the circuit running, then each battery would charge up to nearly 36 volts with no apparent ill
effects. Their finding were that if the switching rate was below 100 Hz then there was no power gain and if
the rate exceeded 800 Hz, then it was dangerous, but they omitted to say why or in what way - possibly
causing the battery voltages to exceed the voltage ratings of the circuit components which they were using.
The switching used was mechanical:
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/TopTen.pdf



For those which like to learn more about this Free Energy ideas.
Hundreds of divides in detail ....
Download the PDF 30 mb file ....
PJKbook.pdf







My Personal notes:
WOW! ....How true again regarding this topic & totally appropriate!
Is my action connected, related or synchronized with Symbolic number meanings?
My Posting No. 3197 = 20 what does it say Symbolically?


Did you test that circuit for 3 years?

You are asking me to forget everything I know because if I don't agree with you then I must be "manipulated"; yet if a random guy on the internet tells you that a circuit produces energy out of thin air, you simply drop every law, theory and experiment known to mankind and blindly believe this guy... What's the logic behind your reasoning; I really don't understand it?

Another doubt: if all this is so secret, covered up, and hidden; how come everyone on the internet has access to hundreds of different circuits that provide free energy? I mean, it seems to me that it's only those who are really qualified in this field that ignore these revolutionary inventions that are free on the internet; everyone else knows about it.

Last edited by flyermay; 23-02-2011 at 10:28 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2011, 04:37 AM   #330
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
What do you mean by ensure the inventor doesn't get it out; there are hundreds of people on the internet claiming that they have already done it, that they found Tesla's lost invention, that they can produce free energy, zero-point energy, vacuum energy, etc... we even had a dozen diagrams on this thread already. Nobody is stopping these people; neither by bribes or any other means, because their claims are simply false...
Lol! Yes now in 2011 on the internet there are hundreds.

Anyway I don't want to derail your thread.

I believe you have helped me answer my question about Kron's negative resistor.

I do not think it is a 'perpetual free energy device' as thought by the source but possibly a temporary battery like a capacitor used in the missile control system because of the necessities that missile control system requires. Of which I know nothing about.

Or I'm completly wrong and it is a free energy device.

Thanks anyway.

Quote:
There are many scientists that completely lost their reputation, but that's not because they did something right, it's because they did something wrong and tried to convince their colleagues of their success (whether it was on purpose or not). There had been a few cases in the last years of supposedly genuine scientists claiming to have achieved cold fussion, but it always turned to be either a fraud or a mistaken experiment that could never be replicated again. Actually, most scientists even agree that cold fussion is impossible, since the maths show that you will always need more energy to fuse the atoms than the energy that such a reaction would produce.
No thats wrong, in the case of Cold Fusion it has been proven true. Surely you are aware of that with the Fleischmann–Pons controversy?

You don't have to answer that.

Thanks again for helping me answer my question.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2011, 04:40 PM   #331
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Lol! Yes now in 2011 on the internet there are hundreds.

Anyway I don't want to derail your thread.

I believe you have helped me answer my question about Kron's negative resistor.

I do not think it is a 'perpetual free energy device' as thought by the source but possibly a temporary battery like a capacitor used in the missile control system because of the necessities that missile control system requires. Of which I know nothing about.

Or I'm completly wrong and it is a free energy device.

Thanks anyway.
Thank you for asking. You did not derail it; if it's about science than this is the right thread.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
No thats wrong, in the case of Cold Fusion it has been proven true. Surely you are aware of that with the Fleischmann–Pons controversy?

You don't have to answer that.

Thanks again for helping me answer my question.
And that's what the controversy is all about: whether or not the experiment has been proven.

As of today, there are still no evidences that point out to any successful cold fussion experiment.

As a side note: It seems that a good option for a future energy source is antimatter-matter reactions; which produces 4 times more energy than nuclear fission, and 2 times more energy than nuclear fussion.

Last edited by flyermay; 24-02-2011 at 04:41 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2011, 10:10 PM   #332
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyermay View Post
And that's what the controversy is all about: whether or not the experiment has been proven.

As of today, there are still no evidences that point out to any successful cold fussion experiment.
I answered this a few hours ago but it seems my reply didn't get posted!

Anyway -

I thought the U.S Navy had confirmed the experiment as widely reported in the media.

I posted a few links, one to Fox News reporting on the story that the Navy had indeed confirmed the earlier experiment by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons

Link - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510589,00.html

There's still controversy? I did not know that.

Thought it was done and dusted but just being ignored.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2011, 10:37 PM   #333
flyermay
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: back on the DIF
Posts: 7,500
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
I answered this a few hours ago but it seems my reply didn't get posted!

Anyway -

I thought the U.S Navy had confirmed the experiment as widely reported in the media.

I posted a few links, one to Fox News reporting on the story that the Navy had indeed confirmed the earlier experiment by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons

Link - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510589,00.html

There's still controversy? I did not know that.

Thought it was done and dusted but just being ignored.
Well it seems that the research carried out by the US Navy in 2009 did not confirm Fleischmann–Pons' claims after all. What happened is that they detected energetic neutrons in the experiement, and they claimed that this is an indication of a nuclear reaction. But most scientists are still skeptic about it, since the experiment did not account for other sources for those neutrons.

Since Fleischmann–Pons' experiment many scientists have claimed to have finally done it; we see cases appearing on the news every few years, which just report what the researchers claim. But so far there hasn't been a single case where those experiments could be replicated and verified; they always give negative results (including those carried out by the US Navy in 2009).

So the scientific community agrees, not only that cold fusion was never achieved, due to the lack of experimental reproducibility, but also that cold fusion is a theoretical implausibility.

Last edited by flyermay; 24-02-2011 at 10:46 PM.
flyermay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-01-2019, 05:26 AM   #334
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Bumping
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:30 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.