Ernst

Hi Sparky53,
Let me first say that I find Lyne's work difficult to read as there are many unproven (and IMO untrue) statements about Tesla's work, and also because of his use of imperial units instead of metric and in some cases wrong units. But I found some other material on Langmuir welding such as this and this

Thanks, Sparky. I'll see if I can find a copy of that book.
(In fact, before clicking "post reply" I googled it and found the 2nd edition - free download)

Ernst.

Thanks for the video. I watched the whole thing. I'd seen some of his video's before and am not too impressed. Also, when someone calls himself "professor" while he isn't (which I'd also found that out because I noticed him making mistakes than a pro wouldn't make), that gives me the impression of a narcissistic dbag desperately trying to boost his ego.
I cannot comment on his Safire comments because I just don't have enough info, but I can comment on the way he talks about things that we "KNOW FOR CERTAIN". There just is no such thing and any REAL scientist would readily admit that.
I too could talk for hours on this subject, but let's just not.
I am happy though, that there is a Safire project but I wish they would publish much more of their findings. The project costs only a minute fraction of the money that is poured into fusion research (which after 40+ years still seems hopeless) or that is spent on the military (research into the destruction of people and property), and any research, however unscientific/unfounded it may seem, may always (unexpectedly) expand our understanding of the world we live in.
I sincerely wish more money would be made available for this kind of research.


Ernst.

Yes, I just received this email:
----------------------------------------- -------------------------

Haven't had time to check all the links, though.

Ernst.

Not very many responses. Ok, let me vent my doubts then.
In the last report from the Safire project, they have shown that new elements were formed on the inner electrode. Elements that were not present in the initial set-up. This proves that nuclear processes take place even though, according to our current understanding, the conditions would not allow it. The quantities were extremely small but could be seen with a electron-microscope and identified with spectroscopy. That was, if I remember correctly, last year.
So within less than a year from the initial discovery, they claim to have made this into a commercially viable product. Not only that, but they also claim to be able to do this in a controlled manner so to reduce radioactive waste into safe-to-handle materials for example.
So within 1 year, they go from "hey, we have some sulfur atoms" to "give us your plutonium and we'll change it into aluminium".
Also, the reactor that they are proposing does not use the heat generated on the inner electrode (where the energy gets concentrated) but on the outside walls. If so much heat would be available there, why isn't that a problem in their current experiments?
So, in short, they are taking a huge step in a very short time. I don't see how that is credible, even if they did not report on all their findings.
I hope this is not another Texas tower...


Ernst.

Have a look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBInhPFFVog&t=4s

I always had great respect for what the EU movement was doing, including the Safire project.
At first glance, the linked video looks very good and promising, but after letting it sink in for a day or so, questions and doubts start bubbling up.
I will not immediately vent them here, have a look for yourself first and tell me what you think.


Ernst.

Ok, saw the video. Interesting, sure, but as you said this is the plasma ignition part and you're still working on the water fuel part.

I had a brief exchange with Eric in the past about the TMT. Eric was absolutely convinced that it did not generate energy, but then his judgement was based on the wrong diagram.
Many, if not most people today think that a TMT is just a Tesla coil with an "extra coil". I already had some evidence that this was not what Tesla would call a MT, now I have absolute proof, as you will see.
If someone reading this wants to see the actual diagram google "rare notes wardenclyffe" and you will find an article published in the Electric Spacecraft in the 90's, that contains some notes that Leland Anderson shared with them. Those show the correct diagram and you will find variations thereof in the CSN and Long Island Notes.
Anyway, if Eric is preparing for a demo of what he currently believes to be a MT then he may be less open to other views than (his) average. Nevertheless I am as interested in his reaction as in yours.


Ernst.

Send you a PM again.

Looks like we are getting somewhere. Tesla, Meyer, Bedini... who will be next?

I think we largely agree on Meyer's work and how he presents it.
It has given you some ideas that have resulted in a working prototype in the form of a jet engine? That is fantastic! Do you have a video I can see?

Your explanation about extra current from polarizing ether isn't even that far from how I would describe it. But in this simple statement there are still a lot of details to be filled in, not the least of which is that you require an energy source. This energy source is the primary cosmic rays as Tesla calls them and which are -together with the ether- outside the scope of modern science. This energy source can be tapped into if certain conditions are met...

It would be really great if you would help promote my book. I will provide a picture and bio in a PM.


Ernst.

I see you follow the explanation given by Meyer. That is OK, everyone is free to believe in what you feel comfortable with. So without wanting to attack anyone, his explanation does not make any sense to me. But let's try to avoid endless discussions. You have given it considerable thought, I'm sure, and so have I. We are not going to convince eachother.

So.... my explanation why it could work is very different and does involve extra current, generated from cosmic rays. Now I'm sure this sounds like the least probable explanation to all of you but after exploring Tesla's work for as long as I have and having seen what I have in my own experiments I am quite convinced that generating extra current out of "thin air" is possible. The key to doing so is a sawtooth waveform (slow rise, sharp drop), either on its own (DC as with lightning) or AM modulated on a HF carrier (AC as with the QCW).

If anyone can identify such a current in the TPU or the works of Hubbard, Hendershot and Moray, please show me.

For the reasoning behind that allow me to promote my booklet here again. Your buying it helps me out a bit and I'm sure will provide you with new insights in Tesla's work.


Ernst.

Thanks for the reference! That is indeed the one I meant.

I have been working on this (=creating this wave form with sufficient power) too with MOSFET's and although some people on the internet have booked success, I have met failure after failure. I have found that those who have been successful use IGBT's in parallel. See QCW
As I am looking for higher frequencies IGBT's are not an option and so I have switched to vacuum tubes as well. There is a bit of a learning curve but the end result is definitely more robust than with semiconductors.
Of course Tesla did not use these but by using an "extra coil" you can work with just a spark gap and get the same effect. So far I have been partially successful replicating this the Tesla way, that is no over-unity but there definitely is a clear increase in current coming from... somewhere outside of established physics.
Anyway, if you start exploring in this direction, please keep me/us informed.
Perhaps we can share some useful tips. Isn't that the idea behind this forum?
If done correctly I am pretty sure you will find some amazing results


Ernst.

Yes, well, how it could relate to Tesla's work is a long story.
You roughly know my view on Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter and his "self acting engine".
I have provided a link to a document describing this a couple of years ago on this forum.
I forgot where and which document.
It can be deduced from there, but I have written it in a different form in that book that I referred to earlier, a more forensic approach, I guess.
Once you understand how the self acting engine was implemented in the TMT, you could see a similar thing happen here with this fuel cell. Possibly....
You, having done much more research on Meyer, say it is most likely something else.
OK, I accept that. But as I am building the necessary equipment anyway, it would be very easy to do a simple test sometime.
I'll let you know if I end up on the list of Meyer replication failures. (or not)


Ernst.

Thanks for your response, Aaron.
If what you are saying is true, then there is no link with Tesla's work.
I have briefly dug into Stanley's work and found many contradicting statements even in his own words.
Most i-net sources say that it produced much more (I have seen a factor 1000 mentioned) H2 and O2 then one would expect from the current and that later reproductions by others produce what they call Brown gas.
There was a British association for advanced energy (or something along those lines, can't find it right now) that confirmed the unusual amount of gas produced.
I don't want to enter into discussions on this point because my knowledge is only from one day i-net browsing and from what I found, which includes many of Stan's own words and drawings, I'm led to believe that he accidentally stumbled on something which he then tried to improve upon without really understanding what was going on.

So, in short, from what I read (and hear) it did concern the amount and if so, then I can see a link with Tesla's work. If it was not the amount but the quality of the gas, then there is no link.


Ernst.

Someone who bought and read my book on Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter showed me this image depicting a diagram from Stanley Meyer.

The interesting bit is marked with a red circle; a slowly rising, then sharply dropping voltage.
If this is the key to obtaining energy from primary cosmic rays (as I described) then this may very well be something that Stanley rediscovered and tried to explain in an entirely different manner.

It is also the same thing that gives a QCW its extremely long discharges.

It is the same thing found in different places creating astonishing results.

Can anyone add something to this list that works on the same kind of electrical input: a slow rise followed by a sharp drop of voltage (either AC or DC).

Is someone interested in exploring this?


Ernst.

Ah! Ok, so you have built this reactor and produced helium3 and deuterium with it.
Impressive!

Ernst.

A "brute force" method.... just give it all you can produce and perhaps something will happen?

Then, make the reaction chamber from plutonium and add a magnetron, ionize the gas and pass a few million amps through it... and of course build the device in the vicinity of a black hole.

You never know until you try...

Ernst.

This raises a few questions:

- what is the purpose of this contraption?
- have you build one?
- how do you expect it to fulfil its purpose?


Ernst.

It produces 3000 Watt per hour?
What is that? 3000 Joules per second per hour?

A quick glance on the inside reveals 2 large batteries and 2 converters.
With those alone you can probably have 3000 Watt for one hour.
And then you will need to charge your batteries....

I think you can buy these a whole lot cheaper.


Ernst.

The reason why the Rothschilds are so obscenely rich is that they always bet on both sides.
So they can not really lose.
Zeitgeist presents a new society, without money, but make no mistake, that society will enslave you in an even worse way.
Now guess who is a member of this Zeitgeist movement....
....
....
Well?
....
....
You're right: David de Rothschild. I have seen a video where he tries to present himself as the new Jesus.
Watch out for this guy, he is FAR more dangerous than you may think.
Oh, where did he get his 'de' in his name?
From money ofcourse, duh!

Ernst.

Let me guess.... he did not answer or he answered "so ?"

Anarchy is the only solution. You're not calling for anarchy? Well, you should!
The more things get "regulated" the less room there is for free expression.
Free expression is the only route towards full development of your potential.
Imagine what power we would have if everyone could develop to his/her full potential.

So, away with kings and queens. They should go where they belong; in fairy tales!
Away with governments, people can damn well take care of themselves.
Away with armies, nobody should kill for his "fatherland" or some other ludicrous concept.
Away with the monetary system, it has utterly failed its original purpose, and now only brings undesirable things (drugs, prostitution, slavery, corruption etc.).
Total, worldwide anarchy is the only solution.

Think about it.

Ernst.