The Bearden Free Energy Collector

نوشته شده در موضوع تولید انرژی رایگان در 15 مارس 2017

Jean Louis,

Yes, we consider we prisoner it precisely. In
genuine circuits matching to that one we drew and animated,
one should place a diode in a “back emf line”
from a belligerent to a high side, so that stream can
usually pass in a normal one-way instruction in a circuit
once a “potentializing source” is switched
away.  In theory, a curl of trouble-maker semiconductor
element can also be “charged with pristine potential
yet initial current” in this fashion. 
There is no defilement of appetite conservation.

Another approach of looking during a switched
trouble-maker semiconductor circuit is that one charges it
with voltage only, totally statically, with no j(phi)
stream accessible during “excitation” or
“potentialization”. One afterwards switches the
voltage source away, carrying drawn usually intensity from it
and not power, and a circuit afterwards changes itself and
dissipates this additional “static” appetite in the
load, by automatically converting itself into a normal
energetic conducting circuit as a electrons
“relax” and pierce as current. Energy is
energy, possibly immobile or dynamic. Yet usually to
send appetite alone, does not need work (at slightest in
theory; in a genuine universe one contingency compensate for some switching
costs to get it all timed and switched).

For a severe justification, a most
modernized speculation currently is quantum margin theory. An
adage of that speculation is that a intensity (anywhere, in
space or on a circuit) can be altered openly and during will.
That is called “gauge
freedom”. Electrodynamicists do it to the
Maxwell-Heaviside equations (following Lorentz, to reduce
a equations to a easier subset) so that a resulting
equations are easier to solve and numerical methods can
be mostly avoided. However, they always insist that we
“do it twice”, changing both phi and the
A-potential so that a dual new army constructed are
deliberately finished equal and opposite. Then they claim
that a new equations are in any clarity matching to
a former. They are not. In a genuine system, one
has insincere that (1) a intensity appetite of a circuit
has been openly changed, twice, (2) dual new army have
seemed openly in a circuit, (4) a highlight and
stress-energy of a complement have been deliberately
changed, (4) a begetter has been so foolish that he
deliberately organised these dual giveaway army to be equal
and opposite, to quarrel any other to a draw, so that the
openly energized circuit can't use any of a free
regauging appetite to do work in a bucket (which requires
translating something, in this box electrons as
electrical stream carrying a additional intensity for
liberate in a — contend — resistive load.

In other words, conventional
electrodynamicists insist that we usually “bottle
up” that additional giveaway intensity energy, so that the
circuit is totally prevented from discharging it in the
outmost bucket to do some giveaway work.

Well, if one is giveaway to change a potential
appetite of a circuit during will (and all electrodynamicists
assume this), afterwards since not do that with usually a single
intensity change, so that a net giveaway force appears and is
accessible for use? Then a complement can be
“released” to use that force to empty that
additional appetite that was openly combined while a force was
hold “static” and not authorised to pierce and do
work. Gauge margin speculation and a customary Lorentz
exquisite regauging of a Maxwell-Heaviside equations
already practically assume that this can be done.

Another approach to see it is that initially, the
behind emf combined by Newton’s third law from the
“frozen electrons”, does emanate a “equal
and conflicting force temporarily”, so “bottling
up” that giveaway intensity energy, but only
temporarily !
Then that back-force relaxes as the
electrons gradually move, and a submit giveaway force
stays and now can interpret electrons by a load,
doing giveaway work as it dissipates in a load.

Let me put it this way. If it CANNOT be
done, afterwards that falsifies a sign leisure principle
itself, that in spin falsifies sign margin speculation and
many of a modernized production of a day. I don’t
consider all that can presumably be falsified, since it has
a immeasurable series of experiments unchanging with it, all
opposite physics. But if it can, afterwards that is itself
momentous.

So possibly approach we go, it’s a momentous
experiment.

Such “asymmetrical regauging” so
as to have a ensuing giveaway force as good as giveaway energy,
is also a means of extracting appetite directly from the
vacuum.  The opening is rarely active, containing
good appetite density, so can also be regarded as a very
heated scalar potential. For electrical circuits, it can
be regarded as a hulk voltage, arrange of like a “high
appetite line”. That is a common “ambient
belligerent potential”, and all other potentials are thus
changes to that “ambient ground
potential”. So to make a elementary intensity is to
garland appetite in a internal vacuum, “collecting”
appetite from a concept opening and into that local
‘bunching area” or in a internal complement about that the
appetite is “bunched”. Any intensity is also
a span of spacetime, and that is a change in the
internal appetite firmness of spacetime (and a vacuum) a
priori.

Another approach to courtesy a degenerate
semiconductor circuit is to usually see that relocating voltage
alone, with no current, is not power. Rigorously, P = Vi,
and if i = 0, afterwards P = 0. If P = 0, afterwards W = Pt = 0, so
there is no work W concerned in simply relocating appetite that
does not change form. Hence a idea of sign freedom,
or pristine changing of intensity appetite being
“free” and costing zero in theory.

So a pretence is to use that good abstract
idea in a genuine universe and in a genuine circuit. The
typical copper conductor, with a extraordinarily fast
greeting time of a electrons, will not give we time
adequate for any conspicuous volume of “free”
intensity appetite to pierce onto a circuit, without
current, before we can switch away. But if the
“conductor” itself cooperates with you, and
becomes initial an “insulator” for awhile and
afterwards automatically changes itself to a conductor, then
we can use this to furnish an overunity
mechanism. But usually if a “conductor”
binds a “insulator” state prolonged adequate for you
to get a intensity onto it yet stream flowing, and
afterwards get off and finish a circuit by switching. It
costs zero to send intensity only, onto some
trapped charges in an “insulator”. The pretence is
to get a circuit to afterwards be “smart” and
change itself into a conductor, so that a dissipation
of that appetite can occur.

Note also that regulating high immobile voltage can
openly send a good understanding of appetite to some trapped
charges. The appetite eliminated by intensity V to
trapped charges q is given by Vq. V is tangible as
“joules per interacting coulomb” and q is the
series of coulombs interacting, yet not means to move
(translate).  For a given volume of trapped q, the
volume of appetite eliminated is Vq, and it can be giveaway as
prolonged as a electrons do not translate.

Some years ago we were looking into doping
2% pristine iron into really pristine aluminum, and creation the
trouble-maker semiconductor wires out of that. However, it
requires a metallurgy lab to do it, as it has to be done
underneath an dead atmosphere since Al and Fe warp at
opposite temperatures. To make a amalgamate so takes
some doing, and we never were means to get any finished to
examination with, and of march could not make it
ourselves.

There seemed to be some crafty things one
could do with a circuit finished usually of coils, capacitors,
diodes, resistors, and trouble-maker semiconductor
wiring.  Addition of transistors also increasing the
operation of possibilities. Actually Nikola Tesla was
means to “shuttle” appetite openly in his patented
circuits, and this can usually be seen in a aloft symmetry
EM analysis; vectors and tensors will not show
it. But to see it clearly, see T.W. Barrett,
“Tesla’s Nonlinear Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC)
Theory,” Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie,
16(1), 1991, p. 23-41. Barrett used quaternion EM
analysis, that shows it clearly. Barrett went on to
urge on Tesla’s methods, and performed dual patents in
a vigilance area. See T.W. Barrett, “Oscillator-Shuttle-Circuit (OSC)
Networks for Conditioning Energy in Higher-Order Symmetry
Algebraic Topological Forms and RF Phase
Conjugation,” U.S. Patent No. 5,493,691
.  Feb. 20,
1996. Barrett is one of a pioneers of ultrawideband
radar.

Meanwhile, I’m still flattering diseased physically,
yet removing a small stronger any day, yet we can
usually work for a few hours and afterwards usually leisurely. A
integrate some-more months and hopefully we will be behind roughly to
normal functioning again.

Anyway, good experimenting and we wish you
glorious results. we wish many of a researchers in your
organisation will be means to obtain some suitable degenerate
semiconductor material, and do some successful
experiments.

Very best wishes,

Tom Bearden

Article source: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tbfrenrg.htm

پاسخ دهید

نشانی ایمیل شما منتشر نخواهد شد. بخش‌های موردنیاز علامت‌گذاری شده‌اند *

*

code