He’s on the right track, though. Most universities offer Octal Appreciation in the first or second year of computer science programs, usually involving trips to Octal Museums for a first-hand look at some of the great octal numbers in history. The British Museum is said to have an original 7777 on display and accessible to the general public. And of course the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi has aced this stuff: 16 principles is octal 20 principles, while 8 pairs of principles is octal 10 pairs – these are called “sacred” numbers, because they look great in octal and are guaranteed to have good Karma coming out the ying-yang.
I appreciate this, eightfold.
So Physicists 74 years ago using a completely wrong model of the atom and primitive equipment by today’s standards were nonetheless able to deliberately achieve this?
And they didn’t even bother to test the Little Boy design ahead of time. It’s first use was in action. Their model and formulas told them it would work.
What, they just lucked into it? And all the subsequent devices, reactors, and on and on? All just blind luck?
If someones models work so amazingly perfectly like this, the errors in the model have to be almost unimaginably tiny.
It has come to my awareness that my simulations of Joseph Newman, along with my present endeavors, all point to one oversight evading me up until now…
That both devices require a high frequency input to appear to function as overunity if we ignore the salient wisdom of our common sense concerning the electromagnetic spectrum…
The problem is what Newman has elected to share with us doesn’t jive with my simulations of his device…
screenshot of HF input at the so-called bar magnet
LTSpice circuit file of HF input at the so-called bar magnet
screenshot of LF input at the so-called bar magnet
LTSpice circuit file of LF input at the so-called bar magnet
A slow rotation of a bar magnet cannot possibly induce sufficient gain to recharge the batteries.
Frequency equals energy; the higher the frequency, the more the energy. This is standard knowledge.
But where is this extra frequency coming from if not from the rotating bar magnet in the center of the coil?
It is coming from the excitation of helium inside the canister wrapped with a coil masquerading as a bar magnet per our taking Newman at his word.
Byron Brubaker is an electrical engineer who has had many a discussion with Newman spanning decades.
He has confided in me that he gave Newman the insight concerning the tendency for helium to exhibit an enhancement of its electromagnetics if this gas were to be enclosed in a glass bulb and surrounded by a coil (as an example).
What irked Byron for the longest time until now – having finally made his peace with Joseph – is that Newman never credited Byron. Joe decided, instead, to credit God for having given himself this insight.
So, there you have it. No overunity, but a hidden source of energy – hidden from our knowledge by an inventor wanting to keep his secret close to himself.
It makes sense that a little tickle should excite helium to add another tickle of its own at a much higher pitch serving as a HF input of low voltage and low resistance capable of blending its sine wave contribution with that of the HV and LF D/C square waves (chopped up by the commutator) and all of this combining inside the massive, highly resistive copper coil giving the benefit of a slow rotation and high torque as a mechanical gain and a slight recharge of its batteries (but no significant electrical gain; at least nothing to brag about).
No overunity; no free energy; plus a minor dose of secrecy.
… we may still deny what we see in favor of what we believe. Doing is belief in action: the commitment to go further with our belief than its mere entertainment by our psyche.
What people say and what people do are two different things.
People are entitled to have any opinion they want when it comes to theorizing from their observations.
In the end, it’s what they do with their theories which matters the most since that is what will impact us - not their ideologies.
I give my own theories as an exercise in critical thinking. For I have to wonder “how is it that I succeed?” But does it really matter what I think?
Something is allowing me to succeed. And when that something is not a free, open-source electronic software, but a robust, industry standard worth over two grand at the checkout counter, I have to wonder whether or not I should be asking - nay, demanding - a refund if (as you guys claim) I’m wrong.
Since you’ve just admitted it’s all bullshit, shouldn’t your book be marked down a bit more than $15.74?
Does “it’s” refer to HF? How can HF be bs? Now that I’ve uncovered Joe’s secret, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to get all excited and want to build it the way he did it and succeed instead of the way he told us to do it and fail?
I don’t understand the relevancy of your point. If you had bothered to buy my text (assuming you don’t trust my admission that I base my present design on my successful simulation of his), you would have seen its schematic is using a HF input just like I’m telling you Newman needed to use despite his hiding it from us.
I took your hinted criticism and reduced the price at the same time as reposting the text with a new title more accurate for its content…
I was doing searches on Amazon to see what came up when I plugged in: “free energy” only to find books on diets free of gluten. I’m no Steinmetz. Yet, transients are what this book is about - despite my tendency to call them surges since I don’t like what the term of transient implies: a tenuous lifespan, which is only true if we allow a transient to eat up a circuit. My job has been to simulate that prevention so as to lengthen their lifespan long enough to maybe get some use out of them.
Free energy is not appropriate as a title since that is merely the intended effect - not its cause. And since I spend over two-thirds of the text discussing theoretical causation, you’d think I’d steer away from whatever benefit a transient may bring to its user and title the book likewise? Well, I’m slow to learn.:smack:
They write themselves.
They literally do, due to the posts being inside a massive, highly resistive copper coil. Basically a little tickle excites the verbiage of a previous post to add another tickle of its own at a much higher pitch serving as a HF input of low voltage and low resistance capable of blending its sine wave contribution with that of the HV and LF D/C square waves (chopped up by the commutator), and voila! A new post has written itself, generating free energy in the process.
Someone should put this thread out of its misery before it starts some sort of energetic uncontrolled chain reaction.
I’ve seen quite a few threads here in which posters state that they have discovered the way to create ‘free’ energy.
Of course it would be interesting to discuss their theories, but sadly the same pattern emerges every time:
- the poster ignores scientific discussion of their idea
- the poster keeps giving Internet links as if they were evidence
- the poster declines to actually build a working machine, since they don’t like publicity, fame or a billion dollars
:smack:
I think we passed a milestone a few years back. AI can generate “Scientific” papers that make more sense and are more enjoyable to read than crank gibberish.
That’s how I know these recent posts aren’t an AI someone is testing.
Well, at least it’s not a bare Youtube video link, so that’s progress.
Old time cars prior to 1920 were not defying any precious laws of physics since physics hadn’t begun its campaign, yet, of obliterating novel thoughts and the devices which spring from them.
http://vinyasi.info/energy/Ammann%20Brothers,%20Newspaper%20Article.jpg
Prove it.
Do you know what any of those words mean?
The only thing this thread needs is popcorn.
No, wait, the only two things this thread needs are popcorn, and beer!
No, wait the only three things this thread needs are popcorn, beer, and hot young people in revealing swimwear!
Tris
I got noting to add, so I felt obliged to speak up.
Take away the “thread” part, and I’m in.