User:Vinyasi/Free Energy does not Exist: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:55, 25 November 2022

What are smart ways of reducing the amount of fossil fuels

we burn, by stopping the supply, or by stopped the demand?

The trick is to eliminate the prohibition against the study of free voltage since free energy can readily arise from voltage by supplying somewhere for voltage to drain to, such as: a ground or a self-short.

But deregulating nuclear power will produce more plutonium for more nuclear warheads to defend, what? Our prohibition against free voltage? Yeah, obviously we're maintaining the problem if we go the route which Abdel suggests.^[1]

Voltage can be had from anywhere in space by employing the use of an open transmission line concept/approach for its extraction. And reactance can accelerate the duration it will take to accumulate enough potential to run an EV. And a shorted transmission line concept will convert that accumulation of voltage into current giving us watts. Voila! Free energy from freely available voltage derived from empty space making use of severe reactance, ie. the reversal of current, to make it practical.

Why aren't we studying this? 'Cuz it ain't good for the economy!

Yet, it's good for us.

A famous man once said, “Man is not made for the Sabbath; the Sabbath was made for man.”

Likewise, ...

We are not slaves to money. For if we are, then our goose is cooked!

Hence, ...

Free Energy does not Exist, but Free Voltage does Exist! ^[2] ^[3] ^[4] ^[5] ^[6] ^[7]

Would you like to listen to some music while you read?^[8] ^[9] ^[10] ^[11]

This is inspired by a need to soften the blows of sharpened intellect...^[12] ^[13]

This Wikibook is not intended for anyone who lacks any background in basic electrical engineering (Learn more at Khan Academy), for it requires a familiarity with: Ohm's Law, Electrical Reactance, Complex Numbers, and their Polynomial Multiplication, basic electricity theory, and familiarity with electronic simulators. Without these skills, you'll be lost trying to understand whatever I have to say. You'll be perplexed anyway even with these skills since nothing you learned in school will have adequately prepared you for what is about to unfold...

There is no guarantee you will understand any of this. So, read through it -casually- once in a while without trying to grasp my intentions. Repetition, with breaks in between, might help.

Here's an example; also, a trick question. See if you can answer it?
Colin Mitchell's answer to: How many watts is a Farad? How many watts is a Henry? on Quora.

Free energy is a colloquialism suggesting getting more resultant energy exiting a device per energy expenditure which powers it. Yet, the mathematical concepts which promote and maintain our rebellious belief in “Free Energy” do not exist and neither do the mathematical constructs of electrical reactance. Both are fictions whose theorized existence have weathered our doubts for over a century of experience among electrical engineers encompassing a belief in the practicality of imaginary numbers.

The testimonials of numerous scientists and engineers (who attest to the practicality of their use of imaginary, and complex, enumerations within their calculations) does not prove the existence of imaginary numbers, nor does it prove that they succeed at representing any variety of electrical reactance, free energy or otherwise. And no testimonial has been put forward (by anyone) that imaginary numbers are useless. On the contrary, they are very useful and satisfy the need for using them. This demonstrates that we can “get by” without having to prove how to take the square root of a negative number. No one has a clue how to do that, and nobody expects to find out any time soon...!

Testimonials and demonstrations are no substitute for a well-constructed proof; and neither are arguments.^[14] Testimonials are merely opinions, demonstrations are mere shadows of an understanding, and arguments are an attempt to promote a concept and all three are outside the jurisdiction of provability.

A proof demands an understanding which we fail to possess concerning the existence of imaginary numbers. And rationalizations for their usefulness does not substitute for lack of any proof.

Yet, so long as imaginary numbers serve us as a useful tool to temporarily hold an unprovable value, we can continue to use them so long as we never entirely forget that we are assuming the existence of a fantasy for the purposes of practicality.

Without concrete proof for the existence of imaginary numbers (in the world of physicality to which we are born), we will continue to have no physical proof for the existence of free energy, and no physical proof for the existence of electrical reactance since the two are closely related. {By the way, Free Energy is a special case of the more generalized topic of electrical reactance.} All we know is that the math works out based on over a century of “street-wise” expertise.

But the situation gets worse...
Free energy, if it is defined as a special case of electrical reactance, is a fantasy lacking testimonials since we also lack an understanding. The intention of this wiki book is to: stop assuming that free energy does not exist and begin to seek an understanding by talking about it in rational terms which parallel our discussions of electrical reactance.

Acknowledgments

The only reason why the opening two paragraphs, at the beginning of this text, are so harsh-sounding is due to the peer-pressure, under which I have been operating, exerted by various editors over at Wikibooks who have managed to pressure me into deleting that text for various reasons, one of which is: its lack of “relevant sources” (citations) to back up my theories.

Well,
I always assumed that I don't need to cite anyone other than myself – not due to any presumed brilliance of mine, but – due to common sense and simple logic.

The problem, is, that I have a short-term memory in which (at my age) I don't always remember everything which I learn from other people – especially if I don't assign any significance to those new ideas at the time that I first hear or read about them.

Not to fear!
The memory of something which Aaron Murakami has said (on more than one occasion) has come to my rescue!

During one of his Energy, Science, and Technology Conferences given in Idaho, I was a witness to his use of the following analogy

Suppose that you spend one unit of energy per unit of time, and if you alter the unit of time in which that unit of energy is spent (without altering that quantity of energy per unit, nor alter its number of units), then doesn't this stand to reason that you've altered the rate at which you spend energy and, thus, altered the total quantity of its expenditure per its original unit of time?

For example,
If I perform a single caloric unit of energy every time I strike my hand with my other fist, and I am doing this per second, then if I should increase my frequency of strikes per second, doesn't this increase the quantity of energy which is delivered to my hand (by my fist) during each period of one second?

This is why we're charged for our electrical energy usage using Ohm's Law – in Kilowatts – blended with per units of Hours since time is one of the three variables of Electrical Reactance Formulae. Time matters to electrical engineering and is not to be undersold since it works in conjunction with the other two ingredients of electrical reactance, namely: capacitive and inductive reactance.

Electrical reactance formulae don't bother to measure themselves using units of amps or volts. And, likewise, Ohm's Law doesn't bother to quantify itself in terms of the temporal-factors of frequency and phase relations, nor with the dynamic field-properties of capacitance and inductance. Yet, it is the combination of these two mathematical relationships which quantifies our electric bill.

Think about it!

If fact, even though we don't see capacitance or inductance on our electric bill doesn't mean that these parameters are not there by way of their implication. These parameters are assumed, according to certain criteria, by the electric company (who provides our electricity) based on a century of expertise of what to expect of its residential and industrial customers and how the electrical utility grid will reactively respond to those customers (considering the capacitive and inductive reactances which result from various types of consumer and industrial loads imposed upon the utility grid). And these presumptions generally hold true with minor deviations from one location to another and over time.

Now,
Parametric amplification^[15] alters energy usage by modifying any one or more of the three parameters of electrical reactance, namely: capacitance, inductance, and frequency. Phase-shifting the time-component of when a wave of voltage or a wave of current peaks and troughs (nadirs) is also included within the time component of electrical reactance since it modifies the temporal relationships among the frequencies of voltage and current.

Parametric amplification manages to alter energy usage due to its ability to modify the capacitive and inductive fields which surround electrical components. And it alters the frequency at which oscillations occur causing these changes of energy usage to occur at faster or slower rates. This is significant since, if the rate of parametric amplification can supersede thermodynamic loss per unit of time, then overunity can be achieved.

It matters what the capacitance and the inductance of physical components are. But it also matters how one capacitor can modify the capacitive field of another capacitor and vice versa, and likewise for inductors modifying each other's inductive fields. They are able to do this because they are modifying their mutual capacitances and their mutual inductances which are just as important as their self-capacitances and their self-inductances.

Well,
Assuming that you accept the analogy, up-above, of energy expenditure per unit of time along with its consequences, and since time is merely one of three variable parameters of electrical reactance, then it stands to reason that free energy is the manipulation of all of the parameters of electrical reactance, not merely one of them (ie, time), while diminishing the significance of energy (under Ohm's Law) even though some energy, no matter how small and insignificant, is always needed to run a circuit.

In order to accomplish this feat of electrical engineering, two criteria must be met (which are repeated and explained further, below) in which

The input of energy must be kept extremely small (to diminish the significance of energy), and
No portal of output should be allowed. Its allowance will encourage the formation of current while its absence may encourage the formation of the reversal of current whose consequence is the magnification of voltage differences driving a circuit into becoming its own power source. This transforms passive components (particularly: inductors) into active components not requiring any significant Prime Mover other than a Prime Mover acting as a mere stimulant which catalyzes parametric amplification or parametric diminishment irrespective of thermodynamics (which is a separate consideration apart from parametric alteration of a circuit's energy).

You never heard of the expression, “Energy IN must equal energy OUT per Unit of Time”, have you? Why not? Because it's expedient to understate the jurisdiction of the law, in physics, in which Energy (and Charge) must be Conserved. This misrepresents the significance of Kirchhoff's Voltage Law and Kirchhoff's Current Law as if electrical reactance never occurs.

Electrical reactance always occurs, to one extent or another, within every circuit no matter how mundane. Even a simple flashlight circuit exhibits electrical reactance by demonstrating inductance (and, thus, inductive reactance) along its length and capacitance (capacitive reactance) across its insulated boundary against its surroundings.

For what agenda are we, thus, brainwashed into avoiding a robust viewpoint? The answer is: the manipulation of society through the channels of government, commerce, education and entertainment, etc, for profit and self-glorification.

We are being sold half a bill of sale whenever we hear the term of: Conservation of Energy. Yet, we're paying full price for this loss of the other half of electrical reality within the realm of electrical reactance.

Synopsis

There is a conspiracy taking place among theoretical scientists suppressing the virtual reality of free energy simulations by awarding them a stigma of foolishness and foppishness adopting an irreverent attitude that free lunches are not worth studying and their ideologies are not worth promoting.^[16]

Well, in the physical world of consumerism, there are discounts all the time. Shoppers love them!

Buy two; get one free!

Half-off sale!

Etc.

These promotional sales may not be an opportunity to walk out of the store with free merchandise, but it's definitely better than paying full price!

This conspiracy (derived from our collective ignorance and misrepresentation of Free Energy) carries over into our collective sensibilities as if the virtual world of electronic simulation cannot be taken as a guide on how to extricate ourselves from prevailing opinion.

Standard physical theory concerns itself with electrical engineering. Its presumption is that you have to, I repeat: HAVE TO, calculate the demand which a load will make upon a supply, and -then- add up all losses due to inefficiencies. This total must be, I repeat: MUST BE, supplied by the power source unless you want your physical appliance to fail.

That's nice. Yet, it merely describes the REAL POWER side of the physical energy equation as if ELECTRICAL REACTANCE was not a virtual reality worthy of our attention. Science is all about attending to details while never losing sight of the big picture.

It turns out that electrical reactance is extremely, I repeat: EXTREMELY, shy. So much, so, that it doesn't take much voltage supplied by a virtual power source to suppress reactance and prevent the eruption of unlimited oodles of freely available reactive power which, whenever passed through a resistive load: such as a heater element, converts invisible reactance into REAL POWER miraculously convincing us that free energy exists when (in reality) free energy does not exist all by itself.

Free energy is a composition, over time, of the non-suppression of electrical reactance immediately followed by its conversion into usable power.

That's the conspiracy intended to keep all of us ignorant of our virtual options.

It turns out that this “free energy option” involves the reuse of virtual reactance (predicated upon the virtuality of imaginary numbers) making it look as if (the conversion of reactance into) energy miraculously appeared out of nowhere when -instead- (what happens, is that) reactance (being lossless) cannot be spent nor lost. It must, thus, accumulate unless converted into a usable format (ie, energy). The accumulation of lossless reactance constitutes its reuse (so to speak) making electrical reactance the easiest available form of renewable energy.

Yet, feeding a virtual circuit too much (ie, conventional expectations of) voltage when that circuit is especially designed to take advantage of this free form of proto-energy (ie, reactance) will guarantee its failure to convince anyone of what I am saying is true.

Also, encouraging a throughput of current (through this type of virtual circuit) giving it an exit for current to pass out (of this type of circuit) instead of restricting portals of entry (or exit) to merely one portal (exclusively utilized as an inlet for its source of voltage) will guarantee suppression of free energy.

So,
Two criteria will guarantee the suppression of free energy under simulation ...

Feeding a simulated circuit too much voltage, and ...
Allowing the entry of voltage to simulate a flow of current by providing an exit.

Avoiding bullet points #1 and #2 will not guarantee the simulation of free energy since you also have to know how to take advantage of their avoidance whenever designing a virtual circuit. But adhering to both points will guarantee its suppression.

WARNING — These criteria are intended to garner success under simulation and usually within the context of the Berkeley SPICE family of simulators^[17] (but not all the time; other simulators^[18] are, also, useful depending upon the situation). Although they are supported by standard mathematical criteria describing the conventional engineering of electrodynamic theory, they are not intended to qualify the physics^[19] behind these simulated strategies. That implication is left to the reader to vindicate, or not, through verifiable experience at your own risk of safety and success. User, beware.

Time Stands Alone. Space cannot Exist without Time.

Electrical reactance exists within the domain of time apart from space.

Electricity exists within the domain of time and space.

Space is where Conservation of Energy occurs. Without space, conservation cannot be qualified nor can it be quantified. In fact, the opposite occurs wherein reactance must become altered over time when space is not involved, because energy does not exist outside of space.

So, when energy withdraws itself from space, all that remains is reactance. Thus, reactance exists all along coexistent with energy when both exist in space. But withdraw space from any consideration, and energy fails to justify itself without a spatial framework to give it a definition.

Within time, outside of space, reactance continues to exhibit the properties of inductance and capacitance. We would normally associate inductance and capacitance with the spatial phenomena of coils and capacitors which spawns them. But this is due to the inherent property of reactance which exclusively persists within the field of imaginary numbers and whose purveyance is the field of oscillatory time (as measured by the $2\pi$ angular momentum of each cycle of oscillation). Thus, inductance and capacitance are never required to be real physical properties despite the physical causes which we associate with them. Inductance and capacitance are non-physical properties of how time affects these properties and without any regard to space since these properties are not energetic properties; they affect energy without being energy, themselves.

Time has that impact upon spatial considerations: it affects spatial considerations without any allegiance to space since time dominates space.

The angular momentum of $2\pi$ binds the frequency of electrical reactance to time by defining each cycle of oscillation.

Inductance and capacitance do not require space to maintain themselves. The oscillations of time remembers them by converting their reactive output (resulting from prior cycles of oscillation) into the inductance and capacitance of subsequent cycles of oscillation. If reactance were somehow retained within the field of space, then this feedback could not occur. Space would, thus, conserve inductance and capacitance from one cycle of oscillation to the next. And this type of electrical reactance would be complex, rather than imaginary, since inductors and capacitors would be storing this reactance. But – in the alternative – the imaginary portion of electrical reactance can stand apart from space if the influence of real power is insignificant as to be of nearly zero amplitude. Under these ideal conditions, electrical reactance feeds on itself creating more electrical reactance from less electrical reactance or, in the alternative, shrinks preexistent volumes of reactance (as the case may be) never reaching infinity, nor reaching zero, amplitudes of reactance due to this tendency for reactive feedback to become a multiplicative, or divisional, trend whenever real power is an insignificant input of apparent power.

As an aside

We spend direct current during one-half of an oscillation and we recharge, or replace a spent charge with a fresh new charge, during each alternate cycle of oscillation. Thus, Direct Current is a subset of Alternating Current in which we casually, and conveniently, ignore the recharge, or replacement, phase of each cycle of Direct Current paying exclusive attention to each half-cycle of Direct Current which spends energy! But this is a game of make-believe in which we hide ourselves from the whole truth. Never, once, do we bother to seek it. Maybe this is why we encourage a way-of-life in which we throw away energy after using it merely once!? Ugh ...

Space is an extension of time which manifests electrodynamic phenomena in order to derive space from time.

Time can withdraw itself from space. When this happens, electricity vanishes leaving reactance in its wake.

Likewise, time can extend itself into space. When this happens, electricity manifests out of nowhere since time does not exist as a property of space. Nor is time a consequence of space. Quite the contrary! Space is a consequence of the electrodynamic extension of time.

In other words, space exists in time and coexists with time. But time is sufficient unto itself. This is where reactance occurs: in time, whether or not space is participating (and cooperating ;-).

But space must participate with time if electricity is to manifest itself. And conservation must participate (as well) within a framework of space cooperating with time in order for electrical energy to materialize.

Since energy has its equivalency within matter, one cannot exist without the other. Both energy and matter coexist, simultaneously, as variations of space. In fact, matter can never be lacking of an energetic state anymore than energy could lack matter to materialize energy since both are qualities of space. Hence, massless photons do not exist. Please see, Appendix: Photons do not Exist.

So, ...
If you want to create energy, or create matter along with its dynamic aspect of energy (energized matter), you don't create matter (or energy) from space. Instead, you create a new space within a preexisting space for new matter (or energy) to exist within by extending both energetic matter – and its containment within space – from time.

Time coexists within all of matter and of energy. So, time is the ultimate source for the creative process to occur. And this temporal condition possesses the quality of electrical reactance from which electrical energy and the physicality of matter arises within their containment of space.

If We Can't Understand Energy, Then How Can We Possibly Understand Free Energy!

Introduction

Triangular waves, or spikes, are one diagnostic check for the production of free energy and overunity.

Fig. 0 – Triangular waves do not saturate inverted current (relative to voltage). They must escalate the production of negative wattage.

The non-existence of Free Energy is not a lie so much as it does not also state that most of electrical engineering dabbles in non-existential reactive power predicated upon imaginary numbers which were invented by Hero of Alexandria to solve intractable problems and avoid the liability of proving their existence in the physical world.^[20] In other words, what is the physical manifestation of the solution to... $i={\sqrt {-1}}$ is a question which has yet to be answered by anyone.

Imaginary answers are not provable since they cannot be measured with physical instruments. They can merely be inferred by the mathematics of complex numbers as possibly existing somewhere in a fictional world often called, “counter-space” wherein everything is backwards (similar to Lewis Carroll's, “Alice in Wonderland” and “Through the Looking Glass”) in which elongated distances between the plates of a capacitor in our world of space is shrunken distances in counter-space.^[21]

Free energy is not energy, yet it is freely available as a special case of reactive power, namely: the mathematical squaring of an extremely low input of real power (nano watts or pico watts) fed into a circuit which lacks a throughput, see: Fig. 1a. This results in the reversal of current traveling backwards towards higher potentials of voltage resulting in the accumulation of a greater difference between those greater potentials and lesser potentials nearby, see: Fig. 0.

Block Diagram

Oscillations of Radiant Energy

Fig. 1a – Oscillations of Radiant Energy due to throwing away most of the input and prohibiting the formation of current (within this circuit) by disallowing an exit (to avoid counter-balancing its inlet). For neophyte designers of overunity circuits, there should be only one inlet doubling as its own outlet.

Consider a circuit whose source voltage has merely one of its terminals connected to a circuit (constituting its input) while the other terminal (of this source of voltage) is connected to ground and there is no other ground connected to this style of circuit design (for the purposes of this hypothetical discussion, please see: Fig. 1a on the left and compare it with Tesla's design, Fig. 1b, on the right).

This configuration (of the terminal connections of a source of voltage feeding a circuit) discourages the manifestation of current which normally flows into a circuit through one portal and flows out through another portal. Instead, a restriction of portals to merely ONE (in addition to severely restricting the input power) encourages breathing without flow, namely: the circuit manifests a standing wave in which the voltage and the current are out of phase by one-half cycle of oscillations. In other words, whenever the peak of voltage bounces off of the periphery of this type of circuit, the peak of current is crossing its imaginary center. During the subsequent half-cycle, the inverse occurs in which the peak of current echoes off of the periphery at the same moment that the peak of voltage crosses the center. This creates an expansion, followed by a contraction, but not in the real world of physicality since the incentive for expansion (voltage potential) and the execution of same (its movement which reflects a flow of current) occur at opposing halves of each cycle of breath (so to speak)!

All of this occurs within the complex field surrounding reactive components.

Although a circular pathway is avoided that would lead from a “source” to a “load” and then, back to the same “source”, circular pathways are encouraged within the body of this style of circuitry so long as the various subcircuits are electrically isolated from each other with merely a mutual inductance between them, and/or a single wire of electrical connection without any return path. These electrically isolated, open pathway, subcircuits perform very well if they interconnect via several mutual inductances to make up for their lack of electrical connectivity.

This situation is best described as when an open IDEAL^[22] transmission line is terminated by one (or more) shorted IDEAL transmission line/s encouraging the formation of a purely imaginary impedance at the input.^[23] ^[24] ^[25] ^[5]

Yet, this ideal condition^[22] is not a fantasy. A bygone era of inventors^[26] ^[27] utilized magnetic remanence to preserve the magnetic field (which surrounds current) by incorporating the use of ferromagnetic materials wrapped around bare copper cable (placed directly underneath its insulation) over a hundred years ago (please see the figure of a Mu-metal cable, below-left) to prevent distortion/dispersion of the dots and dashes of the Morse code which was being sent across newly laid trans-Atlantic telegraph cable in the mid-1800s. We no longer use this method (probably) so as to avoid eddy currents and the inductive heating which ensues? Instead, we promote the use of copper or aluminum cable both of which lack the ferromagnetic preservation of current.

There is no limit to how much mass of ferromagnetic material can be added to a circuit to preserve its current from thermodynamic losses since magnetic coupling can extend this illimitable mass to the area immediately adjacent to a circuit's coils.

Bill Lyne quotes Nikola Tesla in his book, entitled: “Pentagon Aliens”, as having said: ... for every 200 pounds of iron which was magnetically coupled to Tesla's Special Generator, one horsepower was increased at its output.^[28]

This style of circuit design (which I am espousing) tends to make it very easy to manifest an inversion of current 180 degrees out of phase with voltage. This inversion of current is oftentimes mistaken for its homologue of the “negation of resistance” which is mathematically equivalent, but not very educational.^[29]

A more accurate description would be the negation of reactive voltage divided by impedance, namely: ${\text{Negative Current}}=-\left({\frac {\text{Reactive Voltage}}{\text{Impedance}}}\right)$

This leads to another, more traditional, version of Ohms Law in which Power equals Voltage Squared Divided by Resistance: $P={\frac {V^{2}}{R}}$ .

That conventional version is vague and incorrect in so far as it does not distinguish what is occurring, namely, that: Negative Watts is equal to the Application (the Input) of Real Voltage times its Resultant Output of Reactive Voltage divided by various Impedances (both Real and Imaginary) within a framework of time ...

{\text{Negative Watts}}{\big /}{\text{Unit of Time}}={-\left({\frac {{\text{Real Voltage Input}}\times {\text{Reactive Voltage Output}}}{\text{Impedances}}}\right)}{\bigg /}{\text{Unit of Time}}

Granted, this is a more convoluted restatement of Ohm's Law with the distinct advantage of sidestepping the conventional claim of physics in which: “Energy IN equals Energy OUT” by (instead) implying that: “Real Voltage IN cannot equal Reactive Voltage OUT”. The resulting reaction of output voltage must be greater than, or less than, input voltage irrespective of thermodynamics. This is in contradistinction to conventional wisdom since (my perspective is that) the input is complex and the output is also complex all the time (a real value plus or minus an imaginary value). In fact, all circuits possess some reactance in proportion to some non-reactance. This is why I deem the traditional presentations of Ohm's Law flawed (in principle) while maintaining a more practical approach for technicians by avoiding a fundamental teaching of how electricity behaves.

Without this fundamental understanding, no one will appreciate Free Energy since they will lack a robust understanding of electricity. I challenge everyone, who desires an understanding of Free Energy, to return to basics and rethink what we've been taught. Ergo, current is a fiction. It is a mathematical shorthand notation replacing something slightly more complicated.

Fig. 1b suggests a similarity to Fig. 1a. Both images possess a singular inlet for power resulting in a periodic variation of potential occurring everywhere, simultaneously, and without any manifestation of conventional current (subject to entropy) that could delay and reduce (through losses) the transmission of power. On the other hand, the reversal of current (in this wikibook's proposal), produces the inversion of losses, namely: an escalation of gain.

This is similar to if, whenever we shop at a market, they pay us to take their groceries instead of charging us! And... Every time we shop, they pay us more than they paid us before while claiming to pay us the same! {The inverse of deprivation.} What a trip! With so much abundance, who needs war?

Mathematical Consequences

A Low Input Power

Lots of Real Power, plus or minus, a modest amount of reactance will guarantee the conventional stability (or, Rule of Thumb) that reactance cannot grow by way of feeding itself from the reactive field surrounding reactive components, such as: inductors and capacitors, resulting from the outcome of the prior cycle of oscillation since excessive real voltage will suppress a runaway self-looping of electrical reactance.

Yet...
Severely restricting the use of real power at the inlet of a circuit's source of energy will encourage the unconventional rule of thumb in which electrical reactance will be almost exclusively nourished by its own feedback irrespective of thermodynamics or the Conservation of Energy – especially since energy plays no significant role, here, since its input is severely limited to be less than a micro watt.

In other words, any complex number (enumerating the amplitude of either a wave of voltage or a wave of current) possesses two components: a real number and an imaginary number. The magnitude of the real number regulates the consequence of how the present cycle of oscillation impacts any subsequent cycle. Meanwhile, the imaginary number can create the inversion of current when squared if the self-looping, self-feeding tendency of electrical reactance is not suppressed by any excessive input of real power.

If this complex polynomial...

A\pm B\times {\sqrt {-1}}

...is squared...

(A\pm B\times {\sqrt {-1}})^{2}

...then, the result is four products reduced to three (since two results, the cross products of $A$ times $B$ , are similar enough to be grouped together) ...

The square of the real component, $A^{2}$ .
The cross-product of the real portion times the imaginary portion, $\pm 2AB{\sqrt {-1}}$ .
And, the square of the imaginary component, $(B\times {\sqrt {-1}})^{2}=B^{2}\times ({\sqrt {-1}})^{2}=B^{2}\times -1=-B^{2}$ .

If the real power input of $A$ is restricted to a very small value, of nano watts or pico watts, then the negation of real power resulting from the squaring of the imaginary portion of this complex number will not be oppressively regulated out of existence. Only the tiny value of $A$ will shrink or maintain its amplitude while the amplitude of $-B^{2}$ will grow at an exponential rate. By restricting the inlet of real power (feeding this style of circuitry), there will be an increased likelihood of success in producing radiant power serving as a precursor to free energy. Yet, this is not all that is required to ensure success.

It is also necessary to connect only one terminal of a voltage source to this type of circuit while connecting the other terminal (of the voltage source) to ground and disallow any other ground to be located anywhere else within this type of circuit (in the beginning if you are not yet “skilled in this artistry”). This will ensure that no current forms since it won't have anywhere to drain after scantily leaking into the circuit from the voltage source. This will ensure a radial pattern of oscillations, rather than a circumferential pattern of peaks and troughs, in which the peaks of voltage will bounce off of this circuit's periphery at the same time that the peaks of current will be crossing the virtual center of this type of circuit during each half-cycle with an inverse pattern at the next half-cycle.

In other words, current has been divested of its significance. Only voltage matters, plus: frequency, inductance and capacitance.

Since the inherent tendency of electricity is to make up the difference for any shortcoming, current will form (anyway) despite our best efforts at preventing it. This “last ditch effort” on the part of “nature's tendency” will ensure a reversal of current since that is the only direction we will have allowed for by failing to prevent it.

Ponder this
If, after taking every precaution to prevent the flow of current, don't you think that the only other option available (to Mother Nature) is for current to flow backwards as if in rebellion to our various restrictions?

In the words of actor: Jeff Goldblum's character, portraying a mathematician who specializes in chaos theory in the movie, Jurassic Park (part one): “Life will always find a way to break free of any loss of liberty.”

Conservation of Energy is a status symbol confessing allegiance to the herd since it is grounded in physical reality as constituting the ultimate and exclusive verification for any authority while simultaneously ignoring electrical reactance subsisting within the domain of time acting as the trump card (so to speak) giving us the liberty to recycle energy rather than blindly throwing it away (returning it back to its source) after every single use and refusing to pay through the nose for this wasteful method of consuming energy.
Whoever conjured-up this scheme must be a madman!

It sucks!

Voltage Drop

It stands to reason that electrical voltage drop is a mathematical process which cannot be performed upon the imaginary coefficient of a complex polynomial. It may only be performed upon its real number coefficient. This is a consequence of the assumption that voltage drop is the distribution of a real numbered evaluation of voltage across a circuit resulting from simple resistance rather than from electrical reactance.^[30] This allows for the accumulation of reactive potential as well as for the accumulation of reactive impedances (both inductive and capacitive). This latter accumulation can occur within the imaginary fields surrounding reactive components only if the distribution of real voltage is kept below useful values amounting to nano watts and pico watts so as to avoid disturbing (suppressing) reactive feedback. This accumulation of reactance serves as feedback for the input of subsequent cycles of oscillation causing reactance to escalate at exponential values. Hence, “free energy” is an incorrect assessment of this peculiar situation. A more rational explanation is to claim “freely available reactance” resulting from an extremely low input of real power.

Convention teaches us that the peaks and troughs of voltage and current may oscillate their amplitudes as they travel around the circumference of a circuit. But there is another possibility in which they may echo their peaks and troughs in diametric opposition to each other during each half of an oscillation effectively creating a standing wave of one-half cycle of displacement between their phases (See, Fig. 1a, above). This will only occur if we discourage or prohibit the formation of current while maximizing the accumulation of the imaginary component of reactive power. At some point, the complex enumeration of the real and imaginary portions of electric power will be squared during our mathematical assessment of the electrodynamic behavior of a circuit. If we keep the input voltage extremely low and suppress the flow of current, then we may succeed at developing more reactance than what conventional wisdom would expect. And when, through simple (thermodynamic) conversion when passed through a resistor, the complex result (of the squaring of a complex value) will have its phases of real voltage realigned with its phases of reactive voltage and with its various impedances (voltage realigned with current possessing a power factor of positive unity, $+1$ ) and, thus, be able to convert the cross-product of: $\pm 2AB{\sqrt {-1}}$ into the squaring of the imaginary portion: $-B^{2}$ , of a complex reactance.

Utilization of Electrical Reactance

Schematic of a simulation speculated to be the Ammann brothers' Atmospheric Generator.

Fig. 2 is a schematic of a simulation speculated to be the Ammann brothers' Atmospheric Generator.

Spark gap macro of a neon bulb simulated in Micro-Cap software.

Fig. 3 – The runtime simulation of the schematic of Fig. 2 (on the left) will not achieve overunity without this neon bulb macro from Micro-Cap. There is no conventional source of voltage within this macro, because they are behavioral voltage sources predicated upon logical criteria, i.e.: “if this, then that”.

File:Ammann with solar capacitance, v2c3c3g2 = solder joints, output.png

Fig. 4 – This illustrates the ON/OFF state of the neon bulb, in Fig. 2, and the output of four inductive loads. The escalation of wattage is assisted by an inversion of the polarity of current (relative to voltage) resulting from restricting input and preventing any exit of current.

Freely available reactive power is never useless, except from a thermodynamic viewpoint, until it is converted (via a resistive heating element) to boil water and rotate a steam turbine to generate electrical energy (as one example of conversion) to do away with nuclear power plants and their byproduct of plutonium.

What's Reversal of Current Good For?

Conventional circuits deplete their voltage source by slowly or quickly equalizing the difference in potential between the two terminals of a fixed voltage source, such as: a battery. They do this by moving a conventional direction of current from higher areas of voltage (occurring at one terminal) towards areas of lower voltage (at the opposing terminal). For example, ...

A typical 12-volt auto battery will have around 12.6 volts when fully charged. It only needs to drop down to around 10.5 volts to be considered fully discharged.^[31]

Unconventional Free Energy circuits, whose current is reversed relative to their polarity of voltage (inducing negative watts as their output power), increase the disparity between the terminals of their reactive components, such as: between the two terminals of a coil of wire. Whatever components exhibit this property, these components become the new “sources” of power for these types of circuits replacing (and over-shadowing) whatever contributions may occur from an external source of power.

Explosive Simulation

Hertz transmitter and receiver is converted into the Ammann brothers power system, v4.

Schematic for building the simulation of Fig. 2.

? Was the spark transmitter of Heinrich Hertz the Inspiration for the Ammann Brothers Atmospheric Generator? - Quora.^[32]

The top-most graph of Fig. 4 traces the output of a node within the Micro-Cap 12 neon bulb macro (depicted in Fig. 3). This node is labeled “NeonBulb.10” (within the graph of Fig. 4), equivalently labeled “Switchchk” (within Fig. 3), which has already risen from its default value of 10 nano volts to a plateau of 10 volts. This indicates that this neon bulb has turned ON into an arcing plasma.

By the way, if any value closely similar to 10 nano volts were to be traced as the output for this node (within this software macro), then this would indicate a pre-ionizing state preparatory to arcing. This is analogous to what lightning bolts manage to achieve prior to their actual lightning strike. The ionization pathway charts a course preparing for whatever lightning strike may happen to form along this prepared highway.

The second graph (from the top of Fig. 4) traces the output current superimposed over the output voltage of the inductive LOAD as a hyperbolic arch of red (hiding the blue underneath). They are diverging at the far right: the red colored current tracing is escalating upwards in the direction of greater positive amperage while the blue colored voltage is escalating downwards in the direction of greater negative voltage. The third graph is tracing the output voltage of the inductive Barrel Coil whose blue-colored arch swerves upwards at an escalating rate of growth in positively signed voltage while the tracing of the fourth graph is red-colored amperage of the Barrel Coil arching downwards at a similar rate of escalation. The fifth and sixth graphs are tracing the rising output of one inductive side of the Copper Tubing while graphs seven and eight are tracing the output of the other side of the Copper Tubing with the neon bulb in between these two halves of copper.

Improving Realism with a Load

Ammann with diodes, v2c3c3g3b, schematic with two outputs, precharged with 100V

Loaded Test – When a load is applied to a coil of wire, the infinitely escalating output (of Fig. 4) is delayed.

I'm still learning.
Up until now, I thought I knew how to “load” an overunity circuit by applying resistance to simulate a mechanical load made upon an inductor (such as: a motor coil). Although this is standard procedure for normal circuits, I was wrong since my simulations tend to produce unconventional triangular waves of inverse polarity between their phases of voltage versus their current. What I see, now in this Loaded Test (to the right), is that a far better method for loading an inductor is to apply a full bridge rectification of four diodes to convert this extreme divergence of phase relations into direct current thereby collapsing the (seemingly) ridiculous levels of output. That's OK. All that is needed (to produce overunity) is to precharge a 100V difference in voltage between the two copper spheres to immediately engage the neon bulb, spark gap, and turn ON overunity in less than ten seconds. Since the simulation errors before we can see what the output levels off at, we won't know whether the output dies out (to zero) after an initial blast, or levels out at some constant output. Blame matrix algebra for taking simulated shortcuts; not “Free Energy”.

A Buildable Simulation?

File:Ammann with more diodes, v2c3c3g3c, schematic, precharged with 100V, v4, explosive at 38ns.png

Maybe the Ammann brothers made use of baking soda diodes to streamline the performance of their capacitors and make them safe?

File:Naming and labeling conventions of transistors and diodes.png

These are analogies and suggestions of transistors versus diodes in the schematic to the left.

File:Ammann brothers' original newpaper photograph.jpg

Ammann brothers' original newpaper photograph

High voltage tolerant diodes of a century ago were similar to electrolytic capacitors of today. They were made with an aluminum cathode which was conditioned by subjecting it to alternating current. This would form a layer of aluminum oxide on top of the aluminum. When this “conditioned” plate of aluminum was immersed in a watery solution of either borax or baking soda, and paired with an anode of some other substance, other than aluminum, then a diode function was fulfilled with a large tolerance to elevated voltages.^[33] ^[34] Salt would have made a better electrolyte if this were truly a capacitor and not a diode, but with the risk of producing chlorine gas along with hydrogen and oxygen gases all of which are very explosive if not vented away from us into a safer area.

Pairing these diodes with a capacitor sandwiched in between them and with both of their cathodes pointing towards each other, and towards their shared capacitor, helps to reduce the need for simulating a very small capacitance (of 1e−21 Farads) possessing a very large equivalent series resistance (of 1e+8 Ohms)^[35] inside of the simulated capacitance, labeled: ProximityOfSpheres by comparison to if this capacitance had been there all alone without any diodes to assist it. This design may be more likely to be buildable and, thus, more practical to take seriously.

By the way,
I suspect that this specially designed capacitive diode, with both of its capacitor plates consisting of oxidized aluminum immersed in a non-electrolytic bath of borax or baking soda, sat behind -and connected to- the headlight sockets of the Ammann brothers' batteryless EV serving as an additional capacitance with respect to the air-gap between their two copper spheres. So, I am guessing that their two hollow copper spheres were serving as capacitors of their own (and doubling as aerials grounded to the electrostatic charge of the atmosphere) and shorted out with this high-voltage tolerant capacitor hidden inside the front-end of their car which may have served as a throttle?

There still remains the issue of a lack of regulation to prevent the simulated behavior of an explosive force. Whenever the spark gap (neon bulb) flashes ON, the output of power takes a sharp ascension. Whether or not it's merely a momentary surge, I wouldn't want to be around when it explodes!

Does someone want to risk their life by testing out my theories? Because these simulations are suggesting the electrical equivalence of a bomb!

Disrupting Energy on the Grid

How to steal energy from the grid!

Fig. 5a – Watch out! Don't position your free energy device within city limits unless it is fully shielded to prevent it from disturbing radio transmission nearby.

Schematic of energy theft from the grid.

Fig. 5b – Schematic of energy theft from the grid.

I don't think it is entirely accurate that C. Earl Ammann was charged with “stealing energy from the electric utility grid” when he arrived in Washington, D.C. to deliver his EV to the United States Patent Office. He and his brother had demonstrated their EV on the streets of Denver, Colorado, driving it around town, up and down hills, while running it without any batteries.^[27] ^[36]

Instead, I would say that he was “disrupting the grid” since whatever he received from the grid was minimal due to a very weak magnetic coupling existing between the grid and his device. Most of what was “stolen” was lost to the environment benefiting no one.

This arrest is why you and I never heard of him until I ran across a few people on EnergeticForum talking about him. And, now, you know a little of his story.

His theft does not mean he was a fraud. Oh, contrair! It means that the grid got in the way since it was available for having its reactance sucked out of it at an alarming rate. So quickly was this magnetic field extracted, that my simulations (Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b) indicate that a lot of current was being taken from transmission lines located nearby and from the wiring of the homes of their neighbors. Yet, their device would have worked nearly just as efficiently without a grid nearby to suck energy from had they located themselves out in the middle of the ocean or the desert or on some lonely mountain top.

Yet, as my simulation indicates, up-above, in Fig. 2 (which presumes living out in the countryside far away from the electric utility grid), this style of free energy circuitry performs very nicely without any help from energy sources, nearby, getting its reactance from within itself upon its stimulation from external sources, such as: the ambient charge existing in the atmosphere at ground level. This amounts to a mere micro volt which is amply sufficient for stimulating over-reactance in a circuit of appropriate design.

Since this style of circuitry does not require an external power source, but does require an external catalyst of stimulation, care must be taken to restrict external sources of power to protect those sources from becoming overloaded with huge demands placed upon them arising from this highly reactive type of circuit. Reactance can become a sponge (of inverted current) sucking energy from out of sources of voltage if allowed to do so without limitation.

It is this demand, born of reactance, which broadcasts an inversion of current outwardly towards its environment giving the appearance of making a necessary demand. This imposition is unnecessary. It burdens both the environment and whatever source of power resides there. This is why reactance has been the bane of electrical engineers, for there are two sides of reactance, either: benevolent or demanding. We have to take care to restrict our use of reactance to benefit our appliances without destroying our sources of energy in the course of utilizing them. We do this by becoming mindful of the fact that we no longer need a source of power to fund our devices. All we need is for those sources to catalyze an over-reactance. Once over-reactance takes over (if we let it), it -then- becomes the dominant source for the accumulation of proto-energy (radiant energy; current inversion) which can -then- be converted into real power through mere resistance, alone.

Our sociological “motivation for profit” must be restricted to our motive for leading a productive life without allowing this “motive for profit” to unduly burden anyone or anything. So, I am advocating efficiency and the fair treatment of the consumer in the course of pursuing “free energy”. Profit has become the bane of the consumer especially in the wake of inflation in which profit becomes inflated making its pursuit an automatic infringement upon human decency.

The very foundation of our society has been predicated upon the profit motive. Yet, its pursuit has spawned the inflation of our economy making its continued pursuit a violation of human dignity and welfare.
There's no profit to be made from “free energy” if no one can charge us for its consumption.
We can avoid being charged for our energy usage by recycling its electrical reactance to such a degree of excessive conservation that a mere factor of 99% reuse (for instance) constitutes a 100 to 1 gain (of output versus input) without any violation of physics.^[37]

Non-Explosive Simulation

Now7a3d2b, slightly diff windings on Armature1 vs Armature2, schematic.

Stable, non-explosive schematic fed from a 1½V solar panel (or battery) giving a plateau of 900k Watts, RMS, building up its output over 300ks of run-time (83⅓ hours ≅ 3½ days).

File:Now7a3d2b, slightly diff windings on Armature1 vs Armature2, output, numeric.

Stable, non-explosive output.

It's possible to achieve a non-explosive simulation of a stable output in Micro-Cap 12 electronic simulator. Power is enhanced if the two ferromagnetic coils, Armature1 and Armature2, possess slightly different number of windings of insulated floral (green) iron wire in contrast to each other. This simulation was hosted on a 64-bit computer. Hosting Micro-Cap 12 on anything less than this, such as: on a 32-bit computer, tends to give (what may be considered) a greater tendency for false positives with regard to overunity of gainful output.

Conventional vs Non-Conventional Circuits

Comparison of two circuit simulations.

Fig. 6a compares two circuits: the output on the bottom graph displays an explosion of gain due to the inversion of current arising from the plasma state of a neon bulb, spark gap.

How to flash a neon bulb ON to take advantage of its reversal of current.

Fig. 6b is a more efficient method of flashing a neon bulb ON instead of a conventional method which needlessly wastes input.

? Lest you think that all of this is due to imperfections of simulation due to round-off error,^[38] ^[39] here are a pair of variations of a conventional circuit (Fig. 6a and Fig. 6b) which costs a conventionally high drainage made upon some batteries. Yet, the magic does not get initiated there. True, they will contribute their excessive drainage of current, but the magical orchestration will originate (not at the batteries, but) at the neon bulb turning ON (arcing into a plasma) when it reaches its breakdown of resistance at, or above, 90 volts (which is what Micro-Cap simulator sets this threshold at). Then, and only then, will the batteries exceed their prior drainage of nearly 450k amperes to achieve an escalation quickly rising to infinity! This demonstrates the magic of the inversion of current (relative to the phase of voltage) arising, here, exclusively from the neon bulb rather than from any fancy arrangement of electrical components (usually: inductances and capacitances). All of the costs of energy to run this simulated circuit are conforming to conventionally high values expected of them so as to minimize the possibility of no one taking this example, seriously.

The example on the right is more efficient along a style that I frequently employ of using precharged capacitors and/or voltage sources rated at around 1µ volt (a sine wave generator in this example). In this case, this sine source provides a very important frequency of sufficient pitch to accelerate an opportunity for an explosive gain of amplitude to occur without wasting a whole lot of power to facilitate this opportunity. The power is provided by the 10 Farad capacitors (possessing a maximum of 400 milli Ohms, each, of equivalent series resistance) and each are precharged with 100 volts of opposing polarity to coincide with each other in their circular arrangement.

Sometimes, it's important to distinguish between frequency and power and separate them so as to not waste a continuous stream of power to maintain a frequency. This frequency can be very useful in accelerating the time it takes for reactance to explode and yield significant results of amplitude despite the fact that neither formula for electrical reactance (inductive or capacitive) has any factor of kinetic energy, such as: power, amps, or volts, inside of it. Instead, they possess potentialities of power, such as: frequency, inductance, and capacitance per cycle of oscillation defined in terms of angular momentum, or: 2?. Here is another reality to energy which is often overlooked regarding the inherent potential energy already resident within a circuit, namely: its momentum.

Thus, if we focus on a circuit's momentum, rather than focusing on giving the circuit any more energy in addition to whatever it already possesses, then we have an opportunity to manipulate this momentum using the potentialities of: frequency, inductance and capacitance. This does not cost us any more energy than what has already been fed into our circuit.

Think about it
Isn't this focus on momentum the foundation for anti-gravity levitation? And doesn't electrical reactance make inertia equivalent to gravity?^[40] How else do UFO's stay aloft? And make right-angle turns at high speed without slowing down? And suddenly stop without deceleration?

This makes me wonder if we have overlooked a very significant perspective in both physics and electrodynamics. Hmmm, ...

No one (usually) thinks of the mass of a coil as possessing potential energy unless that someone was Joseph Newman. Doesn't matter what people thought of him or his ideas of gyroscopic power. Maybe that was his way of describing inductive reactance? What matters is that, at least, he understood the potential power which is inherent within the inductance of a coil and made use of that power even if it could've been done in a more efficient manner. It almost doesn't matter. At least he confronted people with working models even if he may have lied (in his book) on how to build it.^[41]

Remember, ...
Input power must step aside and quickly dissipate (using standard thermodynamics) to reduce input and, yet still be able to maintain an excellent output. {I could have used the word: 'conserve' instead of 'reduce', but that might confuse anyone who is brainwashed to think of the laws of physics instead of the economics of conserving our electrical resources.}

Negation of current is a powerful factor, within overunity circuits, since negation of watts and the divergence of voltage differences (between two nodes within a circuit) are the result. This leads to the non-saturation of current within inductors (exhibited by triangular waves, or spikes) and a continuous escalation of power at an exponential rate. This rate may not be constant! In other words, a nicely smooth hyperbolic (ascent or descent) away from an oscilloscope's midline of zero may suddenly become a vertical slam into infinite gain!

Similarities to Eric Dollard's LMD Analog Computer

Ripple Waves versus Compression Waves.

Fig. 7a compares the pros and cons of two very distinct forms of electrical transmission: the normal type which suffers intense losses versus its converse which gains momentum!

Comparison of two analog computers both of which are in LMD mode (Longitudinal Magneto-Dielectric).

Fig. 7b – LMD analog computers.

Fig. 6b, up-above, and Fig. 7b (on the right) possess stark similarities to Eric Dollard's Analog Computer in Longitudinal Magneto-Dielectric (LMD) mode since those circuits exhibit their dielectric force (measured in voltage) across their vector of transmission (in series to) their magnetic force of support (in parallel with) their vector of transmission (Fig. 7a). Hence, Eric has managed to create a whole new orientation of transmission existing in the space between a pair of transmission wires in which each whole wire is one of two terminals of transmission while the space between these two terminals is the line of transmission. Since this line of transmission is empty space, this constitutes a line of longitudinal dielectricity while each terminal is a solid composition of magnetizable transverse conductance.^[42]

This is, actually, more efficient at transmitting energy since the magnetism of each terminal remains where it is initially located and we do not attempt to move it anywhere. This is a great boon since we have learned, from studying history, that the movement of magnetizable current (in the trans-Atlantic telegraph cable problem of the 1800s) drops off very rapidly over distance making that conventional style of transmission very costly. Instead, we polarize the empty space between a pair of transmission wires with a capacitant charge of voltage (using each magnetizable terminal of conductance as a sort of capacitor plate to this new style of transmission).

Capacitive Negative Resistance Suggests Epicyclic Lunar Rotation

Negative resistance can vary its behavior based on its location.

Fig. 8a – Negative resistance will grow in amplitude (over time) if it is dielectrical, namely: located within capacitors. Negative resistance will shrink in amplitude (over time) if it is inductive or conductive, namely: located within inductors or resistors.

Negative resistance can vary its behavior based on its location.

Fig. 8b – Negative resistance can vary its behavior based on its location.

At 9 minutes and 20 seconds into this YouTube video, we are shown the inside of an electric generator which reminds me of the inside of John Bedini's patented energizer which is different than standard rotary generators.

Here are two more examples of Bedini energizers.

This puts into doubt that the moon is orbiting the Earth since its axis of rotation is not centered within its own (lunar) center of mass but is centered within the Earth's center of mass making it appear as if it is not in orbit around the Earth. Instead, the moon's rotation around the Earth is an extension of the rotation of the Earth's center of mass.

Conventional Cyclic Rotations of Standard Motors versus Epicyclic Lunar Rotations

Fig. 8c – compares cyclic versus epicyclic rotations of standard generator/motor designs versus John Bedini's suggesting lunar rotation around the Earth (in Bedini's case).

The reason why I call this simulated experiment moon (in Fig. 8a and Fig. 8b) is due to an equivalency between John Bedini's design for a very efficient rotary generator and how the moon always keeps the same side facing us throughout its orbit around the Earth. If the moon (representing a coil) had rotated while orbiting the Earth, then it would have been engaging Lenz Law as a consequence of Michael Faraday's Law in which the movement of one magnetic reference frame against another magnetic reference frame produces a counter-opposing force known as: back EMF. This undermines motor, and generator, efficiencies. Since movement is occurring between the magnetic reference frames of both coils (in these simulated examples, of: Fig. 8a and Fig. 8b), this suggests negative resistance is being engaged within the context of inductive and conductive reactances diminishing the amplitude of the waves which are traced in the middle pair and bottom pair of the oscilloscope tracings of Fig. 8a.

But if the moon's spheroidal inductance rotates around, not the center of its own mass, but -rather- the center of the Earth's mass, then it maps an epicyclic path of rotation which does not engage Lenz Law since the surfaces of the inner “red” coils do not move relative to the surface of the outer “black” coil in Fig. 8c. They move together much like a homopolar generator. Since the smaller “red” coils on the inside of Fig. 8c are not rotating relative to the larger and external “black” coil encircling the inner coils, that is one less type of movement to amplify back EMF. Hence, efficiency is improved. This suggests (to me) that negative resistance is engaging dielectric (capacitive) reactance graphed in the top pair of tracings in Fig. 8a.

What does this mean?
Effectively, it means that the moon has no mass and, thus, no angular momentum of its own apart from that imparted to it by the Earth.^[43] For if it did possess its own angular momentum, then it would rotate around its own center of mass. Yet, it does not. Instead, it rotates around the Earth's center of mass and will continue to rotate only once around the Sun's center of mass for every cylce of its orbit (once its perturbations of sudden release died down) if the Earth were to suddenly disappear. Mass has the consequence of generating inertia. Without a mass to generate inertia, the moon is “locked” into the Earth's center of mass. Hence, did the Apollo lunar landings actually occur? Could they have occurred? Yes. How?

Because this relocation of the moon's center of mass is performed by the moon being composed almost entirely of aluminum, or something similar, which possesses the property of paramagnetism, and if the moon is also largely a vacuous object of a lightweight, but structurally sturdy and honeycombed construction. These stipulations deflect its own center of mass to the Earth which is largely ferromagnetic (due to the Earth's preponderance of iron in its makeup) which has the property of consolidating its own center of mass plus requisition any other object's center of mass to add to its own.

If the moon has any mass (and it's safe to assume that it does, or else the lunar landings would never have occurred ;-), then its mass has been neutralized. Thus, a buoyancy exists which suspends the moon at its height above the Earth instead of our presumption of the mutual gravity between the Earth and the moon acting in conjunction with our assumption of its possession of an orbital momentum as it traces a pathway around the Earth. But under the circumstances, the moon neither possesses orbital momentum nor does it possess angular momentum to rotate. Both actions are taken care of by the Earth's angular momentum and its largely iron composition.

Capacitive negative resistance suggests the epicyclic rotation of our moon since resistance would have to be gainfully negative in order to compensate for the moon's lack of mass with respect to its size. Any other type of resistance would require (demand) a significant mass within the moon to give it sufficient momentum to rotate independent of its orbit around the Earth. Since its orbit is epicyclic, then it cannot have any significant mass. It is a vacuous sphere.

Conversely, this is why the Earth and our Sun are both composed, mostly, of iron. According to the website: TheSurfaceOfTheSun.com – the Sun's hard surface is composed of calcium ferrite underneath its atmospheric plasma of neon and silicon.

How does Free Energy not Violate Conservation?

Definition of Moment of Inertia
For a simple pendulum (an oscillating body/system/circuit), this definition yields a formula for the moment of inertia $I$ in terms of the mass $m$ of the pendulum and its distance $r$ from the pivot point as, $I=mr^{2}.$

Thus, the moment of inertia of the oscillating body (pendulum) depends on both the mass $m$ of a body and its geometry, or shape, as defined by the distance $r$ to the axis of rotation.

How do we accomplish an exponential rise of potential energy without violating the conservation of angular momentum? By separating the mass $m$ of the moment of inertia from its radius (squared) $r^{2}$ , we dematerialize the moment of inertia into its electrical equivalencies of: inductance $H$ representing mass $m$ , and capacitance $F$ equaling radius (squared) $r^{2}$ . But we may only accomplish this whenever current becomes inverted relative to voltage. And this dematerialization occurs due to a translation from real numbers dominating the scene into complex numbers taking over with emphasis on its imaginary coefficient ${\sqrt {-1}}$ dominating the complex number field of the reactance of an electrical component.

When we succeed at reversing current, then there will be no delay: there will be no storage delay within a coil of wire and there will be no storage delay within a capacitor. And there will be no delayed response whenever virtual momentum is stored versus whenever it is released. Coils and capacitors, at this point, become mirrors which merely reflect without storage. Since current is inverted, then there is no delay, and coils and capacitors are receiving the current aspect of their power at the same time that they are exporting the voltage aspect of their power. Hence, a capacitor no longer behaves strictly as a capacitor and a coil of wire no longer strictly behaves as a coil of wire. Each begin to take on the characteristics of the other, but merely in a dynamic manner.

This dynamic condition creates a transformation of the usual dictum of physics, in which: “Energy IN has to equal Energy OUT” becomes true, not for the entire circuit, but for each and every component due to the reversal of current. This reversal of current eliminates any time-delay that Newton's Law of Reaction for every Action would assume.

Furthermore, this reversal of current assumes that what was true in the prior half-cycle of oscillation is no longer true in any subsequent half-cycle due to this separation between voltage and current of one-half cycle of angular displacement (in time; per cycle).

In other words, ...
The result of the previous half-cycle becomes the input for its subsequent half-cycle. And since current is reversed, mass has become separated from radius (squared) $r^{2}$ . This fact, alone, severs any relationship between this process of Free Energy magnification and the conservation of angular momentum across multiple half-cycles.

In other words, the conservation of angular momentum is, now, only true for each half-cycle of oscillation while no longer being true across two or more subsequent half-cycles. This is due to the constantly changing features of moment of inertia occurring between any two subsequent half-cycles of oscillation.

Noether's Theorem allows for this discrepancy when it states that the loophole for the Conservation of Energy is whenever time-frames undergo alteration, because conservation is assumed to be true exclusively within the same reference frame (for time); not across two separate and distinctly different time-frames of reference.

					The energy conservation law is a consequence of the shift symmetry of time; energy conservation is implied by the empirical fact that the laws of physics do not change with time itself. Philosophically this can be stated as “nothing depends on time per se”. In other words, if the physical system is invariant under the continuous symmetry of time translation then its energy (which is the canonical conjugate quantity to time) is conserved. Conversely, systems that are not invariant under shifts in time (e.g. systems with time-dependent potential energy) do not exhibit conservation of energy – unless we consider them to exchange energy with another, an external system so that the theory of the enlarged system becomes time-invariant again.
					Editor's note: “nothing depends upon time per se” – Someone went to sleep at the wheel while driving their proverbial electrified vessel! Apparently, physicists could care less about electrodynamics in which electrical reactance depends heavily upon time as its foundation since reactance (ie, “time-dependent potential energy”) has no dynamic outside of time. Hence, time-frames (ie, cycles and half-cycles of oscillation) matter a lot! By the way, ... This is not quantum mechanics in which “black holes” and “time travel” needs to be invoked for the reversal of light (acting as current reversal) to occur. Instead, simple electrodynamic theory applies, here.

It so happens that the reversal of current satisfies this loophole in as much as no two half-cycles of oscillation share the same (equivalent) time-frame. Only each half-cycle of oscillation can be said to be true to its own time-frame servicing its own reference-frame.

And, ...
Electrical reactance formula (used for calculating the inductive and capacitive reactances of inductors and capacitors) bridges the time-frame gap existing between (and across) multiple half-cycles of oscillation since each iteration of calculations of reactance are always true per half-cycle of oscillation, but not true for the next half-cycle since a distinction must be made (in time) between the inductive reactance resulting from one iteration of calculation (from the formula for inductive reactance using the inductance of the magnetic field of an inductor) from the inductance of the prior half-cycle which spawns the inductive reactance (namely: the inductance) for the subsequent half-cycle. Likewise, this is true for calculating capacitive reactance versus the capacitance which spawned it.

Ergo, due to the reversal of current, there can no longer be any distinction made between inductance and inductive reactance. Nor can there be any distinction made between capacitance and capacitive reactance, for over time: these distinctions which we used to hold so dear in a static world of make-believe conditions of stability of time-frames is no longer valid outside of any singular half-cycle.

Not until current reforms back into its normal relationship with voltage (in which the phases of oscillatory current are in alignment with the phases of oscillatory voltage) will a whole new value of angular momentum materialize literally out of thin air (out of the reactances of counter-space). Only, then, will conservatives cry, “foul play”.

But if we bypass the jurisdiction of the Conservation of Angular Momentum, then no law has been violated!

So, why all the fuss?

By dismantling time, we dismantle conservation. This is what reversal of current manages to accomplish. But only if it is accomplished via analog components; not digital.

True, ...
I've had to use a digital medium of computer simulations to come up with these conclusions and insights. But that's because I trust these multi-thousand dollar simulation softwares are honest in their appraisal of electrodynamics.

And they are honest.

Besides giving me an unadulterated view of electrodynamic theory, they also (sometimes) honestly let me “in” on their petty little secrets regarding their policy to tweak whatever their software designer thought was wrong with electrical reality by sometimes “fudging” the software's results. Such as: limiting the current of a diode should it rise above 1kA. This began to bug me until I could no longer tolerate this behavior. This motivated me to peer into the software code (of the simulator in question) to discover a comment made by its designer that: “sometimes, diodes act weird”.

To me, that is not acceptable to get a degree in electrical engineering from a prestigious university only to fudge a diode's behavior, because of personally finding fault with it!

In Conclusion: What is electricity?

If I rephrase the question as

What is electrical power, then the correct answer is to say that Ohms Law is a combination of two components.

The first component of electricity is real voltage which is distributed across space. We will label this type of voltage with the label of: $V_{r}$ to signify that this represents Real Voltage.

The second component of electrical power is reactive voltage existing in time. This latter component is divided by one or more various impedances tempting us to simplify this second component of electrical power by way of mathematical substitution in which a singular symbol, $I$ , called: “current,” replaces reactive voltage divided by impedance. This latter, more accurate version of the “current” portion of Ohm's Law can be signified by: $V_{x}\div Z$ .

Hence, Ohm's Law fails to describe power (P, watts) as...

P={\frac {V_{r}\times V_{x}\times {\sqrt {-1}}}{Z}}={\frac {V_{r}\times jV_{x}}{Z}}

...if we also assume the substitution of $j$ representing the square root of negative one whenever utilized within the field of electrical engineering: $j={\sqrt {-1}}$ , so as to avoid confusion with the letter $I$ used to represent current.

Instead, conventional wisdom allows for their equivalence...

P={\frac {V^{2}}{Z}}=V\times I

...but fails to distinguish among types of voltages and the implications of expanding our consideration of reactive resistance, namely: impedance $Z$ . This mathematical shorthand suggests the illusion that voltage is squared and then it is divided by resistance due to the illusory temptation to assume that there is only one type of voltage rather than two.

Yet, we know that there is electrical reactance within all types of circuits to one degree or another. This awareness is predicated upon the fact that a piece of wire (for example) exhibits inductive reactance along its length and capacitive reactance extending radially outward from its center across its surface (if it's merely bare) plus across its insulation (if it has any on its surface). Thus, a simple flashlight circuit possesses electrical reactance. Yet, this reactance is so minor that we tell ourselves that we may safely ignore it without worrying too much about making some sort of blatant error.

But this will only work some of the time. We cannot guarantee that this will work most of the time, much less all of the time. And it will certainly never work out very well within the context of my style of orchestrating electrodynamic behavior.

It is this sort of mental programming that all of us must confront (at one time or another) when we wish to expand our awareness of electricity in general and free energy in particular.

We also know that voltage drop cannot be performed upon imaginary numbers.

This temptation to simplify Ohm's Law makes the job of the technician vastly easier to follow procedures laid down by policies which encourage the monopolistic belief that “there is no such thing as a free lunch.”^[44]

But if we assume a scarcity of freely available input power, then we are in a much better position to favor over-reactance as a superior source of renewable energy.

Appendix

Photons do not Exist

It is not necessary to theorize the anomalous existence of photons to account for the traversal of energy across empty space when space is perfectly capable of acting as a dielectric medium supporting the existence of longitudinal shock waves.^[45] Electromagnetic transverse ripple waves are a short-range ramification of dielectric (ie, electrostatic) longitudinal shock waves converting into transverse ripple waves whenever longitudinal shock waves meet up with matter at the other end of an empty void of space.

Oliver Heaviside effectively acknowledged this, over a century ago, when he devised his Telegrapher's equations to solve the riddle of, “Why was the magnetic field of electricity dying out so rapidly (along the length of the trans-Atlantic telegraph cable) while the electric field did not?” It was because the electric field does not travel since it is the consequence of a dielectric material responding to the imposition of a potential storage of voltage. This dielectric material was the boundary condition initiated by the surface of the copper cable separating the cable from its surrounding space of Atlantic ocean. The insulation of this cable helped facilitate this boundary condition insuring that no current would leak out into the ocean. But the dielectric condition of a transmission cable is at right angles to its transmission while its transmission is parallel to the cable's length.

So, ...

Pupin's coils for paired telephone transmission lines.

The transmission of dielectric charge of potential (voltage) does not have to travel, unlike the magnetization of current which does travel. Thus, voltage potential does not have to die-out while magnetic current must die out along the entire length of a copper cable due to the resistance which copper conduit offers to the flow of current. Hence, a ferromagnetic wire or tape had to be wrapped around the bare copper cable before applying a very thick layer of insulation to retain the magnetic field (generated by the application of a difference in voltage potentials upon the terminals at either end of this copper cable) to prevent the loss of the magnetic field surrounding this cable.

This prevention of the loss of magnetism is known as: magnetic remanence, or simply: remanence. It was used as a form of computer memory between the years of 1955 and 1975 by creating tiny ferrite rings through which was threaded a pair of crisscrossing copper wires creating a tapestry of horizontally and vertically aligned fine copper wires each of whose intersections was surrounded by a single, magnetizable, ferrite ring which could remember the polarity of its magnetization long after the application of voltage was shut off in the wires which had passed through each ring. This polarity of remembrance was interpreted as either a binary “one” or a “zero”. And this memory of ferromagnetic material is perpetual. It never dies out unless acted upon by a new force of electricity. This is in keeping with Sir Isaac Newton's dictum, that: “Energy tends to remain in a particular vector of motion unless acted upon by another vector.”^[46]

You see, ...
Magnetic energy is a preexisting condition within a ferrite ring. All we do is make use of it by organizing its random polarizations into a collective alignment which we can recognize as possessing a north and a south pole held to be en masse across the entire chunk of this ferromagnetic material.

So, the perpetuity of magnetism is already within the ferrite ring. But it's a chaotic mess until we impart order to it and, thus, put it to work for our benefit.

It is this perpetuity of ferromagnetism within a lengthy strand of permalloy (or similar) tape which made the transmission of current possible across the trans-Atlantic telegraph cable – without which, there would have been no Morse coded message received.

It is only short lengths of copper wire which can carry a magnetic charge. Long lengths don't succeed unless ferromagnetic material is located nearby, or else this lengthy copper wire is coiled so that the leakage of one turn of wire leaks out into the next!

So, ...
What is the boundary condition of space which makes the longitudinal transmission of dielectricity instantaneously possible?

The answer is, ...
The existence of matter at either end of a longitudinal transmission is what makes this transmission possible across empty space. This space acts similar to the behavior of a dielectric material sandwiched between two conductive plates within a capacitor. And the boundary condition of two conductive plates (on either side of a capacitor's dielectric middle-layer) respond to the longitudinal transmission across the dielectric material by creating transverse ripples of current at the conductive plates located on either side of this dielectric sandwich. But these ripples of current are short-range dying out very quickly due to the resistance of the conductive material in which they arise unless this material incorporates the use of a ferromagnetic mass, such as: iron, or a coiled geometry of the copper coil, or both, to help “remember” the magnetic ripple.^[47]

Electrons do not Exist

Electricity is not “electrons”, if it was, how could particles related to current (closed circuit) flow in a single wire? – This is a good question posed by Franco Bruno Corteletti at Quora.

Cause and Effect

According to conventional streams of thought, there always has to be a “source” to supply a load. Thus, the source is considered to be a causative agent with consequential effects occurring at the load.

But what if this is not always the case? What if an overload of voltage at the load causes an escalation of reactance everywhere else within a circuit except at the voltage of the source?

Now, what can we conclude?

Possibly, that the source of voltage is not a source of energy so much as it is a source of stimulus much like the conductor of an orchestra does not have to play an instrument while he/she conducts everyone else to play theirs.

Nor does a band leader, or symphony conductor, have to feed his players fuel to sustain their actions since they may be performing for free out of gratitude towards the creation of their music and the beneficial outcome for their audience.

This is the way I view electrical reactance in which one segment of a circuit leads everything else without having to do too much of the work. Thus, an overunity circuit is often-times segregated into multiple subcircuits each of whose section has a particular duty to perform: some sections will exhibit a lot of wattage while others will not. Some will be negative wattage while others will be positive wattage. Some will exhibit sine waves while others will show triangular waves or spikes.

Anomalous Kirchhoff Behavior

File:07 - Setup for taking voltage measurements.svg

A plan is diagrammatically laid out of where, and how, to arrange the components of this experiment.

09 - Building the circuit

Building the circuit to test a shorted transformer.

19 - Graphic demonstration of reversal of current on the bench

Graphic demonstration of reversal of current on the bench.

11 - Measuring the total amperage of I1

Measuring the total amperage of the circuit: I1.

13 - Calculating the root mean square (RMS) voltages

Calculating the root mean square (RMS) voltages.

14 - Deriving the individual amperages of R1 and R2 from the total amperage and the individual voltages of R1 and R2.

Calculations of amperage and voltage using Ohm's Law.

File:20 - Summation of results defying the initial assumption prior to performing this experiment.svg

Summation of results defying the initial assumption prior to performing this experiment.

Capacitors are always placed in parallel across inductive loads to save energy and stabilize its usage.

Fig. 9 – Reduce your energy expenditure, and lengthen the ride in your electric car (between taking pit-stops to recharge its batteries), by doing what all manufacturers of electric motors already know: add capacitance in parallel with inductance. It's so simple!

Inversion of Current from a shorted Transformer.

Fig. 10 – Current inversion can be simply achieved with a shorted transformer.

Splitting a transmission line into two branches should divide up the current, according to Kirchhoff's Laws, and maintain the same direction (ie, polarity) of current for both branches, yes?

This law, also called Kirchhoff's first law, or Kirchhoff's junction rule, states that, for any node (junction) in an electrical circuit, the sum of currents flowing into that node is equal to the sum of currents flowing out of that node; or equivalently: The algebraic sum of currents in a network of conductors meeting at a point is zero.

But what if conventional expectations are not always right? What if, sometimes, anomalous events can occur?

Take MrPreva's example on YouTube translated by MrJohnK1 and explained by Chris Sykes and others ...^[48] ^[49] ^[50]

MrPreva has split a flow of current into two branches by shorting out both sides of a step-up/down transformer. Oddly enough, this shorted condition causes the current to reverse its polarity on the larger coil and add this negative current to the smaller coil which graphically heats up, and lights, his smaller coil into a luminescent orange glow! See, graphic demonstration on the right ...

Doing the math results in the following conclusion ...

A fantastic conclusion, that: The Whole is Smaller than Some of its Parts

The current of I2 is greater than the total current of I1 due to the negation of I3.

I1 = 2.8A
I2 = 5.1A
I3 = 2.3A

Total Current of I1 = I2 + I3
2.8A = 5.1A + (2.3A)
Yet, |I2| > I1 = The absolute value of I2 is greater than I1!

In other words, just because the whole is the sum of the parts does not mean that the whole is greater than any of its parts! Does this sound like a contradiction of the Conservation of Energy since Conservation dictates the form and function of Kirchhoff's Laws?

It is possible to simulate this, under ideal conditions, using Paul Falstad's simulator (the “Current inversion” image in the upper left corner) demonstrating that most of the A/C voltage source shifts into the realm of negative watts all the time rather than alternately every half-cycle!

The use of capacitance, in parallel with an inductive load in Fig. 9 to the right, reduces energy expenditure since electrical reactance is recycled. This is in defiance to the electric company who will ignore this savings and charge us the same on our electric bill as if conservation didn't matter!

But this only works for inductive loads, such as: the electric motors inside of our electric cars, and the compressor inside of our refrigerator. What about non-inductive loads, such as: light bulbs?

They're taken care of by the insight of MrPreva (aka, “Pavel”), in Fig. 10 to the left, who has discovered that a shorted transformer whose two coils are of different inductances, will perform the same operation as the presence of a parallel capacitor will perform alongside an inductive load in Fig. 9 to the right.

By the way, ...
The capacitor, in Fig. 10, could probably be removed and the same benefits would occur. So, capacitance is not needed to perform energy conservation via its reuse within Pavel's example. All that is needed is a shorted step-up transformer and some resistive loads connected in series with both sides of this type of transformer. This is shown in the diagram of Fig. 10 in which two resistors are placed immediately above the transformer. One is labeled: 2.5 to signify 2½ Ohms while the other resistor to its immediate right is labeled: 7.5 to signify 7½ Ohms.

Application of Pavel's Discovery

Pavel-generator.png

Fig. 11a – Pavel's generator does not need a prime mover acting as a source of power to maintain its generation of electricity. It merely needs a momentary burst from a sine wave generator of 1µV, plus a mutual inductance greater than unity, to initiate escalation towards infinite gain.

Pavel-generator2.png

Fig. 11b – This variation of Pavel's generator (also) does not need any prime mover acting as a source of power to maintain its generation of electricity, because a momentary burst from a sine wave generator of 1µV is sufficient enough to initiate its escalation towards infinite oblivion! But unlike Fig. 11a, to the left, this version uses a transformer wire gauge of 19 AWG or less and a mutual coupling coefficient greater than 52.08% to achieve its gainful overunity.

Pavel's shorted transformer, in Fig. 11a (on the left), can be used as a device for gaining overunity if we can figure out how to physically manifest a mutual inductance (a magnetic coupling coefficient) which is greater than one. Personally, I like to imagine that this condition represents a very large, additional mass of ferromagnetizable material – lying outside the transformer's core, yet – magnetically coupled to it. If this were true, then this would vindicate William Lyne's alledged quote of Nikola Tesla, when he said that: “... for every two hundred pounds of iron added to his Special Generator, its output increased by one additional horsepower.”^[28] This extra iron was made available within the hull of a very few Elektroboots (electro-U-Boats) of Nazi Germany during WWII. William Lynes alleges that Tesla's Special Generator was bolted to the floor of the vessel's battery room insuring a firm magnetic coupling between his device and the multi-ton vessel which it was powering giving it a minimum range of 30k miles between recharging its batteries.^[28]

By the way, ...
None of these specially designed Elektroboots were recovered after the war. Any of these vessels, which remained fully operational, escaped capture by the Allies. All we have are quotations from William Lyne, who is quoting a Mr. Dort, Jr., who (in turn) was quoting his father – Dort Sr.^[28] For, it was Dort, Sr., who helped the Nazis adapt Tesla's Special Generator for use within a few of their Elektroboots. Some of these submarines were used to tow missile launchers carrying neutron bombs. These neutron bombs were another invention of Nikola Tesla, in addition to his Special Generator, and the liquefaction of air used to power these Elektroboots. The neutron bombs were tested in the Libyan desert by Rommel under the ruse of “looking for petroleum deposits.” These inventions, and several more, were stolen from Tesla's lab in 1895. The fire, of this lab, was set to hide this theft. Immediately afterward, Karl Linde of Germany patented Tesla's liquefaction of air giving a probable motive for this theft and arson (according to W. Lyne).^[28]

On the other hand, Pavel's shorted transformer, in Fig. 11b (on the right), can also be used as a device for gaining overunity if its transformer wire gauge is 19 AWG or less and possesses a mutual coupling coefficient greater than 52.08%. This version is a lot easier to build!

Free Energy Generators don't have to be Fake

Attempts at producing free energy don’t have to be fake. There’s no guarantee, either way, for them to be fake or real, since there’s a general lack of knowledge on this complicated subject ...

Please see ...
Ohm’s Law forms the foundation of basic electric theory in conjunction with the formulae of electrical reactance., is a podcast at Podbean.
... and ...
Is it possible to make a self-powered free energy generator?, is an answer to a question on Quora.

Free energy generators sometimes catalyze their reactances off of freely available voltage potentials within the atmosphere at ground level amounting to a few microvolts which were enough to run crystal radio sets a 100 years ago and are enough to stimulate the over-reactance of a circuit which is starved for power and possesses only one portal, an inlet, for current to flow. This prohibits the formation of normal current. Instead, current finds no other outlet than to reverse itself and exit the same way it came in. And since this is reversed current, relative to voltage, then this manages to increase voltage differences rather than equalizing them and is the definition for the generation of electric power under passive sign convention. This has the consequence of converting passive components, such as: coils of wire, into active components (which generate power rather than consuming them). This offsets the miniscule power entering this type of circuit and replaces the significance of prime movement since the activation of passive coils becomes its own significant prime mover. The catalysis which arises from the environmental background voltage remains significant, but not because it delivers power, but because it is a dependable resource to rely upon since “perpetual motion machines (who do not require any input of power)” are not a fantasy so much as they are a misrepresentation of the reality of free energy augmentation.

The generation of free energy is a multistep procedure involving the acquisition of nanowatts or picowatts of power from our environment to act as a stimulant to catalyze over-reactance of pairs of coils working in conjunction with pairs of capacitors, followed by the augmentation of this reactant voltage via an open transmission line archetype, followed by a self-shorted transmission line archetype (made manifest as a self-shorted coil) to offer a pathway for current to flow. This current will remain in opposition to its voltage and may not require its shift of phase (by 180°) to correct for this power factor since it is already usefully sending power back to its source!

Tribulations

Wikibooks: Requests for deletion – Free Energy does not Exist

“@Leaderboard, I forgot to mention...
Electrical engineering has always allowed for free energy circuits by renaming them: unstable. In other words, "energy IN does not equal energy OUT" defines an unstable circuit in which you can't predict the output based on the input, alone. This is in addition to an allowance for a shift in time due to the frequency component of the formulae for electrical reactance supersedes Conservation of Energy.^[51] Thus, Conservation of Energy is not a law so much as it is a yardstick by which circuit topologies are measured to determine a circuit's type. If a circuit's output is unpridictable (based on its input, alone), then it is unstable since its output was not conserved within the boundaries imposed by its input. Type-casting is not disallowance; it is merely prejudice.

“Considering how unstable circuit simulators are (due to their consistent use of matrix algebra as a shortcut for calculating a circuit's outcome), simulating an unstable circuit within the context of an unstable simulator yields "matrix is singular" error messages more often than not. Only stable circuits yield predictable outcomes. Simulators find no fault with these types of circuits.

“Using an inherently unstable simulator to calculate a circuit's behavior is a predisposition (ie, prejudice) towards favoring stable circuits since only stable circuits will pass through this artificial, manmade act of filtration without coughing up and freezing in mid-stride. This is not due to some Law of Nature. It is due to flagrant social engineering. -- Vinyasi (discuss contribs) 03:15, 31 October 2022 (UTC)”

Wikibooks: Reading room, assistance – How do I improve my wikibook, or is it impossible to improve it?

Wiktionary: Information desk: Two very different definitions of "perpetual motion" ...

Alternative Explanation of Current Reversal

How to Reverse Current Direction: a single page from the WikiBook, entitled: “Circuit Idea”.

For Further Study

Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter

Audio recording of Eric Dollard reading from his essay, entitled: “Theory of Wireless Power” (1986)

Radiant Energy is the Precursor to Free Energy (a YouTube video) with parallelisms to Nikola Tesla's Wireless Transmission theory.

Sending electricity through the Earth (a YouTube video), by Ernst Willem van den Bergh, of Wardenclyffe Research (a YouTube channel).

Wardenclyffe (YouTube video, with my comments and the OP's responses) ...

Me ...
“Could the reversal of current, relative to the polarity of voltage within his Magnifying Transmitter, be a diagnostic check that his Magnifying Transmitter was succeeding at doing its job of collecting atmospheric electricity? In as much as, this reversal of current would be directing the flow of charges into his device (from the atmosphere) in contradistinction, and in counter-opposition, to conventional devices? Convention dictates that our devices must dissipate their potential to do work since they must follow the dictates of thermodynamics such that their current is in phase with their voltage with little or no separation of their phase relations (at least no separation greater than plus or minus one-quarter cycle of oscillations), and -thus- behave in an entropic manner?
“Also to consider, is the fact that his Magnifying Transmitter was orienting its potential in a radial manner, rather than in a circulating manner, since it possessed no return path (it was a monopolar device). Thus, reversal of its current (if this had been the case) would have directed potential inwardly towards itself in the format of a flow of current directed inwardly from the surrounding environment?
“Also, it sounds like a verification that the Ammann brothers' so-called: Atmospheric Generator may have been patterned off of Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter? Now that I've watched this video, this seems more likely than ever before since I've already considered the possibility that they were using one of his patents for their inspiration. But now, it seems very likely!
“In further confirmation...
“It was claimed, by authorities in Washington, D.C., that upon the arrival of C. Earl Ammann with his batteryless EV to demonstrate his technology for the benefit of the U.S. Patent Office, he was promptly arrested on charges of stealing energy from the grid since his demonstration in Denver, Colorado, in August of 1921 (prior to his arrival in Washington) had the distinct side-effect of putting out the power of the grid's customers in the outskirts of downtown Denver (yet, not within downtown Denver, itself). I suspect that he was messing with the phase relations of the grid across the radius of influence of his device (which he has been quoted as saying that it had a ten-mile broadcast radius). So, I'm guessing that he wasn't stealing energy from the grid so much as he was disturbing it throughout its radius of influence while at the same time supplying it with reversed polarity of the flow of energy towards the center of this range of influence at the location of his device. So, at the outskirts of this circle of influence, his device was too weak to have any influence other than that of disturbing the phase angle (or, power factor) of the grid without being strong enough to suck any current through the grid (and from the atmosphere) towards his device at this periphery of its range of influence. Thus, a more accurate assessment would be to claim that he was a domestic terrorist at the outskirts of town (if we would have created that term back then) while also being a Robin Hood of sorts within downtown Denver!”
Postscript ...
I have found, with my five years of experience simulating overunity (over-reactive) circuits, that they will usually behave like a glutton and hog energy from a voltage source, but only if the source is provided by way of a hard electrical connection (closed switch in this example), or else by a “soft” connection, such as: a magnetic coupling. {Maybe this is what the Ammann brothers' device made use of? A magnetic coupling to the electric utility grid, nearby, and -thus- rightfully warrant the arrest of C. Earl Ammann as noted above?}
If, on the other hand, the source is quickly disconnected, its drainage (by the overly reactive circuit) will be minimized, and this circuit topology will turn to its own reactance to make up the difference, but only if it is isolated from exterior sources, such as: the grid (which pervades the city landscape). So, one could say that sources of energy might get in the way of overunity circuits and, thus, block our attempt at reducing our dependency on those sources of energy (for example: the grid, batteries, solar, geothermal, etc.). Yet, sources of energy are necessary to initiate over-reactance. This is why I have learned to use precharged capacitors, of one micro volt or one milli volt mimicking environmental ambient energy at ground level, to initiate over-reactance and quickly dissipate its precharged energy into the circuit so as to avoid suppressing the evolutionary growth of over-reactance (emanating from this unique form of positive feedback).

OP ...
No, in my experiments I have not seen a reversal of polarity. What happens is that you receive additional current. This is also what you see in lightning. For example 20 MV is just enough to break through 20 m of air, which it does, but then another 20m step is taken, and another etc. (google “stepped leader”) This builds up a charges channel and when it connects to ground it discharges violently. This final discharge contains charges collected from the atmosphere surrounding the leader (NOT - as most people assume - from the thunder cloud). As for the Ammann brothers, I have never heard of them, so I can't respond to that.

Me ...
I thought arcing spark gaps exhibit the reversal of current (relabeled: negative resistance), yet, mathematically equivalent?
On a different note, and getting back to my question ...
I wonder if reversal of current occurs only in the receiver coils? Not in the transmitter?

OP ...
Not sure if I understand what you mean. If you have a 100KHz coil resonating, the current through it reverses 200,000 times per second. In a SGTC, when the spark-gap breaks, it triggers a reversal of current in the primary, starting an oscillation.

Me ...
Then, I can assume there is more than one way to accumulate charge other than by reversal of current? And less explosive since, maybe, it is easier to ...
2:48
... regulate the magnetic field drawing in charges from the atmosphere when the acceleration of the electrostatic field occurs between the cathode and the anode?

OP ...
Yes, I think there are more ways. In fact I am working on one that I hope will work on a much smaller scale.

Ether Theory & Gravity

Tesla vs. Einstein: The Ether & the Birth of the New Physics Waking Times

Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity Quora - Electrical Science

Nikola Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity (YouTube video)

Summation of Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity; An excerpt from: Occult Ether Physics, by William R. Lyne.

A Few Quotations from Mahatma Gandhi

My life is my message.
- Response to a journalist's question about what his message to the world was. Mahatma: Life of Gandhi 1869-1948 (1968) Reel 13

You assist an unjust administration most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil administration never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil.
A good person will resist an evil system with his whole soul. Disobedience of the laws of an evil state is therefore a duty.
- Non-Violent Resistance - Often misquoted as “You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance.”

All humanity is one undivided and indivisible family, and each one of us is responsible for the misdeeds of all the others. I cannot detach myself from the wickedest soul.{citation needed}

References

↑ Abdel Fudadin's post in Science Lounge.
↑ Free Voltage Exists! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.
↑ Maybe you should not believe a word I say for your own sake!? For your own protection to prevent you from harming yourself?! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.
↑ Forgive me, for I have sinned! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.
↑ ^5.0 ^5.1 Impedance is a Source of ~~Energy~~ Reactive Voltage – Quora
↑ Voltage Performs Work! – This is what Stanley Meyer was all about.
↑ What does “negative impedance” mean in electricity and electronics? Has the capacitor negative impedance? How do we create a “negative” capacitor?, by Cyril Mechkov
↑ A YouTube mix of Alexandre Desplat's music beginning with: The Heroic Weather-Conditions of the Universe, Parts 1-7. – right-click to open in a new tab
↑ Chopin Nocturnes – Wonders Of Classical Music
↑ Ravi Shankar – Classical Sitarist
↑ Indian Sitar, Instrumental Music, 10 Hours
↑ People of the Condor and Eagle, by Danfung Dennis, 2017 Pritzker Emerging Environmental Genius Award finalist.
↑ An Ancient Legend Meets Modern Times: The Eagle and the Condor Prophecy – Threads of Peru Blog
↑ How can one show that imaginary numbers really do exist? Argument that Imaginary Numbers Exist. University of Toronto, Mathematics Network
Editor's note: Their only success is proving the concept of imaginary numbers is a valid concept and consistent with the rules of mathematics. They do not prove any analog in the real world which mirrors imaginary numbers in the mathematical world of mental constructs. In fact, they admit that there need not be any analog in the physical world in order to have validity in the world of mathematics. Thus, nothing relevant to a physical proof of imaginary numbers has been offered.
This is important, because it is upon this frail basis that the United States Patent Office refuses to peruse any application for patent which purports to export more energy than it imports.
How can the Patent Office have any authority if it utilizes faulty logic?
Answer...
Obviously, a preference is being exercised which favors convention over reason!
↑ Chapter 11 – Parametric Amplifiers and Oscillator from First Quantum Information Lecture Series
↑ US patent office reveals number of secret patents
↑ The SPICE Page
↑ Paul Falstad's electronic simulator
↑ “Physics on the Fringe: Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything,” by Margaret Wertheim (Walker & Company, 2011).
↑ Taking the square root of a negative number on faith is the predicate of electrical engineering!
↑ Is anyone able to explain Eric Dollard's concepts of space and counter-space? Quora
↑ ^22.0 ^22.1 Jeffrey Denenberg's answer to: When an open transmission line is terminated by a shorted transmission line, do they produce a purely imaginary impedance at their input? Can this reactance grow at exponential rates if input is kept extremely small and restricted to a single moment? on Quora
↑ Reflections cause several undesirable effects, including modifying frequency responses, causing overload power in transmitters and overvoltages on power lines. However, the reflection phenomenon can also be made use of in such devices as stubs and impedance transformers. The special cases of open circuit and short circuit lines are of particular relevance to stubs.
↑ Zip compressed file of three Micro-Cap simulated variations of this phenomenon. All of them produce similar results despite the use of three galvonic-style batteries in one version versus not in the other two versions. Peruse this directory on my website (as an alternative to downloading this ZIP compressed file) and hunt for any filename which begins with simplest-overunity-circuit-you-will-ever-see__.
↑ Is it Possible to Generate Current without Voltage? – (posted to my website)
↑ Nathan Stubblefield used two parallel wires, one of copper and one of iron, wrapped around the central core of his Earth Battery which he patented in 1898
↑ ^27.0 ^27.1 The Error of the Ammann Brothers' Fuel Efficient Vehicles
“While Earl was demonstrating his invention all over the streets of Denver, the power had been cut off in the foothills. In spite of this, when he went to Washington DC shortly afterward to try to obtain a patent on his Cosmo Electric Generator, he found that charges had been filed against him claiming he had a device to steal power from the power lines.”
K. H. Isselstein,
Spokane, WA
↑ ^28.0 ^28.1 ^28.2 ^28.3 ^28.4 Pentagon Aliens, Chapter VIII: A Taste of Other Energy Secrets – Quote: “... for every 200 pounds of iron connected to the device, a full horsepower was added to it.”
↑ An example of negative resistance simulated in Paul Falstad's circuit simulator (mirrored copy).
↑ Jim Phipps answer (on Quora) to: With closed magnetic coupling between primary and secondary, what will improve in a transformer?
↑ Everything You Need to Know About the Battery in Your Car or Truck: What Happens When Your Battery's Charge Gets Too Low?, by Bryan Veldboom @Batteries Plus
↑ This is the first stage of my simulated development of the notion that maybe the inspiration for the Ammann brothers' Cosmic Atmospheric Generator came from the spark-transmitter of Heinrich Hertz? It is located within this directory on my website.
↑ Homemade diodes plus their tutorial. — “Darn! Which end is the cathode?”
↑ Borax or Baking Soda Rectifier and the glow.
↑ What Is ESR and Why Does It Matter? Part 1
↑ Is it possible to obtain current indirectly from power lines? Skeptics, StackExchange
↑ Through power factor correction, using a capacitor in parallel with an inductive load, we can reuse 99% of our electricity in this example. This spawns the appearance of a 100 to 1 gain of output relative to input. Yet, this appearance is a mirage since no law of physics has been violated.
↑ Search terms: simulation round off error
↑ I have discovered that round-off error is a byproduct of our choice of computer which we use for hosting our simulation software. Is it a 64-bit computer? Then, we're in luck! Is it anything less than this? Oops! BTW... Round-off error is not determined by the simulator, per se. I wrote about this, a little bit with illustrated examples, in my self-published book, entitled: Oops! How I Goofed Simulating Overunity Circuits on a 32-bit Computer..., available at Amazon, Payhip and for free download from my website.
↑ Erik Anson answers a question on Quora: Is inertia also a force, like gravity, but the opposite?
↑ My answer (on Quora) to the question: Has anyone tried to recreate Joseph Newman's perpetual motion machine?
↑ Eric Dollards Analog Computer as a Power Amplifier
↑ This text: The Moon's Rotation is read aloud by a narrator (on YouTube), entitled: The Moons Rotation ♦ By Nikola Tesla ♦ Physics & Mechanics ♦ Audiobook.
↑ A few answers (on Quora) to the question of: What would happen if an induced current did not oppose the change that caused it, as in Lenz's law?
↑ Please see: Tesla's invention of the Vacuum (tube) Capacitor. The shortcut URL for this Wikipedia article, is: https :// is.gd / teslacap
↑ Newtons First Law of: Inertia.
↑ The alternative to remanence (preserving magnetism) is capacitance (to retard electrostatic potential). The shortcut URL for this video excerpt, is: https :// is.gd / spacetimeconjunction
↑ Translation from the Russian into English of a Youtube comment #1 on MrPreva's video.
↑ Translation from the Russian into English of another Youtube comment #2 on MrPreva's video.
↑ Can someone explain the behavior of this transformer? – All About Circuits Forum
↑ Each cycle of oscillation is keeping time for an electrical reactance to continue to occur. If this frequency should change of its own accord, then time has shifted within the domain of that reactance and Conservation is disqualified (under Noether's Theorem).

Translations

Español

Deutsch

Francés

Italiano

Português

Polski

Русский

中國, 台灣

中国人, 中国大陆

日本

हिन्दी

한국인

عربي

فارسی

Shortcuts to this Page

Freenurgy - bitly QR scan-code image.png

https :// bit . ly / freenurgy

Freenurgy - IS GD QR scan-code image.svg

https :// is . gd / freenurgy

[1] Abdel Fudadin's post in Science Lounge.

[2] Free Voltage Exists! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.

[3] Maybe you should not believe a word I say for your own sake!? For your own protection to prevent you from harming yourself?! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.

[4] Forgive me, for I have sinned! – Magical Me, Podbean, podcast.

[impedance_quora-5] 5.0 ^5.1 Impedance is a Source of ~~Energy~~ Reactive Voltage – Quora

[6] Voltage Performs Work! – This is what Stanley Meyer was all about.

[7] What does “negative impedance” mean in electricity and electronics? Has the capacitor negative impedance? How do we create a “negative” capacitor?, by Cyril Mechkov

[8] A YouTube mix of Alexandre Desplat's music beginning with: The Heroic Weather-Conditions of the Universe, Parts 1-7. – right-click to open in a new tab

[9] Chopin Nocturnes – Wonders Of Classical Music

[10] Ravi Shankar – Classical Sitarist

[11] Indian Sitar, Instrumental Music, 10 Hours

[12] People of the Condor and Eagle, by Danfung Dennis, 2017 Pritzker Emerging Environmental Genius Award finalist.

[13] An Ancient Legend Meets Modern Times: The Eagle and the Condor Prophecy – Threads of Peru Blog

[14] How can one show that imaginary numbers really do exist? Argument that Imaginary Numbers Exist. University of Toronto, Mathematics Network
Editor's note: Their only success is proving the concept of imaginary numbers is a valid concept and consistent with the rules of mathematics. They do not prove any analog in the real world which mirrors imaginary numbers in the mathematical world of mental constructs. In fact, they admit that there need not be any analog in the physical world in order to have validity in the world of mathematics. Thus, nothing relevant to a physical proof of imaginary numbers has been offered.
This is important, because it is upon this frail basis that the United States Patent Office refuses to peruse any application for patent which purports to export more energy than it imports.
How can the Patent Office have any authority if it utilizes faulty logic?
Answer...
Obviously, a preference is being exercised which favors convention over reason!

[15] Chapter 11 – Parametric Amplifiers and Oscillator from First Quantum Information Lecture Series

[16] US patent office reveals number of secret patents

[17] The SPICE Page

[18] Paul Falstad's electronic simulator

[19] “Physics on the Fringe: Smoke Rings, Circlons, and Alternative Theories of Everything,” by Margaret Wertheim (Walker & Company, 2011).

[20] Taking the square root of a negative number on faith is the predicate of electrical engineering!

[21] Is anyone able to explain Eric Dollard's concepts of space and counter-space? Quora

[ideal-22] 22.0 ^22.1 Jeffrey Denenberg's answer to: When an open transmission line is terminated by a shorted transmission line, do they produce a purely imaginary impedance at their input? Can this reactance grow at exponential rates if input is kept extremely small and restricted to a single moment? on Quora

[23] Reflections cause several undesirable effects, including modifying frequency responses, causing overload power in transmitters and overvoltages on power lines. However, the reflection phenomenon can also be made use of in such devices as stubs and impedance transformers. The special cases of open circuit and short circuit lines are of particular relevance to stubs.

[24] Zip compressed file of three Micro-Cap simulated variations of this phenomenon. All of them produce similar results despite the use of three galvonic-style batteries in one version versus not in the other two versions. Peruse this directory on my website (as an alternative to downloading this ZIP compressed file) and hunt for any filename which begins with simplest-overunity-circuit-you-will-ever-see__.

[25] Is it Possible to Generate Current without Voltage? – (posted to my website)

[26] Nathan Stubblefield used two parallel wires, one of copper and one of iron, wrapped around the central core of his Earth Battery which he patented in 1898

[ammann-27] 27.0 ^27.1 The Error of the Ammann Brothers' Fuel Efficient Vehicles
“While Earl was demonstrating his invention all over the streets of Denver, the power had been cut off in the foothills. In spite of this, when he went to Washington DC shortly afterward to try to obtain a patent on his Cosmo Electric Generator, he found that charges had been filed against him claiming he had a device to steal power from the power lines.”
K. H. Isselstein,
Spokane, WA

[200lbs-28] 28.0 ^28.1 ^28.2 ^28.3 ^28.4 Pentagon Aliens, Chapter VIII: A Taste of Other Energy Secrets – Quote: “... for every 200 pounds of iron connected to the device, a full horsepower was added to it.”

[29] An example of negative resistance simulated in Paul Falstad's circuit simulator (mirrored copy).

[30] Jim Phipps answer (on Quora) to: With closed magnetic coupling between primary and secondary, what will improve in a transformer?

[31] Everything You Need to Know About the Battery in Your Car or Truck: What Happens When Your Battery's Charge Gets Too Low?, by Bryan Veldboom @Batteries Plus

[32] This is the first stage of my simulated development of the notion that maybe the inspiration for the Ammann brothers' Cosmic Atmospheric Generator came from the spark-transmitter of Heinrich Hertz? It is located within this directory on my website.

[33] Homemade diodes plus their tutorial. — “Darn! Which end is the cathode?”

[34] Borax or Baking Soda Rectifier and the glow.

[35] What Is ESR and Why Does It Matter? Part 1

[36] Is it possible to obtain current indirectly from power lines? Skeptics, StackExchange

[37] Through power factor correction, using a capacitor in parallel with an inductive load, we can reuse 99% of our electricity in this example. This spawns the appearance of a 100 to 1 gain of output relative to input. Yet, this appearance is a mirage since no law of physics has been violated.

[38] Search terms: simulation round off error

[39] I have discovered that round-off error is a byproduct of our choice of computer which we use for hosting our simulation software. Is it a 64-bit computer? Then, we're in luck! Is it anything less than this? Oops! BTW... Round-off error is not determined by the simulator, per se. I wrote about this, a little bit with illustrated examples, in my self-published book, entitled: Oops! How I Goofed Simulating Overunity Circuits on a 32-bit Computer..., available at Amazon, Payhip and for free download from my website.

[40] Erik Anson answers a question on Quora: Is inertia also a force, like gravity, but the opposite?

[41] My answer (on Quora) to the question: Has anyone tried to recreate Joseph Newman's perpetual motion machine?

[42] Eric Dollards Analog Computer as a Power Amplifier

[43] This text: The Moon's Rotation is read aloud by a narrator (on YouTube), entitled: The Moons Rotation ♦ By Nikola Tesla ♦ Physics & Mechanics ♦ Audiobook.

[44] A few answers (on Quora) to the question of: What would happen if an induced current did not oppose the change that caused it, as in Lenz's law?

[45] Please see: Tesla's invention of the Vacuum (tube) Capacitor. The shortcut URL for this Wikipedia article, is: https :// is.gd / teslacap

[46] Newtons First Law of: Inertia.

[47] The alternative to remanence (preserving magnetism) is capacitance (to retard electrostatic potential). The shortcut URL for this video excerpt, is: https :// is.gd / spacetimeconjunction

[48] Translation from the Russian into English of a Youtube comment #1 on MrPreva's video.

[49] Translation from the Russian into English of another Youtube comment #2 on MrPreva's video.

[50] Can someone explain the behavior of this transformer? – All About Circuits Forum

[51] Each cycle of oscillation is keeping time for an electrical reactance to continue to occur. If this frequency should change of its own accord, then time has shifted within the domain of that reactance and Conservation is disqualified (under Noether's Theorem).

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

@@ Line 733: / Line 733: @@
 ==== Application of Pavel's Discovery ====
-[[File:Pavel-generator.png|thumb|alt=Pavel-generator.png|[[c:Category:MrPreva|Pavel's]] [http://vinyasi.info/ne?startCircuit=generator.txt generator] does not need any prime mover acting as a source of power to maintain its generation of electricity. It merely needs a tiny A/C sine wave generator of 1&micro;V, plus a mutual inductance which is greater than unity, to initiate an [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]] escalation towards infinite gain.]]
+[[File:Pavel-generator.png|thumb|left|alt=Pavel-generator.png|Fig. 11a &ndash; [[c:Category:MrPreva|Pavel's]] [http://vinyasi.info/ne?startCircuit=generator.txt generator] does not need a prime mover acting as a source of power to maintain its generation of electricity. It merely needs a momentary burst from a sine wave generator of 1&micro;V, plus a mutual inductance greater than unity, to initiate [[wikt:over-unity|escalation towards infinite gain]].]]
+[[File:Pavel-generator2.png|thumb|alt=Pavel-generator2.png|Fig. 11b &ndash; [http://vinyasi.info/ne?startCircuit=generator2.txt This variation] of [[c:Category:MrPreva|Pavel's]] generator (also) does not need any prime mover acting as a source of power to maintain its generation of electricity, because a momentary burst from a sine wave generator of 1&micro;V is sufficient enough to initiate its escalation towards infinite oblivion! But unlike Fig. 11a, to the left, this version uses a transformer wire gauge of 19 AWG or less and a mutual coupling coefficient greater than 52.08% to achieve its gainful [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]].]]
-&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Pavel's shorted transformer can be used as a device for gaining [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]] if we can figure out how to physically manifest a mutual inductance (a magnetic coupling coefficient) which is greater than one. Personally, I like to imagine that this condition represents a very large, additional mass of ferromagnetizable material &ndash; lying outside the transformer's core, yet &ndash; magnetically coupled to it. If this were true, then this would vindicate William Lyne's alledged quote of Nikola Tesla, when he said that: &ldquo;... for every two hundred pounds of iron added to his [http://vinyasi.info/circuitjs1/texts/Nikola%20Tesla/The%20Inventions,%20Researches%20and%20Writings%20of%20Nikola%20Tesla,%20ch.%2063.pdf Special Generator,] its output increased by one additional horsepower.&rdquo;<ref name="200lbs" /> This extra iron was made available within the hull of a ''very few'' [[w:Elektroboot|Elektroboots]] ([https://www.uboat.net/technical/electroboats.htm electro-U-Boats]) of Nazi Germany during WWII. William Lynes alleges that Tesla's Special Generator was bolted to the floor of the vessel's battery room insuring a firm magnetic coupling between his device and the multi-ton vessel which it was powering giving it a ''minimum range'' of 30k miles between recharging its batteries.<ref name="200lbs" />
+&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Pavel's shorted transformer, in Fig. 11a (on the left), can be used as a device for gaining [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]] if we can figure out how to physically manifest a mutual inductance (a magnetic coupling coefficient) which is greater than one. Personally, I like to imagine that this condition represents a very large, additional mass of ferromagnetizable material &ndash; lying outside the transformer's core, yet &ndash; magnetically coupled to it. If this were true, then this would vindicate William Lyne's alledged quote of Nikola Tesla, when he said that: &ldquo;... for every two hundred pounds of iron added to his [http://vinyasi.info/circuitjs1/texts/Nikola%20Tesla/The%20Inventions,%20Researches%20and%20Writings%20of%20Nikola%20Tesla,%20ch.%2063.pdf Special Generator,] its output increased by one additional horsepower.&rdquo;<ref name="200lbs" /> This extra iron was made available within the hull of a ''very few'' [[w:Elektroboot|Elektroboots]] ([https://www.uboat.net/technical/electroboats.htm electro-U-Boats]) of Nazi Germany during WWII. William Lynes alleges that Tesla's Special Generator was bolted to the floor of the vessel's battery room insuring a firm magnetic coupling between his device and the multi-ton vessel which it was powering giving it a ''minimum range'' of 30k miles between recharging its batteries.<ref name="200lbs" />
 By the way, ...
 <br/>
 &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ''None'' of these specially designed Elektroboots were recovered after the war. Any of these vessels, which remained fully operational, escaped capture by the Allies. All we have are quotations from William Lyne, who is quoting a Mr. Dort, Jr., who (in turn) was quoting his father &ndash; Dort Sr.<ref name="200lbs" /> For, it was Dort, Sr., who helped the Nazis adapt Tesla's Special Generator for use within a few of their Elektroboots. Some of these submarines were used to tow missile launchers carrying neutron bombs. These neutron bombs were another invention of Nikola Tesla, in addition to his Special Generator, and the liquefaction of air used to power these Elektroboots. The neutron bombs were tested in the Libyan desert by [[w:Rommel|Rommel]] under the ruse of &ldquo;looking for petroleum deposits.&rdquo; These inventions, and several more, were stolen from Tesla's lab in 1895. [https://369news.net/2018/04/01/what-caused-nikola-teslas-1895-lab-fire/ The fire, of this lab,] was set to hide this theft. Immediately afterward, [[w:Karl Linde|Karl Linde]] of Germany patented Tesla's [[w:liquefaction of air|liquefaction of air]] giving a probable motive for this theft and arson (according to W. Lyne).<ref name="200lbs" />
+&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; On the other hand, Pavel's shorted transformer, in Fig. 11b (on the right), can ''also'' be used as a device for gaining [[wikt:over-unity|overunity]] if its transformer wire gauge is 19 AWG or less and possesses a mutual coupling coefficient greater than 52.08%. This version is a lot easier to build!
 === Free Energy Generators don't have to be Fake ===