Oh dear; here I am trying to clean out my yahoo mail acct; which incidentally was recently phished; but because I have 132,000 messages or something this takes forever at 25 messages at a shot, and the yahoo loading time for that instruction ect... So I started from A in alphabetical sending order in which it took hours just to get thru the "Russian" type adresses with what I presume to be composed of the Cyrillic alphabet. So coming to the letter A I was wondering how many important messages in time I must be deleting. Ive had this yahoo account since 2002 or something, and I even pay for it! And after deleting the entirety of Allen Francom's entries or something, I slowed down a bit and started looking at what I might be deleting in this spring clean-up... Then I found this from a year ago. Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
--- On Wed, 7/9/08, alt...@vip.hr <alt...@vip.hr> wrote: > From: alt...@vip.hr <alt...@vip.hr> > Subject: [Vo]:4D WATER > To: vortex-L@eskimo.com > Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 7:52 AM > I would like to know whether anyone > here has had any experience with 4D water. > I have been taking those drops in the past few months and > am wondering > whether I am under the influence of auto-suggestion, > placebo or whether it really > works. I have tried 4D not out of the necessity but out of > curiosity and, as things > stand now, I have done my best decision in life so far. > Sebastian > Well the only way I would reply here to this idiocy is to say that I heard about some russian scientist that was drinking heavy water for his health. One can scarcely imagine what 4 D water is supposed to be... But since you have responded on Nick Tesla's birthday almost a year ago, a more sensible reply is attempted. Let us instead look at the problem where the energy used in a current limited electrolysis process is obtained from "expanded" time, or essentially a conversion of time into energy. LaRouche uses this big word called epistemology. In my ferrite heating experiments, the load currents can be shown to be obtained from a total source where the phase angle differences of the signals in time are over 420 degrees in separation, and as a consequence more voltage developes on the rectified outputs then the source voltages empowering the process. Yet a measurement of the three phase inputs on the conventional method of power input shows that the apparent power input equals the real DC power output. In this regard a quarter amp passed thru a 3/8 ferrite block uses 60 volts obtained from interphasal voltage rise between three currents of one third of an amp from 13 volts separated in time. Measurements of the input power(s) and output power are virtually identical, but if this time distortion is taking place why is the input power not less? Lyndon Larouche might conclude the obvious, but since he may not know what to say in these circumstances; I will say it for him, and he can agree with me later. "YOUR power input measurements are inherently flawed; they are epistemologically incorrect in light of the fact that you have measured the differences in time for each voltage rise referenced to the other, but you have not also measured the merging of currents on the stator delivery lines; which itself divides into two with the delta system of stator line delivery." So as things stand in the present line of measurements the input power summing ~15 watts from a 13 volt, 465 HZ three phase AC DELTA source delivering one third of an amp to 2.3 ohm delivery lines balanced with 70 ohm reactive loads to an apparent 273 ohm ferrite load releases 240 degrees F on a laser light temp measurement of the block. "THIS" particular ohmic load of ferrite, being a non-linear resistance to the voltage imposed upon it: is not yet at the point of maximum energy transfer from the outer resonances to the inner DC rectified load, and hence the addition of that load does not reduce the excessive phase angles in time found on the outside of this circuit. Here a somewhat apt comparison can be made to water having a non-linear resistance where a demonstration of a more efficient water electrolysis can be made with an "impedance matching high resistance water cell" of Non- electrolytic water solution vs the more readily accepted electrolytic solution practice for efficiency of power delivery to a water cell. In any case here I should now be able to ascertain "how much" water resistance needs to be added before the timing of outside voltage sources returns to normal, and also the extra stator line delivery amperages that need to be noted.. Sincerely busy, Harvey Norris