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
