Video of demonstration:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkj-7whwpUk
Funny that few comments are coming out on this - other than from Mats, who
would benefit if this demo meant anything positive.
In fact, it is not a demo in any real sense … it is disappointing theatre to
all but the Rossi-floc
Where is the theory part on the video?
The test proved nothing. It takes 25 KV to make a spark in an automotive
cylinder at high pressure.
That's the reason for the ignition coil. At lower pressures less voltage is
needed. A low pressure florescent tube
requires hundreds of volts to start the arc. That is the reason for the
star
I don't agree. The measurements of energy out & in were good enough to
demonstrate the basic characteristics of the QX. That was the purpose of the
demo. I t would be impossible to to do a replicable experiment without giving
the IP away.
The pathosskeptics make much of the crude power pack
Latest talk:
Boscovich's 18 th century theory gives the link between electrical interactions
and gravity:
https://www.youtube.com/edit?video_id=wAPrJCl9u-s&video_referrer=watch
Theoretical confirmation of the gravitation new origin having a special
electrical nature with Coulomb law corrected
A florescent light uses low pressure gas to start an arc discharge. A starter
interrupts an electrical inductor
to produce a high voltage impulse to get it started. Heaters are also employed
at each end of the tube to get
the arc started. Mercury is added because of its low ionization pot
One of the devices with the lowest breakdown ionization potentials is the neon
light.
There was one version sold by Radio Shack that broke down at about 50 volts.
With a resistor and a capacitor you could make it pulse. The voltage built up
on the capacitor and the lamp
pulsed discharging the ca
A florescent tube emits abuot a 1.3 M hertz buzz. This RF buzz comes from the
plasma in the tube.
It cuts off sharply on the lower voltage of the AC sine curve. There is a bit
of negative resistance at work here too.
Some tubes are about 1 meter in length. Perhaps something may come of my
The two reactor power determinations each had their problems.
The input signal to the oscilloscope was not clear to the streamed audience.
The power signal seemed to be a high voltage followed by a variable voltage
across the reactor. It was hard to tell whether the voltage varied around 0
https://www.sciencealert.com/graphene-levy-flights-limitless-power-future-electronic-devices
From: Jack Cole
https://www.sciencealert.com/graphene-levy-flights-limitless-power-future-electronic-devices
The abstract here reads very different from the article above and doesn’t
mention limitless energy
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.126801
Where is the su
It's not completely clear to me where the energy is coming from beyond
heat. The occasional anomalous vibrational waves are converted to
electricity. The researcher makes basically the same claims in the video
as is made in the article.
I found a link to the full paper. Maybe that will help us
In reply to Jack Cole's message of Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:49:20 +:
Hi,
[snip]
>It's not completely clear to me where the energy is coming from beyond
>heat. The occasional anomalous vibrational waves are converted to
>electricity. The researcher makes basically the same claims in the video
>as
OK, this has actually been around several years under the name of
“nanodrumming”…
Here is a visualization
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v89FgLaGpuI
The energy is thermal in the sense of ambient heat and one of the byproducts is
cooling
From: Jack Cole
It's not completely clear to me whe
14 matches
Mail list logo