Axil is prophetic. Mr.Swartz modified a 3-d printer adding a magnetic pick up 
and he mapped the  billet. The central region had 'liquid-like magnetic 

Please recommend specific test. The Manelas billet is wound as he did, but how 
to we proceed?

From: Axil Axil <>
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 2:36 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DESCRIBING THE MANELAS Phenomenon

One huge advantage that Brian A has over all other replicators is that he has a 
working billet. As a systems engineer, what I  do when reverse engineering a 
old system is to spec it out as well as could be done.

That working billet is the KEY to the system. If I had the billet, I would map 
the magnetic field strengths over the entire face of the billet, front and 
back. I would NOT apply any magnetism to it for fear of changing something. Use 
only passive magnetic sensors.

I would write a specification of the original magnet which would include a 
magnetic map of the field patter that it produced.

I would never run tests on that original billet for fear of changing it in some 

Then I would duplicate the magnetic field patterns produced by the original 
billet so I could run tests to see what the coils did to the field pattern.

I would then submit the billet spec to a magnetic specialty company to produce 
a billet that met the billet spec and duplicated the original billet.

Such a company is Polymagnet, a magnetic fabricator.
Home - Correlated Magnetics<>
Polymagnets are the World’s First Smart Magnets. Create a sophisticated 
experience with Smart Magnet feel and function. The Polymagnet catalog contains 
a variety of ...

I would then verify that the replicated magnet received from the magnet 
fabricator closely followed the billet spec.

With the replicated billet in hand, there are two types of coils to now reverse 
engineer, the actuator coil, and the output pickup cable(S).

The output cable(S) is the one connected to the full wave AC to DC diode 
rectifier. I would identify that rectifier and test how it works, then look for 
some indication of which coils it connected.

I would spec out the AC power source before using it in any way. After the spec 
is written, I would then replicate the actuator power source and not use the 
original one.

I would spec out all coils and replicate them, I would not use the originals.

I would do the same for the actuator coil that must be connected to the 
actuator power source(square wave generator).

As much as possible, use the duplicates and not the originals. Document those 
originals as far as possible. Those originals are far too valuable to mess up 
in any way.

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Brian Ahern 
<<>> wrote:

Bedini and Beardon never achieved over unity operation.

What can we learn from them?

I have witnessed the Manelas device operation, but I do not know what to do wth 
his components.

From: Axil Axil <<>>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 9:18 PM

To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DESCRIBING THE MANELAS Phenomenon

Thinking about how to determine how the aforementioned magnetic bubble behaves 
as follows:

The boundary of the boarder of the bubble as described in my last post should 
be determined through experimentation in order to understand, visualize, and 
maximize the operation of the output pickup coil. To do this experimentally, we 
must determine how the border of the bubble(BB) behaves in response to the 
adjustments applied quantum tuning parameter (QTP): it might expand or contract 
while still centered in place, it might move horizontally and/or vertically 
with this movement including the bubble center, and finally the boarder of the 
bubble might grow and decrease periodically in strength.

In order for these aforementioned bubble movements to be visualized in Magnetic 
Viewing Film (MVF) as seen in the Bendini video, the frequency of the 
activation coil pulses would need to limited to under 10 CPS so that bubble 
movement can be seen with our eyes..

As an experimental equipment requirement, a sensitive signal wave generator 
that can handle very low frequencies together with sub cycle fine tuning is 
required to drive the activation coil.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Axil Axil 
<<>> wrote:
Getting back to the John Bendini video again:

At 8:12 into the video, John Bendini shows how the conditioning of the magnet 
using a coil that wraps around the side of the magnetic billet will produce a 
magnetic pole structure that has one pole located in the center and another 
pole surrounding the center pole located on the exterior edge of the billet.

The edge coil produces magnetic field lines which conditions the billet that 
pass orthogonal to the surface of the billet. After conditioning, all the 
magnetic boundaries are standing vertical to the surface of the billet. This 
orientation of the conditioning field lines direct the magnetic domains to 
reorient themselves to all assume the polarization of  one pole directed 
vertically from the surface. As a reaction to edge concentration of polarity, 
at the center of the billet, magnetic domains of the opposite polarity will 
concentrate forming a centralized  magnetic bubble.

All magnetic field lines rise vertically from the surface of the billet. This 
is why the needle seen in page 6 of the slide show reference below points up 
vertically from the center of the billet.

I beleive that this magnetic bubble is made to vibrate when a triggering 
magnetic field is applied to the billet. John Bendini  states that the bubble 
moves around easily when a magnet is placed next to it.  This is why the metal 
tappers shake during the determination of the quantum critical point seen in 
the Sweet video. We will look at that video in a future post.

It can be seen in the plastic magnetic sensor viewer that the edge of the 
bubble is highly magnetized.  The output pickup coil must utilize these 
magnetic field lines emanating from this  bubble edge boundary to induce the 
output current produced by the VTA system.

In short, the vibrating bubble must produce the output current.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Axil Axil 
<<>> wrote:


Here is a video that shows how the Barium ferrite magnet is prepared. Starting 
at 4:20,there is a section of this video showing that the surface of the barium 
ferrite magnet is NOT conductive on its surface (2d topological insulator) but 
the strontium ferrite magnet is conductive. John Bendini has made a few errors 
here that I will get into a bit later.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Axil Axil 
<<>> wrote:

Floyd Sweet has reported that when the Vacuum Triode Amplifier is in operation, 
it loses weight. The reason for this may be due to the thermodynamically based 
Adiabatic reaction force produced when a coherent system oscillates repeatedly 
through disorder. This process in the EMDrive may produce a reaction force as 
microwaves create and destroy coherence in the vacuum thus producing negative 
vacuum energy.

The magnons inside of a ferrite magnet could mimic the virtual particles in the 
vacuum but be far more concentrated and forceful.  As the magnons oscillate 
through thermodynamic coherence a negative vacuum energy state might be created 
inside the magnet and a resultant Adiabatic reaction force produced orthogonal 
to the surface of the magnet. I would dearly want to build one of these vacuum 
triodes to see if I could get my car to float down the street. That might be 
something that could turn heads.

Here is a lecture that explains how a thermodynamically based Adiabatic 
reaction force is produced.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Axil Axil 
<<>> wrote:
Barium Ferrite is wonderful stuff. First, it is both a topological insulator, 
and an electrical insulator which tightly locks in the atomic magnetic dipole 
induced magnetic domain  where electron flow is non existent and does not 
weaken the magnetic domain through electron band filling.

The key to all this is unpaired electrons. A quantum mechanical property called 
spin gives every electron a magnetic field. Electrons like to pair up is a way 
that negates their spin. You can think of each one as a tiny bar magnet with 
the usual north and south poles. Generally, electrons come in pairs. And when 
you pair up two electrons, their magnetic fields (sort of ) cancel each other 
out. The orbital containing the pair becomes magnetically the same from all 
directions.  Electron pairing is not good for us.

But in some systems, electrons must go unpaired, leading to interesting 
magnetic properties. When you put an magnetocaloric (MC) material into an 
external magnetic field, the dipoles associated with the unpaired electrons 
tend to align with the field and - importantly - the temperature of the 
material increases. Why does the temperature increase? The magnetic field 
forces the spins into a thermodynamically lower energy state, and the result of 
this is that thermal energy - heat - is expelled. When you take the material 
out of the field it cools down. Thermal energy is absorbed by the system to 
return the dipoles to a more disordered state. A good example of an MC material 
is gadolinium, which has seven unpaired electrons in its 4f orbitals, giving it 
an enormous magnetic moment.

Scientists have known about the effect for decades. It was first described in 
1881 by German physicist Emil Warburg, who noted that the temperature of a 
sample of iron increased when he put it into a magnetic field. And it wasn’t 
long before engineers were thinking about how it might be harnessed to create a 
heat pump, a device that shifts heat from one place to another against the 

Barium Ferrite does not allow electron flow to degrade these unpaired electron 
orbitals. Strontium ferrite is not a topological insulator but it is still as 
good an electrical insulator as barium ferrite. Strontium ferrite allows a 
limited number of electrons to flow which weakens the MC effect and the 
generation of magnon coherence. Strontium ferrite will do the job but not a 
good a job as Barium Ferrite, the job being "producing magnon coherence".

Both types of these ferrets can be made magnetically anisotropic. Anisotropic 
magnetism is a requirement for magnetic triode success.   Ferrite magnets may 
be isotropic or anisotropic. In anisotropic qualities, during the pressing 
process, a magnetic field is applied. This process lines up the particles in 
one direction, obtaining better magnetic features. Through sintering, (thermal 
processing at high temperatures), pieces in their definite shape and solidity 
are obtained,

Barium ferrite does not conduct electricity.  It also has a characteristic  
known as perpendicular magnetic anisotropy (PMA). This situation originates 
from the inherent magneto-crystalline anisotropy of the insulator and not the 
interfacial anisotropy in other situations.  As a Mott insulator, it possesses 
strong spin orbit coupling. This characteristic produces a log jam of electrons 
that stops current from flowing. We don't want any electrons to move.

A wet pressed process where magnetic particles can move when placed in a 
magnetic field makes for the strongest magnets before sintering with high heat 
can make that magnetic ordering permanent.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Bob Higgins 
<<>> wrote:
Note that these ferrites have substantially different properties in the small 
signal than they do for large scale magnetic excursions.  An RF engineer would 
shoot you for bringing a magnet near his ferrites because the high magnetic 
field can bias the material away from the desirable high permeability small 
signal linear operating point in the B-H curve of the material.  When you begin 
putting really large signals into a ferrite the material behaviors become 
complicated because, not only is the B-H curve nonlinear, but it also has 
hysteresis.  There is plenty of room for odd behavior in such a complicated 
material.  Sometimes when I look at the B-H curves for large signal excitation 
of a ferrite it reminds me of the temperature-entropy diagram.

Regarding the magnetocaloric effect (MCE)... the field has centered around 
magnetic refrigeration and the materials that dominate the field are those 
exhibiting the "giant magnetocaloric effect" which include primarily materials 
made with gadolinium.  So, ferrite materials may exhibit some MCE, but are not 
optimized for it.  This suggests that MCE may be just a side effect in the 
ferrite during the Manelas device operation, rather than a primary component of 
the effect.  Otherwise, why wouldn't you use a material with the giant MCE?

On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, 
<<>> wrote:

IMHO you have finally got the picture!!!! at least with respect to LENR.

Bob Cook

From: Axil Axil<>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 3:47 PM
To: vortex-l<>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DESCRIBING THE MANELAS Phenomenon

Whenever we can get the spin of an atom to move: whenever we can get a spin to 
lose OR gain energy, that energy can be transferred to an electron with high 
efficiency.  There are a number of ways that atomic spin can be excited: 
magnetocaloric where heat energy is transferred to the spin of an atom embedded 
in a lattice through metal lattice phonons of that lattice or quantum 
mechanical vibrations that are inherent in the heisenberg uncertainty 
principle. The key is to amplify this naturally occurring spin movements enough 
to move electrons strong enough to generate usable voltages and currents. That 
amplification mechanism might be done by setting up a coherence boundary 
condition that involves a change of state between coherence and incoherence 
where a slight external magnetic perturbation triggers this change of state.

Barium ferrite might be a magnetic current superconductor where magnetic 
currents flow inside its lattice.

An example of this  magnetic current superconductor might be a magnet that 
allows magnetic flux lines to pass through it or not based on an external 
parameter: may be temperature or an external magnetic perturbation as an 

See (Barium ferrite is a magnetic insulator)

Current-induced switching in a magnetic insulator

The spin Hall effect in heavy metals converts charge current into pure spin 
current, which can be injected into an adjacent ferromagnet to exert a torque. 
This spin–orbit torque (SOT) has been widely used to manipulate the 
magnetization in metallic ferromagnets. In the case of magnetic insulators 
(MIs), although charge currents cannot flow, spin currents can propagate, but 
current-induced control of the magnetization in a MI has so far remained 
elusive. Here we demonstrate spin-current-induced switching of a 
perpendicularly magnetized thulium iron garnet film driven by charge current in 
a Pt overlayer. We estimate a relatively large spin-mixing conductance and 
damping-like SOT through spin Hall magnetoresistance and harmonic Hall 
measurements, respectively, indicating considerable spin transparency at the 
Pt/MI interface. We show that spin currents injected across this interface lead 
to deterministic magnetization reversal at low current densities, paving the 
road towards ultralow-dissipation spintronic devices based on MIs.

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Jones Beene 
<<>> wrote:
Whenever purported "free energy" phenomena turn up with no apparent source of 
excess energy, there are a limited number of candidates which seem to rear 
their ugly heads.

This only applies to LENR in the absence of real nuclear energy, but the 
nucleus can be part of a combined MO. In rough order of scientific validity and 
usefulness, these candidates for the source of gain are:

1) ZPE (aether, raumenergie, dynamical Casimir effect, space energy, vacuum 
energy, quantum energy, Hotson epo field, quantum foam, etc)
2) CMB cosmic microwave background (3K-CMB)
2) neutrinos
4) Schumann resonance
5) Fair weather field
6) Magnetic field of earth
7) Ambient heat (plus deep heat sink)
8) Below absolute zero (deeper heat sink)
9) Anti-gravity effect

There are more but they tend to be different wording or combinations of the 
above ... and even more incredulous. Many combinations are possible.

The main reason for bringing this up is that recently CMB has been estimated to 
be slightly more robust than once thought and with new ways to couple to it. 
The CMB is probably a subset of ZPE but the energy density of space in terms of 
the microwave-only spectrum is the equivalent of 0.261 eV per cubic cm, though 
the actual temperature of 2.7 K is much less than that would indicate - and the 
peak of the spectrum is at a frequency of 160.4 GHz. ZPE as a whole may be more 
robust, but CMB is adequate for many uses.

The peak intensity of the background is about... ta ad.. a whopping 385 MJy/Sr 
(that's MegaJanskys per Steradian (I kid you not) which is a candidate for the 
oddest metric in all of free energy, maybe all of physics ... along with 
furlongs per fortnight).

At any rate, if one could invent the way to couple to CMB easily, it would be 
possible to see an effective temperature equivalent in an excellent range for 
thermionics, for instance. The ~2 mm wavelength is interesting too. There have 
been fringe reports of anomalies with 13 gauge wire but anything with the 
number 13 is going to bring out the worst ...

Reply via email to