On 21/10/2007 5:27 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > In reply to EnergyLab's message of Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:36:49 -0500: > Hi Ronald, > [snip] >> Now I just can not obtain and have tried for many years to get anyone to >> understand and look at what I am saying and not implying. 'I do not believe >> in "OU" or "Free Energy"', I do indeed believe in the conversion of one form >> of energy into other forms that allow the result to be usable. In my feeble >> mind I do believe the Universe has a finite amount of energy, some known and >> some unknown. The secret is to tap and use the unknown. It is not OU or Free >> Energy, you pay for what you get, even if it is at the Universal level. > [snip] > I agree on this. Here is a list of possible sources that I can think of off > the > top of my head:- > > 1) Energy from the charged particles in the Van Allen belts circling the > Earth's > magnetic field lines, and transferring energy through those field lines. > > 2) Same deal, but energy source is the hot core of the Earth. > > 3) Near field effects. This divides into 2 parts: > a) 60 Hz from the grid. Since your device works with just you touching it, > can you take it for a drive in open farmland/woodland where there is less > local field? > b) Your local radio tower(s). Are you situated within 1 wavelength of the > tower(s)? > > 4) Thermal energy in the ferrite core(s) (do they get cooler?) > > 5) Do your ferrite cores contain a mildly radioactive contaminant (Sm, Nd > etc.)? > Check with Geiger counter while leds are lit, and while they are not lit. If > this is the source, then there should be an increase in radioactivity when > they are lit.
If it is true that there is a finite amount of energy in the Universe, and also that the 2ndLoT is true, our energy demands will be responsible for accelerating the "heat death" of universe. Harry
