82 lines
4.5 KiB
Plaintext
82 lines
4.5 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
|||
|
|
______________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
|
| File Name : WHATISFE.ASC | Online Date : 10/15/94 |
|
|||
|
|
| Contributed by : Steve Gantt | Dir Category : ENERGY |
|
|||
|
|
| From : KeelyNet BBS | DataLine : (214) 324-3501 |
|
|||
|
|
| KeelyNet * PO BOX 870716 * Mesquite, Texas * USA * 75187 |
|
|||
|
|
| A FREE Alternative Sciences BBS sponsored by Vanguard Sciences |
|
|||
|
|
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
|||
|
|
WHAT IS FREE ENERGY
|
|||
|
|
by D.A. KELLY
|
|||
|
|
(taken from The Manual of Free Energy Systems Vol. II)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The term " free energy"' , is considered to be the net EMF yield, or energy
|
|||
|
|
differential between the input to an electromagnetic unit or system and the
|
|||
|
|
output EMF produced by it.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Some electromagnetic machines produce an output "slightly" above unity, while
|
|||
|
|
others have produced outputs of about three-to-one. Lately, the output ratios
|
|||
|
|
have been rising, with a recent unit providing about five-to-one, The
|
|||
|
|
prospects are quite good for a continuing and steady increase in these
|
|||
|
|
input/output ratios.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The concept of electromagnetic "free energy" should not be considered to be
|
|||
|
|
the same as natural free energy sources such as solar-wind, hyrdo or
|
|||
|
|
geothermal energies, because these new E/M machines usually require an input
|
|||
|
|
energy in order to obtain an increased energy output, which the natural
|
|||
|
|
sources do not require.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Several years ago there were only a few ""free energy"" devices which appeared
|
|||
|
|
to offer hopeful opportunities for development, but today there are AT LEAST
|
|||
|
|
FIVE significant individual projects which are operating at varying degrees of
|
|||
|
|
over-unity output.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
While these various machines or devices in both rotating and solid state
|
|||
|
|
classes are based on classic Faraday/Maxwell principles, they achieve their
|
|||
|
|
over-unity output by the ENHANCED ELECTROMAGNETIC ACTIVITY WITHIN THE UNIT
|
|||
|
|
or system.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
It must be noted that some senior physicists, in an attempt to discredit some
|
|||
|
|
free energy researcher's projects are proposing the discarding of Maxwell's
|
|||
|
|
mathematics with their new theories and operating machines. After a thorough
|
|||
|
|
review of each researchers work it was found that rather than the discarding
|
|||
|
|
of Maxwell's equation principles, these various machines actually supplement
|
|||
|
|
or enhance the electromagnetic functioning in each case, based on Maxwell's
|
|||
|
|
Second equation.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Since this attempted discrediting has occurred in two distinct cases it
|
|||
|
|
appears to be a planned and contrived approach to putting down "free energy"
|
|||
|
|
efforts.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
One of the major reasons that establishment physicists resist the Concept of
|
|||
|
|
"free energy" is that the tachyon field concept goes against the Special
|
|||
|
|
Theory of Relativity which limits particle speeds to the speed of light. The
|
|||
|
|
tachyon concept (fast particles) has been proven valid based on the findings
|
|||
|
|
of Professor Gerald Feinberg at Columbia University in 1967. Several of these
|
|||
|
|
new over-unity output machines have established the reality of the tachyon
|
|||
|
|
field as witnessed by the individual researchers.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
In addition to Professor Feinberg's findings on the fast particle concept, a
|
|||
|
|
U.S. Naval research team which was running various experiments during the
|
|||
|
|
1950's recorded a spot indicator moving across a CRT scope screen at a speed
|
|||
|
|
of 202,000 miles per second, which could not be explained. These tests results
|
|||
|
|
were noted as the interaction of particles moving at about 16,000 mites per
|
|||
|
|
second.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Aware of the constant of 186,000 speed of light standard, these experimenters
|
|||
|
|
rechecked their test setup, but again recorded the same results of the 202,000
|
|||
|
|
mps particle speed. Since none could offer an explanation of these findings,
|
|||
|
|
the test results just went into limbo and were noted as an unexplained
|
|||
|
|
phenomena.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The result of the "Saganac Experiment" in 1913, also has never been
|
|||
|
|
satisfactorily explained by contemporary physicists. In this experiment two
|
|||
|
|
simultaneous light sources were sent in opposite directions around a closed
|
|||
|
|
path, and photographic plates recorded the impingement of the light sources.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
If the basic beliefs of relativity "were correct" both light signals would
|
|||
|
|
have traveled these equal closed, circular paths (equal to the distance around
|
|||
|
|
the earth's surface) in identical times. The results disclosed that they did
|
|||
|
|
..not! We must conclude that a modification to Special Relativity is needed!
|
|||
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||
|
|
|