Scientist Built a Home Made Magnetic Generator 24 KW Free Home Electricity

[A.S]

GG, you start to bore me, really...dude devices producing more energy then put into them before are already built and running, yet they do not fully understand why that is so. They know, that that extra amount of energy must be extracted from "somewhere" but the conventional laws cant define it. There is so much proof out there.

What you learn in school is establishment, set up to teach, but people having left such schools touched borders long time ago....PROOVEN

 

You dont believe me? go search yourself.

 

(I would love to listen to you, but i KNOW you words are words from "others" re-spelled for me...thats why i cant, even i wish, dicuss with you in that direction)

 

Dont sell me #### what we all know.....if you havent noticed..we went beyond.

 

Your argumentations are dry history...already known....already considered...already noticed.....and sound like a book-worm song...... there is more into that GG...that is what i, or we try to discover !

 

http://www.leedskalnin.com/ just one link...and dude...there is so much more..out there.....i will save those links in my favs by time...and sent them to you as package.

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

No such devices exist. Grow up :)

 

I worked at the NRC - it's no school, they do real research there. Look it up ;)

[A.S]

No such devices exist. Grow up :)

 

I worked at the NRC - it's no school, they do real research there. Look it up ;)

 

 

You wanna bet? ok...i make my homework - in other words i collect already read material, before i sent it to you....then you go and disproove them. And use the highest sources you can get.

 

:smilewink:

 

(Ever considered, that the things you have learnt may lack? or arent fully true?...i bet NOT) ....NRC?, excellent...that makes it even more fun now

[GGTharos]

Ever considered you might have read a bunch of BS, or that you have failed to comprehend the meaning of what was written? ... you obviously haven't :D

[A.S]

You will see ....

 

NRC = suppression of alternative energy sources ? ;)

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[A.S]

You know what makes me smile? People like you - smart ones - were the same ones insisting on that there is no faster then lightspeed, yet this year they were all prooven short-sighted and wrong, but im sure you havent missed that news? ;)

[GGTharos]

I'll see how deluded you are, I'm sure.

 

By the way, there were plenty of news about 'faster than lightspeed' in recent history. Did you miss those? ;)

Surprised? Trying to figure it out 'out of the box'?

 

Do you even know what the whole 'can't go faster than light' idea is all about? And here you were, throwing around Einstein's name without even understanding what you're now talking about. ;)

[A.S]

I'll see how deluded you are, I'm sure.

 

By the way, there were plenty of news about 'faster than lightspeed' in recent history. Did you miss those? ;)

Surprised? Trying to figure it out 'out of the box'?

 

Do you even know what the whole 'can't go faster than light' idea is all about? And here you were, throwing around Einstein's name without even understanding what you're now talking about. ;)

 

There is conventional dickheaded science, and modern free-minded science.

First mostly insisted or insists on "knowledge" in good ole darwinism fasion, latest ones made discoveries prooving those established ones wrong.

And we all know the history of science is history of supression.

What leads me to that question, what have you done in science at all, you seem to fit more like in a navy suit for my like :music_whistling:

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

There is conventional dickheaded science, and modern free-minded science.

 

There are people who are as clueless and deluded as you. Some of them are scientists. ;)

 

First mostly insisted or insists on "knowledge" in good ole darwinism fasion, latest ones made discoveries prooving those established ones wrong.

And we all know the history of science is history of supression.

What leads me to that question, what have you done in science at all, you seem to fit more like in a navy suit for my like :music_whistling:

Spoken like someone who doesn't have a clue. In science there is method. This method, as I said before, is testing a testable hypothesis. This also means developing and re-testing existing models to confirm the model's accuracy by experiment.

 

The current model is confirmed by ongoing experiment. You know, real life observation?

 

So far, you haven't provided any. The 'dick headed science' is exactly what you're doing.

[A.S]

I dont enter such a battle not being sure....you lost that already....gimme time.....dunno if you will thank me....or try to get your neck out of the sling with excuses or cases.... you will see GG.

 

Im into that quiet a time now.....and i promise you to sum you a list of sources what will make you bussy denying it.

 

Save words for now, especially moving in personal direction...i promised you to come up with mind-shaking proofs...and i will post all here.

[GGTharos]

Spoken like a person who's never set foot in a lab :D

[A.S]

Spoken like a person who's never set foot in a lab :D

 

screw it..you are not worth it......noticeable from your responses....but yet i will keep my promise....just for yoda at least..knowing he is also into that field and interest. and maybe others.

 

meanwhile you can struggle on this:

 

(btw. that the one, this whole post started with, yet i post it again..go disproove it !!! then talk)

 

I know many cases more (from high decurated scientist and millitary ppl)...im just looking for them,

so i can post all i have read or watched myself.

You have high class scientist agreeing on, noone being able to debunk, but also many who supress that kind of "directions"

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

I tend to find people who are wrong are the ones who are worth educating - all they need is to look at what's been done so far and reason from it.

 

This is how science is done; testing and retesting, developing new theories. There's plenty of them, but it seems you don't even know the most basic ones.

 

You tell me it's 'noticeable from my responses', but you tell me this when you don't even understand how science itself actually works.

 

You're a complete hypocrite.

[A.S]

I have not a degree in science, yet math and physics was up to collage my favorites, always with best marks. This field of interest remained even not visiting university.

It remained a side-by hobby or interest field, but with enough basic understanding to understand more if nessesary.

But this does not matter, because all i understand right now is, you are not capable of discovering this topic together, rather attacking me in personal fashion. What makes me believe i do understand something? well, what makes YOU believe, that you understand everything. Your pathetic replies in this forum, may it be science or avionics are always painted with such copy-paste internet show off colors, that people have taken it as internal joke meanwhile. GG always knows everything better and likes to post about it....etc etc etc...

You say, you know so much...and yet all you can bring here is how science defines things and how analytics steps are made....crap what every high-school student can spell..... unable, to jump above your own shadow, and just reasonable questioning those new invenstions and fiels (PROOVEN).

Yes, i AND YOU cant explain it, maybe few can..but fact is, that things are prooven to work - undenyable.

Your knowledge sir, seems to be good enough to really be a good employee in a lab making statistic experiments for protocol.....and i believe that is all you have done in a LAB.

 

You must accept and aggree on, that there are things out there, what no GG and no science can explain - yet - but still it is there and works....and if you cant understand what im talking about,

have courage and search yourself. Yes, there is many bolloks out there, big nonsense headlines, but also very true facts.

I will help you on that path as promised....will take me little bit time to collect for you all good sources, but i will do it.

Nevertheless, there is more then YOU or I can explain....but it is there...and it "runs".

It is easy to recall on established science and be on the save side, but that is very ignorant in my view, because out of fear to be one of the Hoaks followers, you hide behind the conventional knowledge.

More and more science, especially in physics discovers, that old models arent enough anymore, due to the fact that new phenomons are discovered.

Either they have missed something totally, or they must rework on old so thought "never changeable" laws.

Whatsoever, science, at least good scientist should be able to step forward and approach those new things in same ways, what you mentioned above - that s right ! ---but DO YOU DO IT?

no way..you do.......all you do is calling me stuipid...

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

I have not a degree in science, yet math and physics was up to collage my favorites, always with best marks. This field of interest remained even not visiting university.

It remained a side-by hobby or interest field, but with enough basic understanding to understand more if nessesary.

 

You definitely do not understand the basics. It's very easy to see ;)

 

But this does not matter, because all i understand right now is, you are not capable of discovering this topic together, rather attacking me in personal fashion.

 

I believe that you have no understanding of the basics is not a personal attack. It is a statement of fact. The statement that you are a hypocrite is also factual.

 

What makes me believe i do understand something? well, what makes YOU believe, that you understand everything. Your pathetic replies in this forum, may it be science or avionics are always painted with such copy-paste internet show off colors, that people have taken it as internal joke meanwhile. GG always knows everything better and likes to post about it....etc etc etc...

 

That was pretty pathetic on your part actually.

 

You say, you know so much...and yet all you can bring here is how science defines things and how analytics steps are made....crap what every high-school student can spell.....

 

... those being the basics that you fail to grasp ...

 

unable, to jump above your own shadow, and just reasonable questioning those new invenstions and fiels (PROOVEN).

 

... while telling other people all they can do is personal attacks against your ...

 

Yes, i AND YOU cant explain it, maybe few can..but fact is, that things are prooven to work - undenyable.

 

You haven't even shown me anything to disprove so far. All you've done is sit here and push drivel. You haven't produced a single concrete example in this conversation to work with.

 

Your knowledge sir, seems to be good enough to really be a good employee in a lab making statistic experiments for protocol.....and i believe that is all you have done in a LAB.

 

What you believe is irrelevant, since all you do is armchair wrist-waggling. ;)

 

You must accept and aggree on, that there are things out there, what no GG and no science can explain - yet - but still it is there and works....and if you cant understand what im talking about,

have courage and search yourself. Yes, there is many bolloks out there, big nonsense headlines, but also very true facts.

 

... none of which you seem to know of or understand. Yes, I know there are things out there that no one can explain right now, and I gave you examples of such in this thread. This has nothing to do with your utterly flawed thinking ;)

 

I will help you on that path as promised....will take me little bit time to collect for you all good sources, but i will do it.

Nevertheless, there is more then YOU or I can explain....but it is there...and it "runs".

 

It doesn't exist, but you're welcome to attempt presenting it ... like countless charlatans before you.

 

It is easy to recall on established science and be on the save side, but that is very ignorant in my view, because out of fear to be one of the Hoaks followers, you hide behind the conventional knowledge.

 

I believe you are still displaying that lack of grasp of basics right now.

 

More and more science, especially in physics discovers, that old models arent enough anymore, due to the fact that new phenomons are discovered.

 

Yes, indeed - old models aren't enough for certain things, yet they are also being proven right for many other things. That the models we have are not enough has been known for a long time. What you think you've just run into some sort of huge discovery no one else knows about?

 

Either they have missed something totally, or they must rework on old so thought "never changeable" laws.

 

No, actually, those 'never changeable' laws keep getting proved correct every time experiments are done. Why haven't you looked these things up yet? Is it because they don't fit your fantasy?

 

Whatsoever, science, at least good scientist should be able to step forward and approach those new things in same ways, what you mentioned above - that s right ! ---but DO YOU DO IT?

no way..you do.......all you do is calling me stuipid...

 

You haven't shown anything so far to show you know any better. ;)

 

All you've done is flap your guns and pour forth useless drivel - where's your examples that disprove 'conventional knowledge'? Where? If you want to show you KNOW something, show it, instead of writing post upon post of non-sensical BS about how you're the only open-minded science-hobbyist super-hero.

 

You don't need a whole lot of sources, one is enough - just one example of something you're driving here.

[A.S]

I think, you have intelligence to spell somewhat smart, but also have a complex with your ego, that someone might be right and you not.

 

obviously you havent even read that one link i gave you in hesitation as an example case.

No worries i have enough more - with support of those you copy from - which will let you speechless.

Its 6:40 here... no 2 days and i sum them up for you.

 

me out.

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[asparagin]

My, My what started to be a funny topic, turned out so sad.

 

Please allow my 2 cents:

 

On Perpetuum Mobile:

 

Any scientist of our time knows that researching means to achieve something like a Perpetuum Mobile means carrier suicide. But this is only the self-defense mechanism of the scientific comunity against idiots like in the given example. And have no worries if indeed someone will come up with something like this he'll break through, because the wonderful thing about science is that it's foundations are reason and facts, which brings me to the second point:

 

I think A.S. is the only person who truly has something to gain from this topic:

 

While it is noble that you do not take things for given and question some authority, what you should take home with you is:

When going on such a dispute don't forget to take "reasonable" weapons with you: and these are Reason or Logic, Facts. Charisma won't bring you far, except church.

This is the only way to prove someone that you are not a fool.

[Vault]

Drondrik if you have an interest in magnets I work at a lab and I've helped build and install some of the world's most advanced Tesla quadrupole and sextupole magnets, if I can get permission I'll post some pictures of them for you.

[kaiserb_uk]

Hmm... A.S. is a creationist?

 

Use of the derogatory term "Darwinism"? - Check

 

Use of the word 'belief' - Check

 

'ah but there are lots of things science can't explain?' - Check

[GGTharos]

I think, you have intelligence to spell somewhat smart, but also have a complex with your ego, that someone might be right and you not.

 

My ego isn't an issue here.

 

obviously you havent even read that one link i gave you in hesitation as an example case.

No worries i have enough more - with support of those you copy from - which will let you speechless.

Its 6:40 here... no 2 days and i sum them up for you.

 

me out.

 

No, I don't want to go through the site - I was us to be talking about the SAME thing. I don't want summaries, I want ONE example from you of this stuff you're talking about. One concrete example. Scores of links are just a waste of time.

[sobek]

:megalol: People trying to argue about free energy just crack me up, yet they never realise the joke is on them. This thread should be world heritage listed.:megalol:

[A.S]

First of all i need to say few words.

 

Could i be able to copy paste an official extraction of and documented proof from a high authority or official establishment?

 

Surely not, i will not be able to, though i dont have access to highly classified instutions where the only documented proofs may lay in supressed manner. Why i say suppressed science? This will become clear as soon you follow the 1st vidoe link.

 

But why i am arguing so strongly then here vs many others who have choosen a path, wich i could have choosen so easily too by saying "there is no proof, and it does not excist" ?

It would be easy for me too, to say so....and i would be on the save side...avoiding discussions, argumentations and the risk to be called "stuipid", what really doesnt bother me anyways, because i can peacefully understand the standpoints of my dialogue partners.

 

Yet i invite you all to investigate too and use your OWN intelligence to come up with conclussions and logical possibilities.

You can and probably must research on mentioned persons and topic additionally, i did, but i cant do all work for you.

 

 

First WATCH this...then follow the other links:

 

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-988496603742502119&ei=AnmeSsKRDYeu2wLuv-iBCw&

 

-----------------------------------------

 

Historical Background:

-

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-7365305906535911834&hl=de#

-

http://www.leedskalnin.com/

-

Marinovs SIBERIAN COLIU and the SAP Tube

-

Bruce dePalma's N-Mashine

-

The Archives of Lester J. Hendershot and the Hendershot-Converter

-

The Joseph Newman Generator

-

Hand Coler Magnet-Electricity Generator

-

Nikola Tesla not to forget (He made way more then known, which traces reveal slowly)

-----------------------------------------

 

"Free" Energy or "Overunity Devices":

-

Professor John Searl

http://www.searlsolution.com/evidence.html

-

John Bedini:

http://johnbedini.net/john34/bedinibearden.html

(his applications can be found on youtube and google.video too)

-

John Hutchison and the Hutchinson Effect

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=5866006842090712676&ei=tH6eStu4MKac2wKitdWOCw

 

Part 1

Part 2

 

(he i have to say, there is way more about this very delicate case with J. Hutchinson)

 

-

Lutec Australia PTY LTD

http://www.lutec.com.au/ ..with patent in many countries

-

Steven Mark solid state generator:

1.

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-1944827568401901581&ei=zXyeSovCMYbq2gL797itCw&

2.

http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=167210479374903373&ei=932eSpvEDYK82gLvp8H9Cg&q

 

-----------------------------------------

 

Zero Point Energy:

-

http://www.wbabin.net/physics/turtur1e.pdf

-

http://www2.le.ac.uk/ebulletin/features/2000-2009/2005/08/nparticle-82w-fqr-2cd

-

http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm

-

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/oulist.htm

 

 

-----------------------------------------

 

More to come ...... ! (digest first this)

 

My personal thought to the first law of thermodynamics is as follows.

Lets accept that no energy can be created or killed (or in modern pyhsics language "loss of information" is not possible) and it can only be converted from one state into another.

Concluding the whole universe is a closed test-system with all its energy included in various forms, no matter if there is or was a beginning or a end.

Then following that law (energy can not be killed or created ...), that whole system would be an perpetuum mobile itself, selfsustaining in itself in all eternity !

You see what im trying to say with simple words?

All i can do is question, take notes, think beyond my "knowledge" and discover ....its up too you to manifest those things in products which can be hold by hands in order to be understood.

Call me names....i dont care... :)

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S

[GGTharos]

Yeah yeah yeah.

 

1. Show me where they show how you can extract energy from a vacuum. ;)

There's some meaningless explanation in the first video. Literally meaningless.

 

2. Show me where it has been verified by experiment.

Edited September 2, 2009 by GGTharos

[RvEYoda]

Concluding the whole universe is a closed test-system with all its energy included in various forms, no matter if there is or was a beginning or a end.

Then following that law (energy can not be killed or created ...), that whole system would be an perpetuum mobile itself, selfsustaining in itself in all eternity !

You see what im trying to say with simple words?

All i can do is question, take notes, think beyond my "knowledge" and discover ....its up too you to manifest those things in products which can be hold by hands in order to be understood.

Call me names....i dont care... :)

 

You make a mistake here :

 

There is nothing wrong with the assumption that the universe is a perpetuum mobil if it is a closed system. In fact ANY closed system must be a

perpetuum mobile to adhere to the conservation law. (This is also seen in

electrodynamics in various ways).

 

However human technology cannot create a true closed system : Hence :

we cannot make a perpetuum mobile:)

[A.S]

Yeah yeah yeah.

 

1. Show me where they show how you can extract energy from a vacuum. ;)

There's some meaningless explanation in the first video. Literally meaningless.

 

2. Show me where it has been verified by experiment.

 

It has been ...search for Tom Valone ..or better for latest publishings from high official places..... dude, honestly ..do you really research with me, or just blaa blaa "im right, AS is not"?

It has been prooven practically, science is challanged to "understand" it and they are trying well to do so....

This may help you, just as hint.....

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Paper:A_New_Foundation_for_Physics%2C_by_Quantum_Aether_Dynamics_Institute

 

Maybe not the best source right now, though i have read sometime somewhere a better approach (yess from accepted sources) but i will have to dig for that one so quickly.

 

BTW, i really doubt, that you follow the links i post....you sit there and stumble with spoon and knife on the table ...yalling "i dont believe till moma serves me spagetthi" so i can eat it and taste it.

 

:lol:

Edited September 2, 2009 by A.S