Noise (scalar part of electricity) as a probably source of energy

[Pedro73]

Hy.

Reading the book scalar waves by Konstantin Meyl, it has arrive to my attention as a flash, an idea that could be or something spectacular, or a complete non-sense & stupidity. As far as I've seen, noone has take this idea, and if I'm worng, I beg to anyone who let me know anything related to this idea.

Let's assume if what Meyl says it's true, that noise is the scalar part of electricity, the divergent component of the pure-voltage scalar field (as Dollard, Bedini & Bearden states),

As in Lakhvosky MWO in which our only purposes is to find the way to irradiate scalar multiple wave energy, I've been all the time wondering if this is possible or is simply a silly attempt.

I think that thes idea should be better to use in a medical aplication, but who knows.

Please, let me know what you think about it.

[Ernst]

I have worked my way through Meyls work.
here you can find the results.

In short: He is wrong.

Ernst.

[Ernst]

I should add, that I did learn a few things on the way.
Trying to UNDERSTAND the MEANING of vector calculus as it is mapped on electrical fields will give you a deeper understanding of electricity and magnetism.

Ernst.

[Pedro73]

Thank you Ernst.

About your studies on Meyl's work... well, It's true that he make the mistake to assume that in the vacuum the magnetic density is not zero. For the rest, I can not say anymore except that what you said is quite reasonable. Extremely reasonable. I always considerer that there where many tricks going on, and I have always consider more consistence the theory of magnetic and dielectric fields of Eric Dollard. Are you familiar with it? I hope you are, and I beg you to let me know your opinion. Considering that the dielectric should amplify the scalar field, should us not consider the dielectric an non the electric as the primary source of useful scalar energy, as Dollard states?

But in the book there are many other remarkable goals about the origin of the spin & the nuclear forces, the origin of antimatter (the non existence of the quark instead of positrons) and so for. The physicist should tremble reading such statements. I found them remarkable.

The experiments and kits... well there's a remarkable mistake in the kit and in the pictures, referring to the condition of resonance is C1 L1 = C2 L2.

Assuming that the first coil of the pancake coil has a low inductance (L1), and assuming that the sphere ball (C2) has a low capacitance, and assuming that the resistance is negligible, there should be a condenser in parallel with the first coil (L2) in order to mach the equation. But there's no such thing as this capacitor in Meyl's docs,

I did it in my experiments. I build a pancake coils using an electronic mulling cutter, all equal as you can see in the picture. I put a variable capacitor and I could arrive to a resonance on 7,1 Mhz with a Hantek Pc signal generator. With only 0,2 volts of amplitude, I opened a led.

Well all of this is interesting, but I would not like to go out of the main purpose of this thread, which is if is possible to produce useful energy from noise.

Thanks Ernst for your remarkable achievements.

[Pedro73]

When I said I Hope you.. I want to say I'm sure you will know what Dollard states.

Sorry my english is not good at all. :-)

[boguslaw]

Scalar or not scalar there are two sources of energy ; magnetic and electric :-)

Let's see.... for example we can use a ionization of air to make a small hole in atmosphere where cosmic radiation can be sucked and charge capacitor as Tesla shown.... or we could use the fluctuations of magnetic field around called noise ;-) done by cosmic rays or we can use directly radio waves from far away galaxies.... or we can use balloons to tap ionization of upper atmosphere...

not enough ? it was only few examples...

[Ernst]

Try this:
Take a fluorescent tube, put it into a HV (>500V/cm) HF (> 30KHz) electric field.
You will see the tube light up brightly.
Now, switch off the field by shorting its source so you are sure it is 100% gone.
Depending on how long the field was present and on how strong it was, you will see short flashes of light coming from the tube.

I still do not have an explanation for this, but I think a condition is created for picking up energy from .... (I don't know where).
It could have a connection to Erics statement, though.

About Erics work, I have been studying it a few years ago because I am interested in Tesla's work and I thought it might be helpfull. Eric has developed his own maths with definitions that differ from mainstream maths. This makes that it takes considerable efford to really get to the core of it. I found that his conclusions are not 100% in line with those of Tesla and that his maths was still incomplete (maybe that has changed now) and I feel that some of his statements may be impossible to implement in a practicle situation (they are based on mathematical constructions). These things made that I dropped it for then.
Especially the first issue, because I am first and foremost interested in Tesla's work.
But, having said this, Eric has produced a valuable piece of work and when time allows I will pick it up again.

Back to the "scalar part of electricity".
This terminology (scalar) comes from a mathematical approach to electricity. In a strict sence it is the wrong term when considering practicle situations. I would rather call it "longitudinal electricity" (LE).
If you do Meyl's math the right way, you will find that in order to have LE, you need conductance. This is completely in line with our knowledge because in a conductor electricity always moves longitunidal. In an insulator electricity prefers to go transversal, but that does not mean that that is the only way.
It is like a wall with a door in it. If you want to get to the other side of the wall, you can go through the door. But that does not mean that that is the only way. You can go through the wall at any place you like, it just required a lot more violence.
This "electrical violence" can be obtained through a very high dV/dt (very sudden voltage changes), which is usually amplified using a flat spiral coil. This effectively breaks down the insulating character of air, making LE possible over short distances.
The cosmos is full with all kind of electrical processes of inconceivable power (violence) and so it is only logical to assume that we receive LE from out there in huge quantities.
Tesla once said that if the earth were to absorb all the received power, it would be melted and evaporated in a matter of seconds.
It certainly makes sense to try to tap into that source of energy. Just find the right tools!


Ernst.

[Pedro73]

Hy Ernst

I will try what you said of the fluorescent tube.

I'm completely agree with about the longitudinal (not scalar) word.

But, I will have to think about what you said that in order to produce LE you need conductance instead of dielectricity. According to Meyl, there are two different kind of vortexes, the scalar or LE needs dielectricity in order to have an enough large transitions that could store this extremely elusive source of energy. That's why there's a small peace of carbon after EVGray Tube spark gap, cause Gray states that this dielectric helps enormous to increase the LE energy and the transients from a non-steady state to a steady state. These could be done in many different ways, and I pretty sure that you know many of them. But arriving at this particularly interesting point, I would like to point out the Bedini's experiment that you can see in Energy from the vacuum vol 6.



John Bedini in his schoolgirl circuit, uses two coils (that's bifilar), and doing this, the electromagnetic field of the exciting coil should cancels with the backEmf of the pickup coil, and the result is pure scalar or LE electricity field that could be send to a secondary battery (in this case a capacitor). When he short-circuits the capacitor, we could see the scalar, LE, radiant spike or whatever it is, preceding the conventional flux of electromagnetic energy.

In my opinion, it is important in our work to proceed according to the legacy of Goethe's scientific method rather than Newton's, hoping with this to avoid the mistakes of mainstream views and... well we could say, fallacies. And that is with the observation. And what you can see, with no kind of error, gives you a complete opposite sources of energy, one after the other.

Scalar, LE, is blue, cold, implosive, doesnt obbey ohms law, is proportional to the voltage, generates negentropy, is a non-equilibrium system, is proportional to pure fields etc...

Versus.

Electromagnetic is red, hot, explosive, obbey's ohms law, is proportional to the amperage, generate entropy, is closer to equilibrium state, mixes both fields in one (EM)...

This is the moment in which you see (with your eyes) that what these theoretical physicists said is closer to the reality (that is observation), than mainstream approach does.

Anyway both we are agree that the mathematical constructions, no matter what, who or theory, aren't pretty well defined. Dollard (dielectric field), Meyl (potential vortexes) and Bearden (symmetry re-gauging) are probably less wrong than mainstream approaches, but no one of them have resolve the final mathematical problem (if that really exists).

Thanks Ernst & I'm waiting for your ideas.

From Spain, yours sincerely.