Re: MRA
Norman Wootan ( normw@fastlane.net )
Fri, 27 Mar 1998 21:02:39 -0600
Hi! Jerry et all; I wish to thank you for the great answer regarding the
MRA project. Joel and I did what we felt was right back on 12 Dec.1994 when we
asked you to put the MRA project out to the public so that everyone could see
and participate in this very interesting phenomenon of apparent over-unity.
As time went on with all the constant "flamming" and outright inability of the
very best testing available to accurately measure the I/O values the MRA was
put aside. The Patent Office rejected the patent with no explanation (which is
illegal) . When challenged by Dr. Bass the Patent Office simply said "sue
us". One individual (Robert Shannon) posted a nasty message on Bill Beaty's
board claiming that Joel and I had ripped off a bunch of money and there was
fraud involved. Nothing could be further from the truth for Joel and I gave
away parts to researchers. I personally mailed out packages of update material
weekly to the top 20 researchersin the free-energy area such as Tom Bearden,
Moray King, Don Kelly,etc. Joel and I made it a policy to not accept any money
of any kind so as to avoid that old money trap. We saw so many anomalies
during the operation and experimenting with the MRA that it would require a
whole new area of research just to resolve what we whitnessed. Just as Jerry
so adequately stated, "if you can't make it run itself and power a load of some
kind then you can't claim over-unity". I totally agree with Jerry's new "POP"
policy. I just wish that it was fairly applied to all areas and all
subjects. It is time for all who are serious about finding answers to this
riddle to once and for all time bury the old myths out there. I consider Tom
Bearden to be a good friend. I have visited Tom in his home and have all of
his books and papers. Tom said that Floyd Sweets device worked but no one else
other than Walt Rosenthall ever saw it working. This device is still touted
around as being 1,000,000 times over-unity. Sorry guys, Floyd is among the
"dearly departed" therefore all we have is a myth. Since all the negative
statements that were made by many people I chose to stay silent about what I am
working on. I, like Jerry am still interested in the MRA and would like to
have answers to the many lurking questions. Every now and then I fire on up
and play with it. It is real interesting to watch the current into an
amplifier driving the MRA at max gain actually fall far below idle current
draw. Hmmm! Want to have a real laugh? I bought a 100 watt solid state
power amp from Radio Shack and purchased the life time warranty. The first
time I put it to a real power test in the MRA circuit this amp literally
smoked. When I received it back from the Tandy repair facility it had a note
attached. "We cannot understand how this amp was totally destroyed when it is
very well fuse protected". Three times Tandy repaired this amp. Each time
they had to replace all the transistors and the output transformer. We posted
many warnings to researchers about the hazards to solid state equipment when
trying to measure a circuit running at resonance at extremely high "Q". Oh! by
the way the MRA operates exactly like a well tuned Tesla coil. The voltage and
energy multiplication is accomplished by Q ratio and not turns ratio. They do
not comply with conventional transformer theory. These are extremely
non-linear devices therefore display unusual performance. Sorry to bore you
guys. Just listen to Jerry and insist on proof when someone says there is an
over-unity device. Don't take anyone's word, insist on seeing it with you own
eyes. I do not believe anyone has made a device that will run itself. If so,
prove it. If I ever make the MRA close the loop and run itself, Jerry will be
the first one invited to see it for he justly deserves this honor for his due
dilligence in this field. Norm
Jerry W. Decker wrote:
> Hi Dr. Brodowski!
>
> Well, I hate to say it, but the MRA was promoted beyond what I ever
> intended to be involved in. Claims of ACTUAL overunity and other anomalous
> phenomena kept popping up to further cloud the issue.
>
> Norman Wootan and Joel McClains were and are friends of mine. Though I
> have lost touch with Joel, Norman still comes to our monthly Roundtable
> meetings and we are on good terms. Both of these men are very intelligent
> and not con artists in the least.
>
> The plans posted for the MRA were duplicated by others and when analysis
> was made, even by Dr. Hal Puthoff and Scott Little at the Institute for
> Advanced Studies in Austin (250 miles from the Dallas area where we all
> live), the MRA measurements were found to be erroenous, leading to
> calculations that predicted very high overunity.
>
> Now, let's all be honest here. If a device is TRUE over-unity, would it
> not be able to power ITSELF as well as to drive a load??
>
> The MRA could not do that, nor has anything else I've seen or heard of for
> lo these many years.
>
> The idea of blending piezoelectrics and magnetics in the MRA was not new
> but because it was reintroduced and appeared to be producing anomalous
> results, we were all very excited.
>
> At the time, the choices became;
>
> 1) post the information as is, and stating that this APPEARS to be
> overunity, please duplicate and confirm or refute it
>
> OR
>
> 2) keep quiet about it until independently verified, taking the chance
> that if something unique was indeed present, all parties would risk
> possible interference by parties who would not wish to see this MADE PUBLIC
> and take steps to erase the discovery BEFORE it could be so posted.
>
> We disussed this on the phone and via email on several occasions and all
> decided to post it with the note that it appeared to be so. I do not in
> any way regret this decision and consider it an honor to have known Norman
> and Joel because they are TRUE avant garde researchers who want to make
> positive differences in the world.
>
> They did not do it for money, They did not do it for fame or notoriety.
> That is all that matters. They were honest and forthright in what they had
> done, how they did it and were more than willing to share their
> observations in hopes others could indeed verify it.
>
> Unfortunately, all evidence I have seen and heard about does not PROVE the
> MRA is indeed overunity, though the idea still intrigues me even now.
>
> At this point in my 35 years in alternative science studies, self-operation
> is now my single determinant as to validity of a working device. If it
> cannot drive itself, the chances are extremely slim that it is TRUE
> overunity.
>
> Calculations cannot be relied on.
> Measurements cannot be relied on.
> Any outside power cannot be relied on.
>
> So, please do at least try it and prove to yourself that it works or does
> not. There is a reason we don't see the MRA in the news or shown at
> conferences as a standalone overunity device.
>
> For my time and effort, anything less than self-running is probably a lab
> queen, subject to PMS variations that prevent is practical use in the real
> world.
>
> Jerry W. Decker
> Keelynet - http://keelynet.com/