I thought this e-mail from Harvey Norris may be of interest to a lot of
people here. What is better than sharing deep thoughts and insights in the
pursuit of the ultimate truth?
EJ
-----Original Message-----
From: Harvey Norris <tesla4@excite.com>
To: ejeong@bga.com <ejeong@bga.com>
Cc: jdecker@keelynet.com <jdecker@keelynet.com>
Date: Sunday, November 14, 1999 4:28 PM
Subject: H2O fuel
>Hi, Euejin Jeong
>cc Jerry Decker
>In keelynet archives 9-18 you wrote concerning Moray device
>
>The most common mistake in the duplication of the
>device seems in the misunderstanding of where the load should be located
>and what is the key point of it all.
>
>Tom Bearden's theory is pretty interesting and may be targeting the point
>in the right direction but as a physicist I would like to see some more
>quantitative analysis of the problem than the hand waving style of his
>arguments.
>
>I wanted to reply then, but now I see a better moment to do so with the
>current H2O thread on Keelynet. I was wondering if you could forward
>this letter to that group if you deem it of interest. I am kind of working
>in the Meyer/Puharich high frequency resonant water shattering hypothesis.
>
>But first I want to bring your question of where should a load be placed
>in coordination with a process of of electrical resonance? Puharich in his
>"Method and Apparartus for Splitting Water Molecules" Patent no.
>4,394,230 of July 19,1983 states on page 18 "The energy output of
>Component I is an alternating current looking into a highly non-linear
>load, i.e., the water solution. This alternating current generator
>(Component I) is so designed that at a peak load it is in resonance,
>and the vector diagrams show that the capacitive reactance, and the
>inductive reactance are almost exactly 180 degrees out of phase, so
>that the net power output is reactive, and the dissipative power very
>small. This design insures minumum power losses across the entire
>output system."
>
>All well and fine, Puharich is stating that he is placing the load in a
>parallel resonant or tank circuit where the resonant rise of amperage
>dictates that more amperage will exist inside the circuit than is being
>inputed. This ratio is determined by the Q of the circuit, or the ratio
>of the inductive reactance divided by the resistance.But a conceptual
>problem exists because or similar to what you described, where do you
>insert a load in a resonant process. I beleive I have discovered a special
>tank circuit where this can be done, simply because no one has refuted
>this claim after a year of internet exposure.
>
>To digress here for a moment let me describe in further detail my
>experiments years ago where I used a flourescent bulb inserted
>into a resonant circuit as the load. I used a 56 Henry coil placed
>into series resonance at 60 hz. which enabled a 15 fold increase
>in voltage inside the circuit. The logical assumption was to place the bulb
>either in parallel to the inductor, or the capacitor. This showed the
>paradox involved with trying to harness electrical resonance. As
>soon as the bulb was attached to the circuit the resonant rise of voltage
>disappeared and was reduced down to that needed to make conduction
>through the bulb. Now if I added two bulbs in series that voltage to
>enable conduction would increase, and 3 it would increase further.
>Thus to harness electrical resonance the loads that seemed to be of a
higher
>resistance seemed to work better.The problem is described from
>my messageboard;
>The conventional idea of extraction of energy present in resonance is to
>place a load parallel to to the resonant rise of voltage on either the
>inductive or capacitive elements. In each case a new pathway of amperage
>conduction then exists which diverts available amperage from the resonant
>circuit,which in turn reduces the amount of resonant rise of voltage.In the
>process of extraction of energy from resonance this in turn shuts down its
>high potential source which makes for a catch-22 proposition.The spatial
>harnessing of resonance involves a different kind of energy extraction
>whereby the potential of the electric field is not diminished.
>
>The comment about spatial harnessing of resonance:
>The spatial harnessing of resonance goes beyond a simple schematic that
>conveys a two dimensional idea. The idea of tapping energy from resonance
>must be accomplished by extracting energy from the potential without
>dimnishing the potential. This is not as impossible as it sounds. If an
>electric field exists at right angles to a magnetic field a Lorentz force
>interaction can take place which will exert a force on a moving charged
>particle that is at right angles to both the causitive forces. That
movement
>does not deplete the potential in the electric field because it moves
>parallel to the potential.
>
>These comments are a little off topic from what I want to convey here
>but this is the experimental approach I want to use to create a special
>electrolysis in the future. The generators that will give the special 90
>degree phasing are now functional, but I have been sidetracked by
>a more conventional approach I wish to describe here.
>
>Please note that in the bulb experiments, I needed a higher than source
>120 voltage to take place for conduction to take place. By adding bulbs
>in series the electrical resonance in turn supplied a higher voltage to
>enable conduction to take place. Now compare what an electrolysis cell
>does acting as a highly non-linear load. At or around 2 volts conduction
>takes place. Thus in application of electrolysisor design in order to
>maintain this 2 volts the state of the art design published by George
>Wiseman dictates using a series cell design placed to the input voltage
>so that the no. of cells in series matches that of the input voltage. Thus
>60
>cells are needed for operation at 120 volts, so that 2 volts are across
each
>
>cell. In order to limit the amperage through the electrolysizor, that would
>
>probably act as a dead short on its own, a capacitor is placed in series
>with
>the electrolysisor. The amount that capacitor can conduct limits the
>available
>current into the device. What I have done is to add a large induction
>system
>placed in series resonance to be that limiting factor instead. On either
>side
>of the electrolysisor these inductors exist to limit the amperage. The
>advantage to this is that of regulation, again only the amount of voltage
>needed to maintain conduction is drawn from the input. Thus if only 60
>volts are needed for a design of 30 cells, thats what the resonance will
>supply.
>In fact given the above, this means that a parallel instead of a series
>design
>becomes practical. The former limitations of having to use large step down
>transformers to produce the 2 volts from a 120 volt supply are circumvented
>by the fact that the special tank circuit then does this function instead.
>
>Now to return to this subject, Puharich notes that 4 fundamental harmonics
>of high frequency exist to accomplish water shattering of the tetrahedral
>water molecule. I was shooting for a frequency of around 32,800 hz, within
>3 % of his named 31,840 hz. he specifies in the patent. To explain how this
>
>was attempted again needs a digression into how high frequency can be
>produced.
>
>In the 56 H coils in series resonance with a .12 uf capacitor at 60 hz
>15 times the source voltage occurs in both the coil and the capacitor
>but these voltages are in opposite directions to each other. By making
>an arc gap parallel to one of these elements in the resonance, the resonant
>rise of voltage can be made to create an electrical arc through the air.
>Note that this was the same positioning of a bulb, parallel to the voltage
>rise, that gave the problem of taking the whole system out of resonance.
>And when this arc occurs, it creates a new situation where the circuit
>now appears as one of the two elements of the resonance, either entirely
>capacitive or inductive, depending which part of the LC quantities the arc
>is shunted to. For a breif period of time this arc will allow the coils to
>enter
>a high frequency, but it represents an oscillation that is quickly damped,
>and the time period for this process to repeat itself is considerably long.
>It is a very unsatisfactory method of producing a high frequency, and
>again it represents the system going in and out of resonance. I began to
>wonder if a different method could be made where the arc formation would
>schematically convey a possibility that did not take it out of resonance.
>Months of pondering paid off with the discovery of a special tank circuit
>which I have named a binary resonant circuit. It is formed by using two
>identical L and C quantities in series on each side of a tank circuit, and
>then the schematic is twisted into a figure 8 so that a new pathway for
>for each reactive current then exists. This new pathway is used by each
>reactive current, but in opposite directions of travel. Since each reactive
>
>current already is in opposite directions of travel with respect to each
>other in the tank circuit, (this is what causes the resonant rise of
>amperage
>to begin with, by nodal laws each pathway of amperage in oppositon
>then reduces the input amperage below that experienced on each branch);
>when they share this new pathway in opposite directions of travel this
>represents a double negative producing unity. The negative of a negative
>is a positive by mathematical analogy, and in this special tank circuit
>this translates as a reality by the observation that twice the resonant
rise
>
>of amperage is shown on this midpoint path than exists on either branch
>alone. To try and eliminate any potential confusion that exists about the
>differences between series and parallel resonances in their ordinary
>configurations I have again included a comment from my messageboard;
>
>The currents acting through a parallel resonant circuit are 180 degrees out
>of phase which means the highest impedance. The current is continually
going
>in the opposite direction of the impressed voltage, which may cause
>consternation of some of us who wonder how can this be? The case of a
single
>inductor placed to AC is 90 degrees out of phase which means that the
>current is only going in the direction of the impressed AC voltage 50% of
>the time which results in our observation of the coils own impedance. And
>lastly when the voltage is in phase with the current it goes the correct
>direction 100% of the time so that the coils impedance disapears and series
>resonance takes place. (Also see Figure 8 description on messageboard for
>what was just described)
>
>Now to rephrase your excellent observation, Euejin, the correct placement
>of a load in a resonant circuit should occur along this midpoint path of
>this binary resonant tank circuit as I have described. If one is attempting
>
>to use the resonant rise of amperage to begin with, as Puharich attempts
>to show in his patent, doesnt it make a lot of sense to use a circuit that
>doubles this quantity?
>
>As if the preceeding discourse should be enough, actually it does not
>convey the totality of what I am saying. Sometimes a schematic can be very
>misleading in that the same thing can be drawn different ways. If one
>places an arc gap along this midpoint path, the high frequency
>that can be created is a world of difference from the former method
>described. We now have an oscillation that does not go in and out of
>resonance, but rather oscillates between series and parallel resonance.
>It produces a very clean practically continuous oscillation that is not
>significantly damped at high frequency. This is because when this hybrid
>tank circuit is given an open connection at midpoint, it becomes something
>entirely different,in that case schematically it is two series resonant
>circuits
>180 degrees out of phase. This is how an arc gap can serve to oscillate
>BETWEEN resonances. By using 4 metal bars with the two inner bars
>connected to the electrolysisor and two air gaps between the outer bars
>connected to the binary resonant system at midpoints, a high frequency
>can be conveyed to the electrolysisor without the use of solid state
>circuitry
>to produce this high frequency. Now the question becomes how is that
>frequency tailored to meet our specifications of 32,800 hz. To do this is
>to
>simply apply the discovery of a quarter wave length oscillator as shown by
>Tesla.
>Thus by making the wire lengths of the inductor 1.4 miles (perhaps not so
>simple)
>this should be shown. My first attempt to drive this system at 120 volts,
60
>hz AC did
>not produce the needed high frequency probably because the voltage at the
>bars
>was only around 750 volts whereas around 3000 volts are needed to produce
>the
>high frequency to jump the arc gaps. This is where the experimental
>alternator system that produces 360
>hz will come in handy. Six times the frequency guarantees 6 times the
>resonant
>rise of voltage when the system is then resonated at that frequency. The Q
>of the large amperage BRS is only 3 at 60 hz, but at 360 this becomes 18.
>The drawback with the alternator system (diodes have been removed to
provide
>AC) is that it is a large amperage system that only provides 30 volts
>output. A 4/1 step up transformer is then needed to supply 120 volts and at
>that frequency the transformers may heat up quickly. Better leave now that
>this post got so long. But I should add that this method produces a high
>voltage pulse that immediately extiguishes or quenches itself upon
>establishment of arc. This automatic quenching is established as a means to
>instantaneously apply a high voltage blink to the electrolysisor to
>accomplish water shattering.
>What I have described here is what was was discovered by connecting two
>series resonant circuits of 180 phasing at their midpoints, and I should
not
>go into the
>next idea which is to create two of these binary resonant systems from the
>experimental alternator system, where each of those systems are then 90
>degrees out of phase. Then each of those L and C quantities can be
>interfaced
>SPATIALLY between those phases to deliver a theoretical 40% over unity
>predicted by Lorentz force laws. This is what I am trying to convey as the
>spatial harnessing of electrical resonance.
>
>Sincerly, Harvey D Norris, tesla4@excite.com
>Binary Resonant System
>http://www.insidetheweb.com/mbs.cgi/mb124201
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________
>Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com
>Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
>
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------