>One trick John sometimes uses is to time the next pulse front to arrive
just at the >time that the ions are almost but not quite stopped in their
"overshoot" charging >mode and are preparing to reverse into discharge mode
(following the electrons in the >external circuit, which are already in that
mode). With the exact timing, the whole >situation starts over. There are
several other variations that John has also used and >found effective.
>
Seems I heard 3.3MHz? or about .3uS time delay? Is this the ion charge time?
Sure would be nice to run an experiment (closed system) and account for each
and every single energy potential from starting... powering a load... then
finish.
Does not stealing negative energy give some signs like anti gravity, and
cold
energy and maybe time slow down? Can not we test for these also, in our
closed
system? If there truly is 'unaccountable' energy from the vacuum, then it
would show up somewhere in our closed system tests. I have not seem this
done
except for Floyd Sweets device, where his unit was measured and produced
some
anomalistic effects.
>So Nelson and another engineer used an electric light bulb as the load,
adjusted the >pulses and timing appropriately, and produced a little unit
which kept its battery >charged while continuously illuminating the light
bulb.
>
>John shared his research with Jim Watson, who succeeded in developing a
version that >powered a much larger motor (8 kW), which he demonstrated at
one of the Tesla >conferences at Colorado Springs. Watson and his family
were later to mysteriously >drop out of all contact, so that even his own
financial backer could not find him.
>
Is this the solid state Tesla Unit John has on his website? I heard from
somewhere also that the timing pulses of that Tesla unit was about 500Hz?
Someday.. I have to build that one.. I ordered some parts just have not
got around to building it. Sure an FIRED UP NOW!! <g>
>IC-2000 paper
?? Jer, Can you post this paper when it gets published? Or maybe it is now?
Would like to go back in time and review the derivations and see what was
missed in classical electrodynamics. It is finally making some sense from
Beardens email. <g> However, I am still somewhat skeptical...as "the proof
is in the pudding" so to speak...
v/r Ken Carrigan
-------------------------------------------------------------
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/
-------------------------------------------------------------