OverUnity Research

I thought I would start a thread to better explain Free Energy.

The scientific community does not recognize the terms "free energy" or "overunity" but instead use the term Zero Point Energy.

Here is a good explanation...http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html
Introduction to Zero Point Energy

Here we can see what was once called the Aether became Dark Energy/Matter and then Zero Point Energy. So in fact the scientific community was never against the concept of "universal energy" but proved it beyond all shadow of doubt. In this respect the scientific community is light years ahead of most in the free energy community.

For example...

QuoteCASIMIR EFFECT
The cavity between such plates cannot sustain all modes of the electromagnetic field. In particular wavelengths comparable to the plate separation and longer are excluded from the region between the plates. This fact leads to the situation that there is a zero-point radiation overpressure outside the plates which acts to push the plates together. This can be considered analogous to radiation pressure (radiation pressure from the Sun pushes comet tails away from the comet nucleus), and the resulting effect is now called the Casimir force.

The Casimir force is widely cited as evidence that underlying the universe there must be a sea of real zero-point energy.

Here we have scientifically proven evidence that the universe must be a sea of real zero-point energy. Feynman/Wheeler also proved that a cup of supposedly empty space contains enough zero point energy to boil all the Earths oceans. So in fact it is only the people who don't understand the science that thought the notion of universal energy present everywhere was ever in question... it's not.

Therefore we should understand the fact that...
1)The scientific community was never against the notion of a "universal energy" present everywhere, they proved it.
2)They were never against extracting said energy, they are actively working to prove it can be extracted.
3)Certain elements in the FE community are being dishonest and trying to discredit science to serve there own interests.

In fact most of what everyone in the FE forums wants to understand about free energy can be found by researching Zero Point Energy.

Regards
AC

   I think that people deserve to know the truth, and we are being kept away from the real truth about free energy. The Aether, and such is not even taught in schools. Are we still that naive? Was Tesla and all his hundreds of patents and inventions nothing of importance?
   So, what are we going to do about it, besides post some article or video to look at, and speculate about? As that has not worked too well, so far.

   NickZ

   BTW: For a free energy forum to not even focus, discuss, develope, and research Tesla's FE ideas, is more than just pretty strange.
  Are we going to put up with that??? Missing the boat, are we?

NickZ

QuoteI think that people deserve to know the truth, and we are being kept away from the real truth about free energy. The Aether, and such is not even taught in schools. Are we still that naive? Was Tesla and all his hundreds of patents and inventions nothing of importance?
   So, what are we going to do about it, besides post some article or video to look at, and speculate about? As that has not worked too well, so far.

It's debatable, the Aether was replaced with dark energy/matter which is taught in school. Here in Canada they also teach electron flow notation which is the correct form. An electron current always flows from (-) to (+) so things are looking up.

QuoteBTW: For a free energy forum to not even focus, discuss, develope, and research Tesla's FE ideas, is more than just pretty strange.
  Are we going to put up with that??? Missing the boat, are we?

I like to look at as many different sources and perspectives as possible. To look at the literature of countless electrical technologies from ancient cultures like the Sumarians, Egyptians and the late 1800's to date. After a while a person can learn to see how it all relates to one another and where it's going. I see ZPE and the electric universe theory as continuing part of Tesla's research and moving beyond it.

Here's an interesting fact, Tesla didn't know what the Aether was or wasn't saying but ZPE explains it pretty well. I like it because it stops all the naysayers claiming there is no energy present dead in there tracks. In fact Feynman/wheeler and many other scientists did what Tesla never could. They gave a coherent theory and proved by experiment that all space is literally seething with energy. At which point the argument that we need to get something from nothing or create energy is off the table. It's no longer a valid argument and we can move forward...

Regards
AC

Isin't it just lightning ?

Here's an interesting thought...

Many claim the Michelson-Morley experiment was proof there was no Aether/ZPE which is false. It didn't prove or disprove an Aether only that there experiment didn't detect it.

As strange as it may seem most didn't even understand what was proven. In fact the only thing the experiment did prove was that light was unaffected by the Aether hence it couldn't detect it.

However we have detected the presence of an Aether by experiment which many in science then chose to discard. You see when clocks, even atomic clocks, are accelerated to a high velocity the matter they are made of oscillates at a different rate. Many mistook this to mean time is variable which is completely absurd. Universal time is constant but when matter moves through the Aether at high velocity the rate of oscillation changes giving the false appearance that time has changed.

So we can see that the people involved were simply cherry picking facts to support there beliefs which isn't real science.

Logically if there was nothing in the vacuum of space the rate of oscillation of matter at high velocity would not change but it does... ergo something must be in that space.

Regards
AC

   quote:
   "Here's an interesting fact, Tesla didn't know what the Aether was or wasn't saying but ZPE explains it pretty well. I like it because it stops all the naysayers claiming there is no energy present dead in there tracks. In fact Feynman/wheeler and many other scientists did what Tesla never could. They gave a coherent theory and proved by experiment that all space is literally seething with energy. At which point the argument that we need to get something from nothing or create energy is off the table. It's no longer a valid argument and we can move forward...
                                                                                                                                                                           end quote.



   AC:  You should first check to see what Tesla DID say about the Aether. As you don't seam to have any correct knowledge or information on that.
You can change the name, to dark matter, dark energy, or whatever, but not the contents.
   You should also mention that to Verpies, he is still under the false impression that there is no Aether, nor any energy at all in the vacume of space, nor in the Earth's ambient. ONLY in material objects, instead of non physical energy being the source of all. In other words, all energy come from matter, He thinks. Like Einstein said in his false formula. Most people also believe the same thing. As it is still being taught to your kids in school.
No wonder... they are trying to keep us in the dark for as long as they can.  So, don't buy it...Like Verpies does. It will keep you from building anything like a OU device, or a self running device. As it is running on ambient energies, instead.
   If science can't prove something, it does not exist (to them). Perhaps they should open their eyes, before we pollute ourselves to death, burning shit that does not need to be burnt, anymore.  More nuclear plants are in the works though, as we speak. Seams like more than 700 of them was not enough. Which one will blow next???  Even the old Russian reactor, it's coming back to life...after all these years, and they can't stop it. 

   NickZ

Yeah I'll go with that,

SL says has any one got or made a free energy generator,
well have you got a ant motor that has brushes in it well your generating FREE energy and using it against your self with the way it's wired internally, that's why it gets hot
and uses so much energy.

Sil

NickZ

QuoteAC:  You should first check to see what Tesla DID say about the Aether. As you don't seam to have any correct knowledge or information on that.
You can change the name, to dark matter, dark energy, or whatever, but not the contents.

To my knowledge I have read all of Nikola Tesla's work which has been published to date. Which parts of his work are you referring to exactly?. 

QuoteYou should also mention that to Verpies, he is still under the false impression that there is no Aether, nor any energy at all in the vacume of space, nor in the Earth's ambient. ONLY in material objects, instead of non physical energy being the source of all. In other words, all energy come from matter, He thinks. Like Einstein said in his false formula. Most people also believe the same thing.

I defer to the picture below...

I have my own theories and my own work which keeps me busy. I don't tend to buy into anyone's dogma and like to do my own thing. I would also point out most of what your referring to are theories ie. "general theory of relativity" and were never claimed as a fact... unlike many other false beliefs.

Regards
AC

A good video on ZPE showing proof that energy can be extracted from the vacuum.

Unlocking Zero-Point Energy
Garret Moddel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tGRhTXKh8A

I found it strange that most of the objections relate to the 2nd law of thermodynamics...

QuoteThe second law of thermodynamics establishes the concept of entropy as a physical property of a thermodynamic system. Entropy predicts the direction of spontaneous processes, and determines whether they are irreversible or impossible despite obeying the requirement of conservation of energy as expressed in the first law of thermodynamics.

However it seems to me most people do not understand the 2nd law nor energy and take them out of context.

For example, most use reasoning which always devolves into circular reasoning or a logical fallacy. They believe all systems follow entropy moving from a high energy state to a lower energy state. Do you see the fallacy?, if this were true then no energy could ever be concentrated which would never allow entropy to take place... ergo circular reasoning.

In this respect we can disregard all the laws and rely on one irrefutable premise...
Entropy and the dissipation of energy cannot happen unless the energy was concentrated by something else in the first place, cause and effect.

So in effect those who hold strictly to the 2nd law are arguing we can get something from nothing and can violate the COE. All we have to do is ask a simple question... where did the energy come from in the first place?.

Regards
AC

As per Admins suggestion posts trolling others have been removed.

No further comment...

QuotePhysics currently lacks a full theoretical model for understanding zero-point energy; in particular, the discrepancy between theorized and observed vacuum energy is a source of major contention.[4] Physicists Richard Feynman and John Wheeler calculated the zero-point radiation of the vacuum to be an order of magnitude greater than nuclear energy, with a single light bulb containing enough energy to boil all the world's oceans

Wikipedia

Zero point radiation found everywhere can be an order of magnitude greater than nuclear energy... that's interesting.

So the "radiation" in between the particles in atoms could contain as much energy as the kinetic energy of the particles themselves. We could even conclude as Tesla did that matter contains no energy not given to it by the Aether/ZPE. It would seem Tesla's Aether theories 100 years ago were very similar to the present theories in science.

Regards
AC

For me, the ZPE is energy in its most raw primordial state. A disturbance to its dynamic balance causes an influx of this raw energy into an open system to re-establish equilibrium. As I understand it, this can be accomplished by any kind of rapid pulse, be it electrical transient or even an inertial pulse.

One thing that brings out a lot of discussion is the role resonance plays in this dynamic, particularly with coils. What is the relationship between resonant charge in a coil and its ability to access ZPE?

Bob

This is a truism. Energy recovery is always the transition from a high energy state to a lower energy state.
Since the ZPE is the minimum state of energy, lowering it is a challenge about which it is not the banal idea of the principle that is to be displayed, but the how.
A rapid electrical transition does not explain the supposed mechanism that could be at work, nor how the cost of this operation could be lower than the energy recovered.

I have wrestled with Bearden's ideas for years. Doc Stiffler's work with resonant frequency seemed to open an avenue for approaching Bearden's idea for poking the aether with an electrical transient. Stiffler often referred to tapping into the temporal spatial lattice via transients in the resonant frequency of his coils. Tiny output, but I've always wondered if it could be scaled up.

I agree that a charge gradient is necessary, and yes the question is how to feasibly create or harness one. Do transient spikes with a sharp fall not constitute a (micro)momentary gradient?

I've often wondered if such transient response charge can be fed (hammered) into a very small (pF) sized capacitor, to discharge thru a coil with a secondary and pickup coil.

F6FLT

QuoteThis is a truism. Energy recovery is always the transition from a high energy state to a lower energy state.
Since the ZPE is the minimum state of energy, lowering it is a challenge about which it is not the banal idea of the principle that is to be displayed, but the how.

Is ZPE the minimum state of energy?, Physicists Richard Feynman and John Wheeler calculated the zero-point radiation of the vacuum to be an order of magnitude greater than nuclear energy, with a single light bulb containing enough energy to boil all the world's oceans. I mean, if that's the minimum then who needs the maximum, is boiling all the worlds oceans not enough?.

In fact, this could be seen as giving some credence to Tesla's theory that the vacuum of space contains more energy than matter. That all matter is given it's energy from the space it occupies and that around it. Imagine that, a cup of ZPE vacuum energy containing more energy than all the fossil fuels all of mankind has burned in the history of mankind many times over.

Who the hell needs science fiction when science fact is magnitudes stranger than the average person can even imagine?. Keep in mind this isn't even considered fringe but mainstream physicists telling us this is the case.

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.03.23, 22:20:20
F6FLT
Is ZPE the minimum state of energy?, Physicists Richard Feynman and John Wheeler calculated the zero-point radiation of the vacuum to be an order of magnitude greater than nuclear energy...

There is no consensus on the level of vacuum energy, the ratio reaches 10 to the power of 120 (!), see the "vacuum catastrophe" :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant_problem

Your subsequent question is therefore unfounded.

As for Tesla's theory, where is it? I have never seen any, only vague hypotheses never formalized, with legends all around spread by devotees who take Tesla for a god. Tesla was a remarkable inventor with exceptional engineering skills, but certainly not a theorist.

F6FLT

QuoteThere is no consensus on the level of vacuum energy, the ratio reaches 10 to the power of 120 (!), see the "vacuum catastrophe" :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant_problem
Your subsequent question is therefore unfounded.

Not at all and having no consensus disqualifies nothing, it simply means most can't agree, no surprise there.

Here is an interesting blog
https://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2012/07/26/empty-space-has-more-energy-than-everything-in-the-universe-combined

AC

https://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2012/07/26/empty-space-has-more-energy-than-everything-in-the-universe-combined

QuoteWhat we normally think of as the entire Universe, consisting of hundreds of billions of galaxies, with about 8,700 identified in the tiny patch of deep-sky shown above. Each one of those galaxies, itself, contains hundreds of billions of stars, just like our own Milky Way, and this is just counting the part of the Universe that's presently observable to us, which is by no means the entire thing!

And yet, if we map out everything known in the Universe, and trace out the cosmic structure, we find that the normal matter -- things made out of all the known elementary particles -- is less than 5% of the total energy density of the Universe. There's got to be about 20-25% of the Universe in the form of dark matter, a type of clumpy, collisionless matter that is made up of a yet-undiscovered particle, in order to get the type of clustering we see.

But perhaps most bizarrely, the remaining energy of the Universe, the stuff that's required to bring us up to 100%, is energy that appears to be intrinsic to empty space itself: dark energy.

As T.H.Moray said, were swimming in a "Sea of Energy". Moray who built a FE device with an output of some 10kW per cubic foot using a bunch of coils and some vacuum tubes as switches in the early 1900's.
http://www.rexresearch.com/moray2/morayrer.htm

QuoteI started my experiments with the taking of electricity from the ground, as I termed it, during the summer of 1909. By fall of 1910 I had sufficient power to operate a small electrical device, and I made a demonstration of my idea to two friends... This demonstration in the early stages consisted of operating a miniature arc light... It soon became evident that the energy was not static and that the static of the universe would be of no assistance to me in obtaining the power I was seeking...

To add a little perspective, I'm in my mid 50's but Moray and many others had all this FE technology figured out 50 years before I was even born.
Were talking about the early 1900's... let that sink in.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.03.24, 15:46:58
F6FLT
Not at all and having no consensus disqualifies nothing, it simply means most can't agree, no surprise there.

Here is an interesting blog
https://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2012/07/26/empty-space-has-more-energy-than-everything-in-the-universe-combined

AC

As already said, there is no consensus. So to take a particular opinion that would talk about a huge energy, when other scientists say the opposite, proves nothing. It is what is called a hasty generalization (https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-hasty-generalization/) (a sophism).

All scientists are far from being of the same opinion on unanswered questions. Understand the difference between research and science. Research only becomes science when the evidence is such that the theory is adopted by everyone because of measurements and observations that leave no doubt. Only science is knowledge. Not research, which is hypothesis.
The enormous energy of the vacuum is a hypothesis, and the idea that it could be harnessed is science fiction without the slightest clue as to its feasibility.

F6FLT

QuoteAll scientists are far from being of the same opinion on unanswered questions. Understand the difference between research and science. Research only becomes science when the evidence is such that the theory is adopted by everyone because of measurements and observations that leave no doubt. Only science is knowledge. Not research, which is hypothesis.

Science is knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena but it's always incomplete and should be in doubt. For example, most believe objects are magically attracted to one another because of the law of gravity but nobody has a clue what gravity is. Think about that, they made up countless laws about phenomena without having a clue what it is or it's fundamental cause. Can someone claim to understand something but have no idea what caused it?, I find the reasoning mind numbing.

QuoteThe enormous energy of the vacuum is a hypothesis, and the idea that it could be harnessed is science fiction without the slightest clue as to its feasibility.

I see it differently from a fact based perspective. We know the universe has over a billion trillion stars which have been radiating unimaginable amounts of energy into space for untold billions of years. Since we know energy is conserved and cannot be created or destroyed where did all the energy go?. The answer seems obvious and one cannot say the universe is full of energy always in translation but this part over here is empty for unknown reasons, it's absurd. Thus we must conclude we are swimming in a sea of energy otherwise were left with the "something from/to nothing" dilemma.

If there isn't an enormous amount of energy in the vacuum of space then where did all the energy radiated from a billion trillion stars in the universe go?. Here's a clue... it didn't just disappear into nothingness it was conserved.

AC

@AC:

Sure, everything in the universe has been radiating energy for countless eons.  But everything is also absorbing energy.  However, this is a different kind of energy than ZPE, which involves quantum fluctuations.  ZPE is what's left after all the other energy has been removed.

My theory is that the 'virtual' energy comes from momentary straightening of the space/time (sic) curavature, which immediately reverts back with recombination.  Energy inherent in the curvature can be shown by Einstein's equations.  The presence of energy will curve space, the same as the presence of mass.

Jerry

QuoteSure, everything in the universe has been radiating energy for countless eons.  But everything is also absorbing energy.  However, this is a different kind of energy than ZPE, which involves quantum fluctuations.  ZPE is what's left after all the other energy has been removed.

Good points however the universe has very little matter to absorb any energy, less than a fraction of 1% by volume. As well what we call material is only 1% matter and 99% space which is full of energy. Thus all which we call material only accounts for a small fraction of any given space and the rest is energy. Even the most dense material we know of is more like a screen door at best and only 1% matter.

Look at the Casimir effect, we produce a gap between two plates concentrating certain wavelengths of EM energy found everywhere and the two plates are pushed together. Yet apparently nobody has been able to deduce that this is how gravity works. You see objects are not magically pulled together for reasons nobody can explain they are pushed together similar to Casimir plates. Ah but one would have to acknowledge that space is full of energy rather than some spooky action at a distance nobody has a rational explanation for.

Unless of course, you want to fudge reality and the math making constants like time and space variable. However if were going to jump headfirst down the rabbit hole why not just believe we can create or destroy something from nothing?. There is little difference between variable space/time and creation/destruction because in both cases they have produced a theory so far removed from reality it becomes pointless.

I suppose my problem is that I'm naturally disagreeable and don't tend to believe anyone. I'm just backwards and deduced what the Primary Fields (Electric, Magnetic, Gravic and Inertial) are first then built all other phenomena on that premise. Versus supposing there could be some magical force which acts through nothing or creates something from the same... call me crazy if you will.

AC

We need to keep in mind that these virtual fluctuations are statistical.  The odds say that a given frequency/energy event at a specified point is probable during a given period of time. All frequencies at one point don't occur continuously and simultaneously.  However, when ZPE does appear, something doesn't get created from nothing, or return to nothing.  It has to involve something which momentary transforms, then is restored as the ZPE self annihilates.  Spooky action at a distance would require the energy to come from somewhere else in the universe - through subspace (defined as the universe minus at least one dimension, such as siderial distance).  Instead, the fluctuations involve pairs of particles, not just a bundle of energy.  And my position is that this is a local phenomenon.

When it comes to Casimir, I have a theory which doesn't involve ZPE.  Based on my observation that a molten drop at the end of a brasing rod will explode TOWARDS a nearby surface at a higher temperature.  I've never heard of Casimir producing anything other than a gentle push.  All particles radiate, and when energy from two particles meet out to the sides, at a ninety degree angle, that interaction produces a rotation which moves Aether outwards through the resulting ring.  At the same time, Aether is pulled inwards through the two nearby masses, entraining them to move towards each other.  The same mechanism might account for gravity.  But I'm not convinced that shielding gravity (with a two axis electrostatic roll) will have any effect on inertia within the field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6_KKXTbTyg

"Using a Casimir injection process, we have demonstrated continuous electrical power production in thousands of devices... "

I consider this to be a breakthrough.  The time may come when we can buy ZPE panels similar to solar panels, although thicker, depending on how many diode sheets need to be stacked for a desired output.  Replacing vacuum between the plates with the thin film dielectric is very innovative.  Successful operation would seem to be more important than understanding where the energy comes from.

Of course, it still has to be replicated, to ensure that there isn't an X-factor associated with the researcher's presence.  Or just test it while he's not present.  I've seen in the past that charisma (longitudinal force) can affect a transformer's output.  (That's how I charge my 'sparking condencer' HV supercap without a diode on the NST.)

Jerry

QuoteI consider this to be a breakthrough.  The time may come when we can buy ZPE panels similar to solar panels, although thicker, depending on how many diode sheets need to be stacked for a desired output.  Replacing vacuum between the plates with the thin film dielectric is very innovative.  Successful operation would seem to be more important than understanding where the energy comes from.

Were going to be seeing a massive number of breakthroughs in the near future made possible by nano-technology and meta-materials. Almost every university has some kind of program working on ZPE or nano power generation.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/07/30/184712/engineers-unveil-first-casimir-chip-that-exploits-the-vacuum-energy/
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph240/blakemore1/

Richard Feynman and many other Nobel prize winning physicists predicted all of this decades ago and said the only real problem was building a small enough lever to extract energy at atomic scales. We already know there is a huge amount of kinetic energy in matter and EM/ZPE energy in the spaces between matter. So it's simply a matter of understand energy and where it comes from as well as how to interact with it in a practical manner.

We could think of it this way, we already know how much energy is available at the atomic level from Fission and Fusion. It's all been proven tens of thousands of times over however it's very costly and problematic. All this new tech doesn't blast matter apart like fission/fusion and is designed to interact with the kinetic energy already present in a non-destructive way. There's simply no getting around the fact everything we know is made up of matter in motion and EM energy.

I find all this stuff easy because my focus was always on understanding Energy, the Primary Fields and Matter first. To understand the foundation everything is built on first then proceed to build technology based on that. As they say, we cannot build what we cannot understand and many are going about this backwards in my opinion.

AC

The extraction of energy from the zero point follows the same rules as physics in general.
It is not because we can have forces, that we could have a perpetual energy.
In the Casimir effect, the force between plates will indeed do some work. But when the plates have moved closer to each other, how can we put them back to their initial position to reset a cycle, without doing the opposite work?
Whether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.
Energy is what is recovered by going from one state to another, and what must be supplied to return to the initial state. This principle seems to me to be sufficiently universal that we should either try to circumvent it rather than fight it or deny it, or to tap into known or unknown sources of energy for the return to the initial point of the cycle, sources that would be diminished but would be sufficiently large for our needs (for example, nuclear). Magic words like "ZPE" are not enough to counteract it.

I'm reconsidering my opinion of the ZPE 'breakthrough'.  ZPE does not flow through a Casimir boundary plate.  Instead, it is considered to push against the plate from the outside.  Also the metal/oxide/metal diode doesn't have the characteristic doping associated with a tunnel diode.  Furthermore, the top mirror reflecting energy which does flow into the cavity suggests this reflection may produce a biphasic energy which results in a shape resonant self organising charge effect across the diode.  It's likely that his picoWatt is coming from ambient heat reflected back out at the top, with the internal reflection coming up from the bottom, then back down.  But of course, I may be wrong, and some other mechanism is responsible for the effect.  But I don't see how it can be ZPE.

F6FLT

QuoteWhether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.

This is true however it's not the only energy process we know of. 

A plant can absorb energy, water, minerals and gasses from it's environment doing work in the process. More important, unlike any primitive devices constructed by man a plant can grow increasing it's rate of absorption exponentially over time. Unlike your system we do not supply energy and in order to return the system to it's original state the energy it absorbed can be transformed doing work for us.

In engineering terms every plant is an semi-intelligent, semi-independent, self constructing, self replicating, self healing energy transformation machine.

Are plants intelligent?...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/radical-conservation/2015/aug/04/plants-intelligent-sentient-book-brilliant-green-internet

I always found it strange that mankind is not even remotely close to having the intelligence or knowledge to be able to create something like a plant from scratch. I mean were surrounded by them, we eat them, there everywhere yet we have no idea where to even begin to build one. Granted we can pretend to grow them and genetically modify them but building one from scratch is beyond our understanding.

This is why it's important to keep an open mind and understand our conception of energy and machines to extract energy is child like at best compared to nature.

Regards
AC

Quote from: F6FLT on 2022.04.02, 09:14:36
Whether it is plates under the Casimir effect, plates of a capacitor under electrostatic attraction, or magnets attracting each other, the problem is the same: the energy gained to go from one state to another, must be supplied again to return to the initial state.

That assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

In the early NMR work back in the late 1940's it seems that there might be a route for using nuclear precessions to get excess energy.   In any magnet the electrons responsible for the magnetism are precessing and there is energy in those precessions.  Fast applied field transients might unlock some of that energy as we discussed in 2019 on one of my benches.  That got nowhere but partzman was using conductive magnets that don't take kindly to fast transients.
Smudge   

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.04.05, 23:59:29
F6FLT
This is true however it's not the only energy process we know of. 

A plant can absorb energy, water, minerals and gasses from it's environment doing work in the process...
[...]
This is why it's important to keep an open mind and understand our conception of energy and machines to extract energy is child like at best compared to nature.

Regards
AC

Plants do not differ from inert matter. The physical-chemical reactions at work in life also result in a overall increase of entropy. Plants burn energy to run their processes, just like our artificial machines. There is no natural free energy, which is moreover the evidence that if it is possible, it is surely not obvious.
Nature did not invent the wheel, man did.  If nature's models had all the answers, airplanes would flap their wings.

If we are not able to learn from our past mistakes, we go around in circles. This is what is happening today in the free energy movement. For the question of the open mind, one must be circumspect, see my signature.

Quote from: Smudge on 2022.04.06, 10:59:25
That assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

In the early NMR work back in the late 1940's it seems that there might be a route for using nuclear precessions to get excess energy.   In any magnet the electrons responsible for the magnetism are precessing and there is energy in those precessions.  Fast applied field transients might unlock some of that energy as we discussed in 2019 on one of my benches.  That got nowhere but partzman was using conductive magnets that don't take kindly to fast transients.
Smudge

I want to believe you, but I don't see anything coming.
This question of energy as a passage from one state to another is also at the microscopic level.
For example, a seemingly brilliant idea was the capillary engine. The water rises by capillarity, so we think that once it's up, we just have to let the drops fall back down, and bingo, we can start the cycle again! But no! At the microscopic level, the Van der Valls forces are at work and block the process.
The principle is universal. We must find something else. A Maxwell demon is perhaps possible. The LENR too. The energy of neutrinos... In any case we have to consider a change of state of something whose imbalance would then be restored naturally by the ambient energy, or whose imbalance would be unimportant if the energy provided is enormous (nuclear energy).
There is no miracle solution in the past, it would be known. I think we should look to the future, not to the past, and think innovation rather than rehashing the old stuff that everyone is talking about for decades without ever having produced anything useful, or even the slightest proof of concept.

François

Smudge

QuoteThat assumes that nothing exotic takes place during the change from one state to another.  Take the example of two magnets doing work by moving together slowly under attraction.  The exact quantity of energy gained must then be supplied to move the magnets apart back to their starting conditions.  But if the movement together is so fast that magnetic viscosity comes into play, then an increased quantity of energy is required to pull them apart.  There is always this loss which is often accounted for by assuming that the loss goes as heat, the magnets get hotter.  I am not aware of any calorimeter measurements that validate this assumption.  Of course the lost energy has to go somewhere, could some of it go into the maelstrom of the sea of energy we call space?  And if so can we do something to the magnets where that action gets reversed and we actually get some excess energy back?

This reminds me of my work on the perpetual electromagnet.

A permanent magnet is simply a ferromagnetic material where the electron orbits have been coordinated and locked in place producing a permanent magnetic field. An electromagnet is simply an electron current moving in circles like an orbit through a conductor. Thus if the conditions were met whereby the electrons in the turns of wire in an electromagnet could continue in motion like a PM it would become a switchable permanent electromagnet. At which point the notion of having to remove an iron core or magnet becomes a mute point.

In fact there were many inventors who made similar claims which is where I got the concept. They used solenoid or switched reluctance motors which used only a fraction of the input we would expect. You see almost all the energy we input into an electromagnet is used to maintain the electron current holding the magnetic field not to create it. If the electrons could be maintained in motion like a PM then we would only need to create the magnetic field once, let it perform work then recapture the input.

So my goal was straightforward, do whatever is required in order to maintain the electron current moving in circles in a conductor longer than expected. Much of this isn't that difficult however we have to understand and focus on the problem at hand. As Faraday said, it doesn't matter how we do it only that we do.

I should also note that Ed Leedskalnin's literature also helped my progress. I built many of his devices including the perpetual motion holder(PMH). Don't get me wrong, Ed was as crazy as the day is long however that doesn't change the fact his concepts had merit. The PMH was valid and a periodic induced magnetic field could be maintained permanently. It's important to start with a viable concept as a foundation then continue building on it.

Regards
AC

Perpetual electromagnet or perpetual anything are expressions to please oneself, when nobody is able to provide the slightest experimental indication that it would be possible, and certainly not the pseudo-inventors who talked about it. An inventor is one who produces an invention. Where is this invention of a perpetual electromagnet, outside the heads of believers? Nowhere. So no invention, no inventor, but useless palaver.

We all dream of little black boxes with a power outlet that takes out the perpetual KW. So we have fun with electronics and electricity, because the components are available and playing with them is easy. And we invent stories, that this or that would not be in conformity with the classical theories when nothing deviates from it and that this idea is the simple result of the ignorance of those who speak about it, the less competent being the most apt to delude.

It reminds me of the story of that drunk person, who at night, when leaving the bar, looks for his car keys that he lost, under the street light, because elsewhere it is dark!  ;D If there is free energy somewhere, you'll have to be a lot smarter than rehashing fairy tales to flush it out!

F6FLT

QuotePerpetual electromagnet or perpetual anything are expressions to please oneself, when nobody is able to provide the slightest experimental indication that it would be possible, and certainly not the pseudo-inventors who talked about it. An inventor is one who produces an invention.

My proof that perpetual motion is the norm is that not you or anyone else can give me one example of something not in perpetual motion.
The conservation of energy demands perpetual motion is the norm because energy is motion.

Your supposedly a smart guy, one example of something not in perpetual motion is all I'm asking, any idea's?. It's strange because not one single person has ever responded to my question. One would think they would be all gung ho to prove me wrong but I suspect they already know the answer.

Regards
AC

If my theory that ZPE stems from a momentary relaxing of the local space/time curvature is correct, this would lead to the notion that there might be less of it in interstellar space than on, or near, the Earth.  With the Cassimere effect conceeded to be an example, we might see a reduction of this force so far out in deep space.  The space/time graph is not linear.  With a uniform difference between the internal and external Cavity pressures, there might still be a relativistic overall variance from one depth of space to another.  (This may already be known about by those who work with the ZPE equations.). Perhaps we should send a Cassimere test device on an interstellar probe?

Another way we could test for variance would be to use directly extracted ZPE to power the probe, then watch for changes in the probe's acceleration.  Or, just monitor the output from the ZPE unit.

If my theory is correct, then something else we should consider is the concept that extracting the energy could quite possibly produce a permanent reduction in the local curvature, with a corresponding permanent reduction in gravity.  There is a legend that a planet named Malduk exploded in the Pleiades thousands of years ago, with at least some of the survivors coming here - landing in the Carpathian Mountains region.  There is reason to accept the legend.  So what destroyed the planet?  Widespread, universal extraction of power from the ZPE?

I think before we get too determined to power our cars with ZPE, we'd better send out one or more probes to find out if there IS a change in the underlying curvature.  If there is, then ZPE should be outlawed, except in deep space.

Another thing to consider is that Putin said he invaded Ukraine because they were going to install a Sky Net which would destroy the world.  Were they planning to power their High Altitude Platforms with some easy way they discovered to extract ZPE?

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.04.07, 20:32:00
...
My proof that perpetual motion is the norm is that not you or anyone else can give me one example of something not in perpetual motion.
...

Semantic drift and sophism. The question is not perpetuity, we know well that there is perpetual motion in the atom or the universe, it is a truism. The question is to extract a useful work by alleging a perpetual motion.

Allcanadian

If you cross magnetic field with closed conductor current is generated inside conductor, so I suspect we should cross magnetic field frequently with frequency related to the circumference of conductor to bring current in DC mode like you imagined

F6FLT

QuoteThe question is not perpetuity, we know well that there is perpetual motion in the atom or the universe, it is a truism. The question is to extract a useful work by alleging a perpetual motion.

Very good, we have now established that perpetual motion is the natural state of everything in the universe. This is self-evident and anyone who claims perpetual motion is impossible is misinformed.

Step two is to acknowledge that everything we know and see all around us is in perpetual motion as matter or energy. We have no need for imaginary schemes or theories and it has been well established that matter and the space it occupies holds all the energy we could ever want. On this level we must also acknowledge that energy/motion cannot be created or destroyed and is always conserved.

On the question of how to extract useful work by alleging a perpetual motion... were already doing it.

All energy is the perpetual motion of something thus all our present energy systems and any useful work ever done must utilize it. Many billions of years ago matter/energy was dispersed into this area of the universe forming our Sun/star and planets which then provided all of the energy and life we presently enjoy.

We cannot just cherry pick a small part of the present energy here or elsewhere and presume it had no past. The law is that energy/motion cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. Thus all energy including all we know must have come from somewhere and represent perpetual motion because ...energy cannot be destroyed.

So the only relevant question is how to efficiently transform some of the energy from the sea of energy we are presently immersed in?.

The first clue should have been that all energy relates directly to the motion of something. All our present systems and those in the future must rely on the conversion or transformation of one form of energy/motion to another. For example fission/fusion knocks around some electrons in a material, they recombine as a different atom(transmutation) and release some energy. We oxidize a hydrocarbon, the atoms recombine as different molecules and release some energy. As we can see all these energy transformations rely on changing the kinds of motion taking place. Most often electron orbital motion in an atom changing and recombining to form a new atom/molecule and releasing energy as oscillations/heat.

In every case the energy transformation process is nearly identical because were not creating/destroying energy or motion were transforming or converting it. The most obvious problem is that many have come to believe creation/destruction in the norm not transformations. At which point the saying "You cannot reason a man out of what he never reasoned himself into" comes into play.

Which begs the question where the energy in these free energy devices could come from. We know as a fact that all the matter and space the device occupies is full of energy and in perpetual motion, that may be a good place to start. It's literally all in motion thus it's simply a matter of finding a way to transform some of that motion to a more useful form. 

Regards
AC

Nobody questions the operation of heat pumps. Why somebody would question operations of energy pumps ? There is enough energy in Earth magnetic field coming from solar rays and other cosmic sources.

Forest

QuoteNobody questions the operation of heat pumps. Why somebody would question operations of energy pumps ? There is enough energy in Earth magnetic field coming from solar rays and other cosmic sources.

That is a good observation, our batteries, generators and other sources simply pump free electrons from the (+) terminal to the (-) terminal. Then the free electrons flow from the (-) terminal through the circuit or load back to the (+) terminal at the pump. By any other name it is simply a pump using a force to produce a flow of material we call electrons.

The heat pump is a neat device, on the cool end it absorbs the oscillation energy (heat) in our house and moves those oscillations in a material to the hot end where the oscillation energy is expelled. It's an energy pump or mover rather than an energy transformer like an electric heater which is why the efficiency is higher. 

It would seem to me we could use a similar process to move other forms of energy. The concept is sound it's just a matter of working though the problems associated with the technology.

Regards
AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.04.09, 16:39:49
Forest
That is a good observation, our batteries, generators and other sources simply pump free electrons from the (+) terminal to the (-) terminal. Then the free electrons flow from the (-) terminal through the circuit or load back to the (+) terminal at the pump. By any other name it is simply a pump using a force to produce a flow of material we call electrons.

....

Regards
AC

In a nut-shell that's what I think Tariel Kapanadze did. Create a large electron deficit (sink) and hook a device between that and the earth (source). Electrons move from earth to fill the sink but get converted to other types of energy before they get there, and the sink never fills. He said from the beginning it was simple.

Regards
Cadman

My own limited observations have shown that a charge gradient must be established to draw zero point energy into a system, where it essentially changes state into work-capable charge.  I believe there are ways to establish conditions which produce this charge gradient using basic transistors, diodes and coils (and an outside power source).

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.04.08, 18:52:09
F6FLT
Very good, we have now established that perpetual motion is the natural state of everything in the universe.
...
On the question of how to extract useful work by alleging a perpetual motion... were already doing it.
...

Those who tell us this are still paying a subscription for electrical energy.
Find the error...

Bob Smith

QuoteMy own limited observations have shown that a charge gradient must be established to draw zero point energy into a system, where it essentially changes state into work-capable charge.  I believe there are ways to establish conditions which produce this charge gradient using basic transistors, diodes and coils (and an outside power source).

That's the kicker isn't it?.

We look at these FE devices in there most basic form and it's nothing more than some coils of wire, maybe iron cores and switches. Then again, a computer AI is simply a bunch of transistors forming logic gates and some software. Giving rise to the notion that not unlike ourselves some things can be much more than the sum of there parts. I mean, if most people were not "alive" themselves they would probably conclude intelligent life was impossible, yet here we are.

So we have a lot to learn...

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022.04.10, 19:56:29
Bob Smith
That's the kicker isn't it?.

We look at these FE devices in there most basic form and it's nothing more than some coils of wire, maybe iron cores and switches. Then again, a computer AI is simply a bunch of transistors forming logic gates and some software. Giving rise to the notion that not unlike ourselves some things can be much more than the sum of there parts. I mean, if most people were not "alive" themselves they would probably conclude intelligent life was impossible, yet here we are.

So we have a lot to learn...

AC

Yes. I suspect the keys to unlocking this mystery (tapping ZPE) are very simple and we are getting bogged down in far too much detail and technobabble - both purposeful and by conditioning within conventional closed system paradigms.

Bob Smith

QuoteYes. I suspect the keys to unlocking this mystery (tapping ZPE) are very simple and we are getting bogged down in far too much detail and technobabble - both purposeful and by conditioning within conventional closed system paradigms.

I have a trick I use at the bench during the theory and building phase. I picture matter as a fog of oscillating particles floating in a sea of EM energy. This keeps my mind thinking objectively versus just seeing components, wires and switches which is subjective. We have a hundred years of science which proves what we think were seeing in reality is subjective. What we think we see is not real and matter is 1% kinetic material and 99% EM energy. At which point this notion of closed systems becomes completely absurd.

It's definitely a balancing act because we have to live and work in the supposedly real world but most of it is a fabrication. Most of the stuff were contemplating is the last thing on anyone's mind, lol.

Regards
AC

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=atGD9dIgYgg&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD

Casimir effect ( zero point ....
Shared by a fellow open source researcher ( and avid experimenter)

Respectfully submitted
Chet

The Garret model ( again,shared by a fellow who follows the news on the "other side" of open source )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6_KKXTbTyg
And the patent

Quantum vacuum energy extraction

Publication of US20070241470A1

2008-05-27

Application granted

2008-05-27

Publication of US7379286B2

Respectfully submitted
Chet K

Chet K

Quotehttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=atGD9dIgYgg&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD
Casimir effect ( zero point ....

They make some good points and I'm not sure most understand the significance. The Casimir effect shows almost everyone was completely wrong about the amount of energy in a given space. Ergo, space is not empty that lie is off the table. We have reproducible, demonstrable proof we are floating in a sea of energy... period... end of debate... full stop... time to move on. 

So there is no need to suppose a FE device must get something from nothing or violate the COE. That lie is off the table and no longer relevant.

In fact some of my testing agrees with this notion. I found the supposed "extra energy" in a FE device may not come from an external source. It comes from the circuit itself and the space said circuit occupies. Nothing is flowing in from anywhere the energy is already present within the system.

It's similar to a primitive or simple minded person saying nuclear energy is impossible when all they know is steam engine technology. Nuclear energy must be impossible because nothing is being burned and we cannot see the energy source... the energy must be created from nothing, LOL.

It's also absurd that the people supposedly claiming to believe in the COE are most often the first to claim it must be violated by a FE device.
Supposed expert... nothing can violate the COE.
Man shows working FE device.
Supposed expert has a melt down and claims COE has been violated.

So which is it?, do they believe in the COE or not because their actions tend to prove they do not. I would never suggest the COE can be violated, I know better.

AC

This was found in my archives. Maybe it will be interesting. :)

Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2025.08.29, 08:59:10
This was found in my archives. Maybe it will be interesting. :) Casimir chemistry

In general, according to the article, it is necessary to carefully select the reaction conditions. The system must satisfy the boundary conditions of the reaction in a normal environment without using the Casimir effect, so that when using the Casimir effect, a small quantitative addition of energy in the nanocavities leads to a qualitative change in the chemical composition.

QuoteIV. APPLICATIONS
...
A. Casimir Catalysts
Catalysts form the backbone of the world's chemical industry, contributing to the manufacture of roughly 90% of commercial chemical products. As enzymes, abzymes, and ribozymes, they render life possible. Hallmarks of traditional catalysts are the abilities to lower activation energies, modify
transition states and reaction rates, while not being consumed in the reactions. The Casimir systems considered thus far satisfy these criteria; however, they can also apparently change reaction energies and equilibrium constants, setting them apart in fundamental ways. For this discussion they
will be called Casimir catalysts. On a purely academic level, it might be argued that Casimir catalysts are not possible because they shift chemical equilibria, whereas it is normally understood that a catalytic shifting of equilibrium can lead to a violation of the second law of thermodynamics. This objection is not valid here because any exess in chemical energy resulting from a Casimir cycle e.g., Figs. 2 and 3 can be traced to net work
performed against Casimir force, not supplied by a heat bath; thus, the second law is not challenged

In order to avoid being banned by grandfathers with a pure academic level, we need to somehow get out of the difficulty that has arisen.  :)

When I first heard about the Casimir effect I remembered reading about some Russian inventor working with honeycomb type natural structures.
https://www.rexresearch.com/grebenn/grebenn.htm 

It seems like quackery until we correlate this with the newest RF cavity massless propulsion claims.
https://newatlas.com/cannae-reactionless-drive-space-propulsion/33210/
Apparently the old has become new again.

It also seemed to relate to microwave cavities and some older VHF vacuum tubes. Stories of imploding televisions pulling the nails out of the walls in the room. Could some kind of bizarre cavity based self-resonance taken place?.

Ergo, it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together and we have countless instances where strange things tend to happen in geometric structures with shaped cavities.

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2025.08.30, 15:59:25
When I first heard about the Casimir effect I remembered reading about some Russian inventor working with honeycomb type natural structures.
https://www.rexresearch.com/grebenn/grebenn.htm 

In 2021, interesting information appeared on the Internet, which added facts.

Let's start in order:

Viktor Grebennikov is generally an expert on insects, he did not really understand theoretical physics.
Grebennikov is an artist, writer, sculptor, popularizer, dreamer, but not a techie.

Serious scientific theories were put forward by his companion, professional physicist Valentin Zolotarev.

Together with Grebennikov, he wrote 2 scientific articles. I assume that Zolotarev included Grebennikov as a co-author only because it was necessary to popularize his theories. If you try to download and translate, there is very professional physics text, you should be prepared for this.

1. "Theory of field radiation of multicavity structures" 1988

Influence of De Broglie waves on the formation of elementary particles. Close to quantum physics.
...
the EPS field consists of displayed de Broglie standing waves, i.e. these waves are not emitted if there is no radiation from material particles.

https://greencapitalcity-narod-ru.translate.goog/unknown/Data/Anomal/Html/tech/eps_theory.html?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

2. "Fast processes in the environment of physical vacuum as a source of physical phenomena" 1988–1991
Quantum physics, structure of physical vacuum, quantum basis of gravity.
https://ru.djvu.online/file/LFwzw48MlQ2mT

Nothing more was known about Zolotarev until recently.

In 2021, the daughter of Valentin Zolotarev posted a biography of her father on the Internet, which lists numerous scientific articles.
https://habr-com.translate.goog/ru/post/566074/?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Original:
https://habr.com/ru/post/566074/

Based on this, it became clear that Zolotarev worked at the main university of the USSR, engaged in nanotechnology in the 70s of the 20th century.
"F.V. Lukin State Research Institute of Physical Problems". At that time, this university was studying the possibility of using biological microstructures or creating synthetic analogues. Therefore, Zolotarev was probably attracted to the insect science that Grebennikov was studying.

Probably Zolotarev developed photomatrices for first special cameras. This is clear from reading the list of his works.
These photo matrices were very primitive. They were a line of 1000x1 photocells, only 1000 pixels. Nonsense by today's standards, when mobile phone cameras have tens and even hundreds of millions of pixels.

https://www-155la3-ru.translate.goog/k1200.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

The pixel lines were probably installed on satellites that photographed the Earth's surface. Scanning was carried out by the satellite's movement in orbit, while the Earth's surface was constantly shifting. It wasn't only the USSR that created such things; the US also made, I think, even more advanced devices.

The elements of such a first matrix are probably relatively large, micrometers.
Of course, in those ancient times, they could not have technologies that allow the creation of structures measuring several nanometers, as now in processors from AMD or Intel.
But the vertical structure of the photocells layers could probably have been very small.

A list of works by Zolotarev, in which, it seems to me, he could observe the influence of De Broglie waves, Casimir forces and other quantum effects, and even anti-gravity effects:

33. Method for studying adhesion levels in photosensitive translucent films
49. Method for determining the parameters of sticking levels
56. Method for determining adhesion levels in translucent films
92. Parameters of sticking levels in amorphous selenium
127. Method for studying adhesion levels in photosensitive translucent films

Why can adhesion in microstructures be related to the Casimir effect? ​​- probably because Casimir discovered this effect when he was creating colloidal solutions to coat magnetic tapes at Phillips, where he worked at the time, and he was having trouble with it because of particle agglomeration. So he discovered the law of why this was impossible. Metal particles stuck together under the action of the Casimir force.

The numbering corresponds to the list in the article:
https://habr-com.translate.goog/ru/post/566074/?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Conclusions:

- probably Grebennikov's anti-gravity structures had very, very small dimensions, nanometers.

- Larger structures Grebennikov demonstrated as a model, and as a way of influencing the biostructures of humans and insects, which, in his opinion, are very sensitive.

- could Zolotarev somehow secretly manufacture nanostructures at his place of work at the research institute? Some kind of hidden technology?

- could Grebennikov obtain such structures, in the range of nanometers and less, from natural materials?

I think that Grebennikov presented his fantasies as reality, and his friend Zolotarev dreamed that his theoretical works would be accepted sometime in the future.

Sergh

QuoteConclusions:
- probably Grebennikov's anti-gravity structures had very, very small dimensions, nanometers.
- Larger structures Grebennikov demonstrated as a model, and as a way of influencing the biostructures of humans and insects, which, in his opinion, are very sensitive.
- could Zolotarev somehow secretly manufacture nanostructures at his place of work at the research institute? Some kind of hidden technology?
- could Grebennikov obtain such structures, in the range of nanometers and less, from natural materials?
I think that Grebennikov presented his fantasies as reality, and his friend Zolotarev dreamed that his theoretical works would be accepted sometime in the future.

It's debatable, I did extensive research on Viktor Schauberger and his work who was a humble Austrian naturalist and forester.
So how can a naturalist/forester become an expert in advanced energy and EM propulsion systems in the 1950's?. It's easy to understand and these people were studying and replicating how nature works first hand not simply following the often misguided opinions of other people. I found this to be true as well.

As Schauberger said, consider a simple tree. It can lift hundreds of gallons of water hundreds of feet per day. It is a syntropic, self-organizing, self-healing system which concentrates energy and material to grow larger and replicate itself from a seed. It makes all of mankind's technology look grossly amateur and primitive by comparison. Nobody is even remotely intelligent enough to build this kind of system such as a seed from scratch. So this notion that everything is known is comical verging on absolute delusion.

As well I think you may be mistaken about the work of Grebennikov. Nature always interacts on multiple levels simultaneously which confuses most people who can only think in singular terms. They can grasp a single cavity oscillating at one frequency but don't have the capacity to imagine hundreds of different cavities interacting through physical and electrical oscillations on multiple levels.

The answer to why so many people fail to understand these complex concepts and systems may relate to this phenomena...
https://dignotech.com/why-some-people-cant-picture-images-and-might-dream-in-words-instead/

Aphantasia is the term used to describe the inability to form mental images. Ergo, if you cannot imagine or form a mental image of these complex systems in your head the odds of failure increase by magnitudes. My research suggests the majority of the most brilliant people, like Einstein and Tesla, all had hyperphantasia. As Tesla claimed, he could constantly build something in his head in every detail and determine if it works or not. Einstein believed that "imagination is more important than knowledge," suggesting that while knowledge is limited, imagination allows for endless possibilities and creativity.

Ergo, if a person cannot imagine how nature and advanced technology works then it may be time to take up another hobby.

Well, I posted new exclusive real information about Grebennikov and his friend, physicist Zolotarev, I was accused of lack of imagination. Should I have fantasized? Would they have been happy then?  :D

Ok, let's fantasize, a little. If Zolotarev was developing primitive photo matrices for early military satellites, and then found an antigravity effect in such structures, then we could probably find the same or a stronger effect in modern photo matrices in cameras and, of course, ... mobile phones.  :)

Weigh your mobile phones in different positions and camera states, on super-precise scales! Antigravity should be there, if Grebennikov or Zolotarev are not just dreamers!  ;)

Sergh

QuoteWell, I posted new exclusive real information about Grebennikov and his physicist friend Zolotarev, I was accused of lack of imagination. Should I have fantasized? Would they have been happy then?

No, I simply pointed out that-
1)Many brilliant people like Viktor Schauberger had no technical background or training. They learned from nature.
2)The majority of all the most brilliant men like Einstein and Tesla had a very active imagination.