I feel alone in OUR

[F6FLT]

Wow you must be so smart...

Compared to you, you are right, the rest of your speech on my person rather than on the subject, confirms it.

So in summary, you have a very simple set-up that you have neither built nor measured and from which you claim to generate free energy.
If you find people stupid enough to take your word for it, you'll feel valued, but with me it's a failure.

[Allcanadian]

Joel

illegal  activity? I guess you really don't understand this basic circuit? Or even better prehaps I don't understand my own circuit.  I get it about promoting  illegal activity. I wouldn't do it as well. I just fail to see how this could be not legal,

It's an interesting debate and I have done many psychological/social experiments on this matter.

The facts show the people most likely to be critical of this sort of thing including free/environmental energy generally always have a vested interest in holding the status quo. Mainly people paid/employed by utilities, the fossil fuel industry or follow the populist "always for profit" narrative. The status quo is deeply ingrained in most fields of energy/science/technology.

The same groups also tend to get triggered by renewable energy and heat pumps. They find the notion that we could input one unit of electrical energy into a heat pump and move six units of heat energy from the environment offensive. Psychologically it relates more to "the greatness of man" philosophy similar to religion where nature is viewed as nothing more than an inert commodity. Nature and the environment, including it's benefits and energy, is seldom even recognized outside of recreation.

The literature suggests this psychological change came about when most of the population migrated into cities/urban areas and became detached from nature/reality. Including the fact most city/urban people seldom leave there work/home dwelling and spend almost no time outdoors. There environment became other people, buildings, concrete/steel, employment, consumerism, self-gratifying activities and wealth. Of course, nature is seldom recognized and any energy received from it seen in the same light as magic or something from nothing. In fact, many have become so detached from reality they are no longer aware they even live on a planet circling the Sun ie. the flat Earth syndrome.

So it's important to understand most free thinkers like those in the FE community are not considered "normal" by others. Of course this depends on what we consider normal. Is it the nature world and the universe at large or an overpopulated artificial echo chamber glorifying mankind.

AC

[F6FLT]

Joel
It's an interesting debate and I have done many psychological/social experiments on this matter.

The facts show the people most likely to be critical of this sort of thing including free/environmental energy generally always have a vested interest in holding the status quo.
...

Your argument is double-edged. Because on FE sites, the status quo is that we already have free energy, that there are hundreds of machines that have worked in the past, that inventions have been suppressed, that so-and-so knows the secrets and that we have to follow their tracks...

So on the FE sites, the one who has an interest in maintaining the status quo is the blind believer in free energy, because he is the majority profile.
It is even quite clear that many people prefer to keep their faith in dubious machines, refusing to test them and measure them carefully, or even to build them, especially those coming from their own ideas as it is the case here, because they know in their heart that it will not work but they want to keep their illusions.

When a set-up is as simple and revolutionary as the one Joel presented, but the one who has the idea doesn't verify it on a test bench, it's obvious that he want to stay in the illusion, not to be disappointed, and keep the status quo about the FE that exists but that nobody get.

[Allcanadian]

F6FLT

So on the FE sites, the one who has an interest in maintaining the status quo is the blind believer in free energy, because he is the majority profile.
It is even quite clear that many people prefer to keep their faith in dubious machines, refusing to test them and measure them carefully, or even to build them, especially those coming from their own ideas as it is the case here, because they know in their heart that it will not work but they want to keep their illusions.

It's debatable, almost all of the science and technology we know today was deemed impossible at some point. Not all that long ago if someone said a box full of switches(transistors/logic gates/machine language) could hold a conversation just like a human (chatGPT AI) they would be considered a fool yet here we are. As such anyone claiming we can no longer make unimaginable progress in every field of science and technology is on the wrong side of history.

I agree with some of your points and it's similar to the point I made in my last post. The "majority profile" of this planet is slowly moving further and further from reality and the natural world. What you call science I call nature which is one and the same as science is supposed to be the study of nature. Were not that different, however where you prefer to believe the people of science to the people here I prefer to believe no people. So our thinking is similar I just take it to the next level and bypass people going straight to nature. Why should we limit ourselves to anyone's thoughts when we could think for ourselves?.

I think it's ironic, you think your stuck in traffic but you are the traffic where I opted out and chose not to drive.

[F6FLT]

F6FLT
It's debatable, almost all of the science and technology we know today was deemed impossible at some point.
...

This is not true, most of what was thought impossible in the past, such as the possibility for every man to fly easily by his own power, is still impossible, and it is irrelevant, because it lacks logic.
Indeed, some things claimed to be impossible at one time, and which were possible later, do not imply that everything claimed to be impossible today, will be possible tomorrow (fallacy of generalization).

Moreover, many of the anecdotes about things claimed to be impossible in the past that were possible later, such as making the heavier than air fly, are based on misinterpretations.

[floodrod]

Hi Joel.

I am trying one of your circuits, but not using the grid.  I want to experiment all with batteries. Whether or not it is against electric company policy, I do not want to mess with the grid.

I have this circuit hooked up.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVMpQQugA-0&lc=UgzUiMGbV4wwYTaXDLR4AaABAg.9lSbS36j4Sy9lTN6qGZ22F

Car battery powers a small 110V inverter.  Microwave oven cap, 10 uf 400V cap,
this SCR-  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B085968V8Q?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details
and This neon.  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B085968V8Q?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details

The circuit connects back to the same battery as the source to see if the battery will gain charge.

When I power it, after a few seconds the neon lights up and stays lit (from what I can see.)  I am monitoring the battery voltage and it slowly goes down.  I left it on for about 5 minutes, and it slowly drains.

Does all this sound about right?  Can you point me in a direction here?

Thanks

[floodrod]

Just as an update-  I found the problem, but the circuit will not charge a battery from it's own power (as most of you already knew). The cheapo neons I was using were firing at too low of voltage.  I got bigger Neon's in that fire at 105-125V and it flickers as it was described.

I know it's hooked up correct because when power an inverter from 1 battery to feed the circuit,  then use a separate battery as the collector, it does charge the collector battery.  So everything is operating as described.

But when I use the same battery as the source and collector, the battery drains as it operates.

Joel recently posted a video of a battery powering itself like I am describing using an inverter and a 9V power pack. and the voltage was raising.  The new video used flyback from a coil, although he was calling it "Back-EMF".  Those 2 terms are not interchangeable though, so I think he was referring to Flyback.  He did not post a diagram of the circuit, so I can not replicate at the moment.

Anyway, I just wanted to replicate this for my own understanding (without using the grid). I am still glad I did because I learned a little something here.

[Bob Smith]

Hey Joel
Thanks for your honesty. I was living between Ottawa and North Bay up to 2020. I only ever met one person who could relate to a bit of this material - a heating/AC guy who understood from the perspective of strange gains when fluids moved from liquid to gaseous state or vice-versa. He was way too busy to chat outside a repair visit. Anyway, that got me thinking about "states" of energy: aether, cold electricity and hot electricity.  I began to understand more of why Don Smith and many others were using capacitors in their setup (won't go into it, but those who understand will understand). But yeah, it's a bit of a lonely walk. Standing outside the prevailing paradigm searching for truth in any walk of life or discipline always is.

I even worked in the tech department at my old job, and no one was really into this subject area. Strange looks and snickers, mostly polite indifference.

I hope you continue to pursue your passion. I've been out of the loop for a couple of years, trying to get a homestead going with my wife; getting back into it slowly, finding my tools and components that were packed away. (now in western QC about 2 hrs from Ottawa)
All the best. 
Bob