BesslerWheel.com

[John Lindsay]

One question that gets' me is how come a socialist regime hasn't enhanced there economic viability with free energy devices since they aren't in such a Market oriented society and usually will go to great lengths to keep there economies afloat? Have these ideas been suppressed here also and how? Maybe it isn't the governments doing it but operatives from..? Could be way above owners of Oil companies and the like-too messy. Untouchable financiers, those who control the pursestrings, who would laugh at the unfashionable use of the word conspiracy or turf management. For those in the know in the higher eschelons of world goverments, they would never admit to being pawns. In fact we may be obliged to do there dirty work for them covertly "Do whatever is necessary! No Free Energy devices!" Would the United States government "willingly" be a participant in the blatant theft of taxpayers dollars-a significant percentage of your paycheck!-on outdated, polluting and bogus technology in a scenario that will eventually be found out about and reconciled.In some societies this would be grounds for the overthrough of a goverment and/or public execution of those responsible. Sounds like a helluva movie doesn't it? Where is Indiana Jones when you need him? John

[jim_mich]

Tesla was working on a method to supply unlimited energy to any place on earth. When his financiers found out what he was up to, they cut off all his funding, as it would have hurt their newly established electric companies.

Very few individuals have the financial means to startup and produce a new product.

Ed Gray had a working self powered 'motor' and was building three units to be installed in Grayhound buses for testing. But then he got served with government papers suppressing his invention and the bus company suddenly decided it was in their 'best interest' to not work with him.

Governments make lots of money from energy taxes. If you subtract production costs, the remaining 'profit' is split about half and half between government and the energy companys. They both would be hurt by any free energy device!

I am aware of more than a dozen inventors over the last century that have had working free energy inventions that somehow got suppressed. Most were electrical devices.

I think most politicians know nothing about suppressed inventions.

[Jonathan]

Though I can see why, and maybe how, FE devices would be surpressed, I think the number one arguement against it having occurred is that it is beyond me how 'they' manage to get to the position where they become 'they', and still have no clue about economics. If you really think about it, it becomes obvious that if every citizen has PMM doing their work for them, then they will have a ton of free time on their hands. After not long, I suspect that innumberable people will become bored and want something to do. People will then naturally begin working, not for money, but because they really like what they are doing. I don't have to spell it out, all of humanity will be able to lift itself by its boot straps to levels of greater wealth (or really whatever makes you happy, since wealth can be traded in for nonmaterial goods, like a ride with NASA to outer space).
If you've ever seen The X-Files, then another possiblity comes to mind: maybe 'they' know something we don't, and the current state of being is in fact the lesser of two evils. Of course it is more likely that 'they' are just greedy and stupid.

_________________
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.

[jim_mich]

Jonathan, it is a matter of controlling people. There are people in very high places that have puffed up ideas about themselves. It takes money and military power to control people. When people are busy working just to eat and pay the bills they don't cause trouble.

Those I talk of are higher than governments. They control governments. They put presidents and kings into power. And they have them taken out when they think it is needed.

You seem to doubt that free energy has been suppressed? Do I need to compile a list for you?

[Jonathan]

I definitly see motive. In some cases, I can see opportunity. So it would follow logically that all that there needs to be is a viable FE device, and it will be supressed. However, I haven't seen very convincing evidence that there have been more than two. I know that in the last century there have been innumberable claims of some form of electromagnetic FE. I do believe that if mechical PM is possible, so too is the EM kind. But EM phenomena is so complex, and though rarely and begrudgingly admitted, is not well understood. Further, as I have stated before, I don't have very good success with normal EM devices, so I tend to limit my scope to the machines. I would like to see that list though, and I think Sevich would too.
As to those that control the gov't, please don't tell me that you think they are Jews. I very much doubt the existence of a super-gov't, if for no other reasons than they are A) doing a bad job and B) are obviously not keeping themselves very secret, since we are talking about them.

[Gravmaster2000]

It would seem things are getting done with magnetic engines
as well...My main interest now...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Callowaymotorsgroup/

Vector Viper

[ovyyus]

Hi Jim,

If free energy is actively suppressed by elite 'hyper-government' all-controlling forces then does it not also follow that all claims of free energy success must be bogus - simply because they have not been suppressed?

I agree with Jonathan, these proposed 'dark forces of suppression' seem to be doing a very poor job. I think that perceptions of ongoing worldwide multi-cultural, multi-political, multi-generational free energy suppression are more likely the result of our own unbounded talent to imagine a boogyman at the window when it is only the boring old wind.

Perhaps claims of suppression can soften the blow of failure and redirect the attention of angry investors away from the inventor?

[VergingOnDone]

Not that I'm a conspiracy theorist or anything but there are several intriguing things I've learned over the last several months about who actually try to direct things, not only in America but also the rest of the world. One thing that really blew my mind is the link between the Bush family and the Bin Laden family. They are actually business partners in several ventures. The Bin Laden family -well known for their construction projects in the middle east and ties to Royal families backing of these projects. The Bush family oil company was originally funded by the investments from the Bin Ladens. The day of the plane attack Bush Sr. and Osama's brother were in meetings about their Defence development company. The week when all the planes were grounded one plane was allowed to fly with orders directly from the white house, (I personally remember some news reports about eyewitness account of seeing a plane) to fly the Bin Laden family to France for fear the American public would retribute vengence on them. Why? I remember when I read this story that the writer was comparing it to if Clinton flew the unibomber's family out of the country for the same reason. Seems dodgy to me. Other strange stories are: Bush Sr. was director of CIA during Kennedy Presidency, Bush Sr and Jr. were members of the Order of Skull and Bones, (secretive society at Yale) other strange info at misinfo.com

[jim_mich]

VergingOnDone, you got it! And with our last president, people close to him who knew too much seemed very accident prone.

[jim_mich]

Here is a rough listing (40) of what I believe were/are suppressed inventions/ideas. These are the documented ones. How many more are unknown? Some might have been frauds or hucksters, but all of them?

These names are somewhat abbreviated as they were taken from the name of the directories where my files are saved. I started saving files after I noticed internet sites disappearing. They are in no particular order.

Searl
Adams
Hubbard
Tesla
Moray
Sweet
NMachine (DePalma)
HansColer
GastonPlante
Hendershot
Griggs
GravityDevice (Electric Rocket)
RJohnsonMotor (Rory)
Gary (HarperMag)
Brown-Ecklin
Correa
EVGray
Marinov
Cook
Jenson
Cater
Prentice
Ecklin
Meyer
Bearden
ATree (Peter Markovich)
Newman
Francoeur
MEG(Tom Bearden)
HJohnson(Howard)
Bedini
TransWorld (Donald L.Smith)
NegResistor (Dr.Deborah D.L.Chung)
LaFonte
Kunel
Muller
Dragone
Perreault
Methernitha
Orffyreus Bessler


Of all these I think Hubbard was the most interesting...

Before Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band...before Timothy Leary...before Ken Kesey's band of Merry Pranksters and their Electric Kool-Aid Acid Tests...before the dawn of the Grateful Dead, there was Alfred M. Hubbard: the Original Captain Trips.

He ended up supplying LSD to the government and most of North America.

[ovyyus]

Hi Jim,

Which on your list do you think are suppressed inventors?

It surely can't be Adams - I was an associate of Adams motor company back in '93. He wasn't suppressed, just couldn't back up his claims with a working device. He liked to think he was being suppressed though :)

Beardon can't provide any verifyable working device despite years of attempts and theorising. Same with Searl, Bedini, DePalma (now deceased), Marinov (great guy, also deceased), and many others.

Most claim to have working devices of one sort or another but either are/were unwilling to allow close examination or can not support their claims with independant successfull replication. I wonder why?

Others on your list have received patents for unworkable design concepts - proving, if nothing else, that the patents office is fallable.

It seems that inventors are slippery, secretive and paranoid creatures by nature. Some free energy inventors I've been associated with over the years do tend to feel that they are 'at war' with the business/finance World. Sometimes when things don't go well for them, they lay blame in all manner of directions.

I think there is generally scant evidence to back up individual claims of free energy suppression when all things are considered on balance.

IMHO, the concept of free energy suppression is nothing more than urban myth that has taken on a life of it's own over the years and spawned a large (and growing) industry of stories, movies, books, lecture tours, etc - entertainment dollars by definition.

Tell a lie enough times and it becomes truth.

[Jonathan]

Does 'Cook' refer to the inertial propulsion device? If so, I am certain it isn't more than an optical illusion, having seen pictures of tests on the net.
I do hope that ATree doesn't refer to the Axletree Dynamo, a device that quite obviously doesn't work.
As to the dissappearance of websites, I have no idea what you are talking about. Go to Google right now and enter 'perpetual motion'. It says in the upper right corner that there were about 256000 matches. If 90% were skeptical, there are still a ton that the world wide conspiracy is doing a crappy job shutting down. Not to mention that they haven't stopped you from saving the sites to your computer, or from posting the names of these people, or even continuing to exist, given your toublesome seeking of PM.
And what has Verging got? Sounds like the usual questionable political dealings. I just finished reading John Collins' book this morning, and he shows what many know, that politics isn't what it should be. The conspiracy of which you speak is very very rarely about some shady purpose, and almost always a natural result of stupid people and psychology.

[jim_mich]

http://my.voyager.net/jrrandall/CookCoil.htm

http://www.rexresearch.com/markovic/atree.htm

Most references to Jensen's device have been removed from the intenet. Here is my saved copy...
---------------------------
Vol. 3, No. 2, December 1994

A Free-Energy Device

The following article comes via Toby Grotz, the electrical engineer on the Russell Science Research Team. Paul Raymond Jensen offers his idea free to the world. Thank you Mr. Jensen. We welcome your feedback, comments, or questions regarding this or any other article.

by Paul Raymond Jensen
I have built a transformer which supplies more power to its load than is drawn from its primary source.

I named this device The Unidirectional Transformer (UDT), because the magnetic reaction of the load current does not affect the magnetic action of the primary circuit.

The UDT is composed of a parallel LC resonant primary, a split secondary, a gapped magnetic core, and a "feedback winding." Virtually the only input power needed is that used to magnetize the core.

The magnetic core I used came from a small 60 Hz commercial power transformer made of interleaved silicon steel E and I laminations. I took the core apart, separated the Es and the Is, and made one stacked E core and one stacked I core from the laminations. Then I filed down the center leg of the E core about 15 mils to gap the combined E-I transformer core. The resulting m of the core at 60 Hz was about 100.

The primary winding is wound on the center leg of the core. The two secondary windings are wound on the two outer legs of the core and are series connected. Both secondary windings have the same number of turns. The "feedback winding" is wound over the primary on the center leg and is connected in series with the secondary.

The free-energy action of the UDT follows directly from the laws of magnetic circuits.

Consider what happens when an AC sine voltage is applied to the UDT primary. A magnetizing current flows, which can become rather high because of the low m of the core. Fortunately, gapping the core results in a fairly constant m through the entire AC cycle, up to a peak H of about 720 A-T/M. This results in a constant primary inductance, which permits parallel LC resonation. Resonating the primary reduces the magnetizing power to that necessary to match I2* R losses in the primary and the hysteresis losses in the core.

Magnetizing the core results in an AC sine voltage being induced across the secondary. The magnetic coupling between the primary and the secondary is very high, but the core area within each secondary winding is only one-half that of the primary. This means that the volts/turn of the secondary will be only one-half that of the primary. For the secondary voltage to equal the primary voltage, the secondary must have two times the number of turns in the primary.

The primary also induces a voltage across the feedback coil, but the purpose and characteristics of the feedback coil will be explained later.

When a current is drawn from the output, the two secondary windings each generate a magnetomotive force (MMF) directed against the MMF of the primary. The MMF of each secondary winding "sees" a series-parallel magnetic circuit through the transformer core. One magnetic circuit, "seen" by each secondary winding, is through the center leg of the core. The other magnetic circuit "seen" by each secondary winding is through the two outer legs of the core.

The resulting magnetic flux generated by the MMFs of the two secondary windings is dependent upon the reluctances of each of the magnetic circuits. Because the center leg is gapped, it has a higher reluctance than do the outer legs. This means that less magnetic flux from the secondary will pass through the center leg than will pass through the outer legs.

In my transformer, the reluctances of the magnetic circuits through the center leg were three times higher than the reluctances of the magnetic circuits through both outer legs. This was difficult to achieve and required hours of filing, polishing and fitting of the E and I cores. The alternative was to increase the gap, which was not acceptable in my particular design because I was driving the transformer at 60 Hz and could not afford any additional loss of m in the core.

Since the reluctances of the "center leg circuits" were three times higher than the reluctances of the "outer leg circuits," one-quarter of the secondary flux passed through the center leg, while three-quarters of the secondary flux passed through both outer legs.

The magnetic flux from the two secondary windings cancels in the "outer leg circuits," leaving only one-quarter of the total flux generated by the output current to react back upon the primary. This resulted in a current gain in the secondary, relative to the primary. Lenz's law was bypassed, and free-energy resulted.

An alternate explanation for the current gain in the UDT is to consider each secondary winding as acting as the primary winding for the other secondary winding when an output current is drawn because the two secondary windings generate geometrically opposing fields.

Now consider the "feedback winding." It is connected in series with the secondary and is wound over the primary winding on the center leg of the core. When the core is magnetized, an induced voltage will appear across the feedback winding which will subtract from the voltage across the secondary. The purpose of the feedback winding is to cancel the remaining secondary flux passing through the center leg of the core. It effectively isolates the currents in the primary and the secondary at the cost of a reduced output voltage. The feedback winding generates a magnetic flux equal and opposite to the residual magnetic flux from the secondary when an output current is drawn.

Given the above example, where three-quarters of the secondary flux self-cancels in the "outer leg circuits," the feedback coil will only have to oppose one-quarter of the total secondary flux. Since the feedback winding has two times the core area of the secondary windings and carries the full output current, it need have only one-quarter the number of turns of each secondary winding. However, this will reduce the output voltage by 25 percent. Therefore, to achieve the originally desired output voltage, the total number of secondary turns must be increased by the factor 4/3; the feedback coil must then have one-quarter of the number of turns of each secondary winding in this new secondary circuit.

Given the condition in which the feedback coil perfectly cancels all the residual secondary flux through the center leg of the core, the power drawn from the output will be nearly independent of the primary input power. The primary input will be the magnetizing power and nothing more. The output power will have a negligible phase angle (due to the leakage inductance) if the m of the core (as seen by the primary) is at least 100.

In practice, it is best if the feedback winding is short a turn or two, thereby preventing series inductance in the output at the cost of a small increase in the primary input power. A parallel resonant primary circuit allows for great input power reduction while ensuring voltage stability and linear operation under varying output loads.

The UDT can be used without a resonant primary circuit for the amplification of any time-varying signal. The main flaws of the UDT are the (normally) low primary m and the very long secondary wire required to ensure isolation of the input from the output. A single or double stack of E-I laminations seems to provide the optimum core geometry, all factors considered. At high frequencies it becomes practical to use ferrite cores with "center leg circuit" reluctances less than their "outer leg circuit" reluctances because the volts/turn of each winding can be made very high. Conventional transformer design techniques should be used once the basic UDT topology has been determined.

I have invented and developed the UDT on my own, without benefit of any knowledge of other free-energy devices, if they exist, which utilize the basic principles of UDT operation.

Please feel free to use this information as you desire. However, I hope that no one will attempt to patent and control this type of transformer. The time on Planet Earth is 15 minutes before midnight; there is no time left to waste. Free-energy technology is not meant to be controlled by vain and greedy parasites who wish to use a gift from God to exploit their fellow man. Free-energy technology represents a spiritual transition of the human race. Free-energy is not meant to be owned, period!


UDT EQUATIONS

Number of Turns = N

a = V(output)/V(primary)

V(Primary)/N(Primary) =
V(feedback)/N(feedback) = V(secondary)/N(secondary)/2

N(feedback) =
[N(secondary)/2] [(R of outer circuit)/(R of outer circuit)+(R of center circuit)]

a[N(Primary)] = [N(secondary)/2)-N(feedback)]

R = Reluctance = Y/mA

Copyright ©1996 University of Science and Philosophy. All rights reserved
------------------------------

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Lab/1135/invent.htm

[ovyyus]

Hi Jim,

Jensen was mistaken - the device doesn't work as he thought. A typical free energy 'invention' public release that does not go on to provide backup information to this effect.

Once again we hear the cries of eureka! - but where is the follow up information when the concept is found wanting? It's been 10 years since this device was released, ample time to settle the matter one way or the other.

No follow up information correcting the original claims, no independant replications and data, no move to experiment with or modify the design. Why? Because it doesn't work and the concept is fatally flawed. Inventors just don't like to admit when they are wrong, it seems.

Given these circumstances it's no wonder people are prone to think free energy is already a reality and we don't have it because it is suppressed.

[jim_mich]

ovyyus, a question about Jensen. Did Jensen ever realize that it didn't work? The reason I ask is one way to suppress an idea is to present paper proof that it will not work. Then spread the message that the idea has been proven to not work and the inventor must have been mistaken or a shyster.

I'm sure some on my list were overly optimistic. But I know they all weren't mistaken or shyters. And that brings up another subject. How many times has an inventor been wrongly persecuted for fraud? An inventor needs funds for research to turn an idea into a product. Maybe he is up front and open with a few people who help him financialy. But then he gets persecuted for taking peoples money because everyone 'knows' free energy is impossible and the government must 'protect' these people.

There are many ways to suppress an invention. The first step is just do nothing. If the inventor fails to produce repeatable results and his invention only works sometimes, time will take its toll and the idea or the inventor will die naturally. The second step would be disinformation stating the invention is a fraud and deter anyone from suporting it. The lab may have a fire or break in and important items destroyed. If a working model is produced the invention can be declared a threat to national security and the inventor ordered not to work on it anymore and not to disclose it to anyone. The inventor may be bribed to forget the invention. Subtle or violent threats may be made. If the inventor seeks partners they are targeted or the inventor jailed for fraud. At any time the authorities may raid the lab and confiscate papers and models using some bogus reason. If all else fails the inventor may have an accident.

Each situation is different. Local authorities may be 'pressured' to 'do something'. Most of those involved will think they are 'doing the right thing' or are just doing their job. Underworld or secret agents might be used in exstreme cases. The inventor will most likely never know who is behind it all.

Just my opionions...