Progress in the last weeks

  • Topic Is Sticky
  • Last Post 12 August 2017
Chris posted this 10 August 2017

I think as a group of interested individuals, we are progressing very well. In more than two years trying to share information in other places, we have progressed more in only a few months!

I think the massive amount of information I uploaded to the web may have helped some.

We now have more detailed information on Energy Machines than ever before, we have more hard data than ever before, and we have more seriously studding and progressing than ever before - Nice work Team.

The main threads, well worth studding:

Again a huge thanks to all Forum Members!


Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Zanzal posted this 10 August 2017

Yeah its a lot to take in but it seems very promising. If anyone is interested while researching parametric excitation, I also came across some effects that look interesting:

Negative Resistance/NDR
Electron Avalanche
Multipactor Effect

These effects are also associated with vacuum tubes and spark gaps and look like good candidates for free energy. Multipactor might be related to Correas PAGD device. I'm torn, part of me wants to play with parametric excitations, and the other with high energy spark gaps....

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Chris posted this 10 August 2017

Hey Zanzal, it is a fair bit to digest, but not all is important.

NDR, aka Negative Differential Resistance is a resistance we do see in these devices, however, it is not true Negative resistance, in other words, it never goes to Zero or below Zero.

One could say, anytime a Coil becomes a Battery, we have a Negative Resistance:

We are all no doubt familiar with this!  I remember when I first started studding Tom Bearden, I thought: "Wow I am never going to understand this stuff" but many years later I do.



Zanzal posted this 11 August 2017

To me a negative resistor is more of a mythical device. I'm skeptical such things exist. NDR is a very real phenomena that for simple devices seems to have value in inducing oscillations. Although from a standpoint of charging inductors, maybe the whole as voltage increases, current decreases might seem undesirable, but what might be important to consider what we learned from the Preva experiment is that the current in/out isn't the whole story. I get the impression from looking at the timeline that negative resistance seems to be one of those things that is being actively avoided. But with the recent advances in understanding the cause of NDR (the root cause of NDR was published recently), we would expect in the future to see more NDR devices.. Also, it is probably worth looking into the wikipedia article for Negative Resistance which shows the trumpet waveform.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
gnosticman posted this 11 August 2017

To me a negative resistor is more of a mythical device. I'm skeptical such things exist.

I really think you should review what Mr. HyIQ wrote above your last comment.  Note the diagram he included and replace the box that says "Negative Resistor" with a charged inductor coil - or, I could also say "with an inductor that has some current flowing through it".

If the coil has current flowing through it, any reduction in current will be resisted.  Therefore, it pushes current where there now is a deficit of current and acts like a battery -- just like the diagram that Chris posted.


It's basic Lenz Law.  Just turn it on its head so you add a "push" to the cycles and you have the parametric exitation oscillations that may result in OU.  (Though, I still have no idea of the specific rigs and/or setups to make this happen....still figuring out determination of resonance.)

It may simply be a matter of semantics.  You don't generally see an inductor thrown into the category of a NDR -- as a thyristor would be.  Therefore, an inductor (or LC tank, not sure the requirements) may be considered a "negative resistor" of sorts.


I'm probably just writing what you're already aware of, since you've read the Wikipedia article on negative resistance (which does discuss inductors a bit).  I guess I'm just saying the very use of the word probably depends heavily on perspective: when current is increasing an inductor will act as a regular resistor, but when it is decreasing the inductor will in fact act as a negative resistor. 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
gnosticman posted this 11 August 2017

I think as a group of interested individuals, we are progressing very well. In more than two years trying to share information in other places, we have progressed more in only a few months!

I think the massive amount of information I uploaded to the web may have helped some.

I was just thinking the same thing before I came to this thread.  (I was reviewing the site once again to see the recent changes/additions.)

I also was looking at your "Support" page and noticing that the only way you have to receive support from the community is advertisement banners.  I really think you should also include some cryptocurrency wallet addresses so that the community could donate (if we choose) to help support the hosting costs of this site.  (I wouldn't be able to give much, but I'm sure I'd send some Monero your way now and then.)  

And if you don't know already: electrical power production is directly related to the potency (and value) of most cryptocurrency.

Mr. OldScientist (the german guy who people have linked to in the past) has a membership program where he includes specific lessons for a monthly cost.  The problem to me is: 1) he assumes a certain level of expertise in more obscure electronic methodology and components, and 2) he doesn't tie things together or make it clear with his lessons.  

I would REALLY love it if you had a simple experimentation track that would end with some form of self-running OU device (even if it was only 40 watts).  That would definitely be something I would be willing to pay for, and I believe you would do a better job than OldScientist of explaining the step-by-steps and disclosing the "gotchas" that you wouldn't otherwise know without working with the tech for some time.  

Also, one of my biggest difficulties in experimentation is taking measurement of the higher voltage and/or higher current waves.  Especially when I am trying to do it at the same time (e.g., in a circuit where voltage and current are out of phase).

Anyway!  My point is:

  • Please accept cryptocurrency donations; and
  • Please consider a rudimentary teaching course (to clearly provide the knowledge you have accumulated) that is accessible to anyone with a basic scope, access to some basic parts (e.g., magnet wire of a few different gauges, a mosfet and 555 trigger circuit or just a well tuned LC oscillator, bread boards, etc.), a basic power supply (like a re-purposed old A/C adapter that puts out between 5 and 10 volts, maybe 1 - 10 amps), and with a willingness to learn / complete the tasks.  


  • Liked by
  • Chris
Zanzal posted this 11 August 2017

I really think you should review what Mr. HyIQ wrote above your last comment.  Note the diagram he included and replace the box that says "Negative Resistor" with a charged inductor coil - or, I could also say "with an inductor that has some current flowing through it".

Chris is correct in pointing out that a true negative resistor should be a power source. In the Preva experiment this does occur, where one coil can become a power source resulting in additional current through one path than is supplied by the source. So you are correct more or less except that redubbing this concept negative resistance because it fits well with the idea of a true negative resistor is not a good idea IMO. Of course, any time you have a break in ohms law, one might say its the result of negative resistance, so its not technically incorrect to use that argument, but since we know its the result of induction why refer to it as negative resistance? I just think it is imprecise... Of course I get annoyed by diagrams that show I flowing from anode to cathode. I'm just one of those weird people that like things to be physically consistent.

I'd like to think that we should be looking at NDR not as a source of power, but as a way to achieve certain effects that can prove valuable. Understanding and mastering the concept is working to complete the puzzle... The theory alone is just a small piece, I hope others are encouraged to experiment with NDR and share their information so that we can put more pieces together.. We each have different pieces we've worked on, some people have more of the puzzle completed.

Oh and I like your suggestion about putting together a step by step guide, if someone wants to do that. Another thing I would like to see community members do is to use their unique skill set to build specialized modules or kits or training guides deeply focused on helping people master a specific concept. I really liked gbluer's slayer exciter kit. An example of training guides might be a guide to transformer core materials. A guide to coil winding geometries that looks at the advantages and disadvantages, etc.

While I understand and even share the desire to have the end result now, having the end result without taking the time to do some self education may result in lost opportunities. My opinion is have a little patience, make some friends, share what you learn with others. And if you are really loaded and feel compelled to give Chris money, ask him for his email address and send him a gift using paypal.. FE and Crypto currency are mutually exclusive.. FE would eliminate the illusion that Crypto is anything but fiat. I'm sure people will not like me saying that, but if its any consolation Quantum Computing will likely upend the existing currencies first.

Chris has been very nice to share his ideas, concepts, and discoveries and giving attribution to others. Given how much he knows, I have little doubt he could make as much money as he wanted.. Anyway, I am not putting down your suggestions, to each their own. For me, Chris not being in it for the money is what gives him credibility. Though I am not saying he shouldn't be using his knowledge to make money, but to borrow a phrase, the left hand need not know what the right hand is doing.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • gnosticman
Chris posted this 11 August 2017

Hi Guys, awesome constructive posting.

Please remember, a Battery has an internal Resistance, as does a capacitor, normally called an ESR (Equivalent Series Resistance).

I have covered a very simple experiment, in my now out dated PDF: Guidelines to Bucking Coils on how the Resistance drops significantly in Opposing Mode, Partnered Output Coil configuration: Page 14 "The Flow of Current in a Wire when there is No Magnetic Field"

I agree with what you guys have written!

However, there are many problems associated with this and the surrounding circumstances. E.G: User GotoLuc replicated the Wistiti POC Toroid and failed. His failure was broadcast through the forum and as a result, others lost interest. GotoLuc was given advice, but chose to ignore it! Chose to completely ignore my repeated response to look at why he failed.

His Output Coils were not Opposing, he just had a regular Transformer. A critical aspect of this technology!

Needless to say, again this device works, but it does take some work! One needs to get the techniques I have so thoroughly covered in the Timing Thread and the Parametric Excitations of Electric Oscillations, one MUST remember the 1/4 Wave length scenario's I have covered in detail.

As you correctly point out Zanzal, in the Mr Preva Experiment, one element, one Inductor, becomes an Active Element. It becomes a Current Source, with a Negative Power Factor. In point of fact, it is now a Battery!

Also, please remember, I am still learning also! I am doing the best I can to get out what I have learned, share what we have all learned, and share as mush Hard Data as we can. But I am not always right, so please keep this in mind.

A Step by Step Guide: Gnosticman the best advice I can give is simply replicate the small experiments we have looked at here on this forum. The Mr Preva Experiment, The Wistiti POC ToroidThe MEG, The Floyd Sweet Early Work, all the very simple experiments.

Keep it simple, stick to the Layout (Don't change anything), keep the costs down while learning.

The key is, don't let a failed experiment determine the end result, that is success! Please always keep in mind, there is a set of requirements that must be met, and once met, you will meet with success!

We are all here to succeed, so ask, post your progress, post your questions, make suggestions.

Please, I ask you all, save your money for your own experiments!

Thank you though, I really do appreciate your thoughts!


gnosticman posted this 12 August 2017

Zanzal: I fully agree with almost everything you wrote [besides the bit about cryptocurrency since we already have ciphers hardened against quantum computing, and it may be fiat but it's far more democratized fiat than any other currency available ;-)].  I especially concur with the bit about patience and putting in the time for self-learning.  I prefer the experimental approach for learning, coupled with theory.  I like theory because it helps to guide my experimentation and exploration of the material.  That is the same reason I would want the step by step experiments.  Either way, though, no one can learn for me: I must do it for myself, and experimentation helps me acquire the intuitive understanding deeply.

Chris posted this 12 August 2017

“Hear, hear” - Gnosticman, you hit the nail on the head!

There is an understanding that is required before success can be achieved. Throwing a few coils together is only ever going to result in Failure. Nothing more. Unless you're really lucky...

I have added a short list to the forum's main page: Suggested Experiments

Once an understanding is achieved, then one can see why experiments may fail. Giving a Direction to the experiment! Then improvements making for progress, then making for success.