Sunday, January 29, 2017

Perpetual Technique is at the Heart of every Free Energy Machine, not Perpetual Motion.

Dear Physics Girl,

It is an abuse of the English language to call any machine perpetual motion when every true machine perpetually uses technique to harness free energy.

Take the lever of Archimedes. It is not perpetual, because we can explain it. Yet, it harnesses free energy of leverage to move objects heavier than what we could otherwise move. It is perpetually capable of doing this provided we don't stop for tea and the lever doesn't break! Butt it is definitely not a perpetual motion machine, because we can explain it using common principles of mechanical dynamics.

Just because energy is for free, doesn't mean we have to bad mouth devices we cannot explain.

Stanley Meyer's Dune Buggy made synthetic ammonia on demand by blending hydrogen |split from water| and mono-atomic nitrogen |from his air intake| by first ionizing these two gases with a high voltage positive charge in the vicinity of 70,000 volts - just like Herman Anderson did to his modified ICE (internal combustion engine).

Petros Zografos, Peter Painter, of Greece bubbles air through his electrolytic chamber to fulfill the 1807 quote of Sir Humphry Davy in which "electrolytic hydrogen will combine with nitrogen in the presence of water, while ordinary hydrogen will not."

Barbosa and Leal's Earth Captor could just as easily capture its Earth energy by magnetizing a very large mass of iron and use that as one plate of a capacitor to create a voltage difference with another iron plate much smaller than the first (through the use of the magneto-motive force) without using any watts, or the Earth, to do this.

We could go on and on with free energy examples which can be explained with common knowledge and, thus, dispel the notion that every machine designed to be against the profit motive of vested interests does not have to suffer the indignity of mislabeling via abuse of English.

In response to...

Saturday, January 28, 2017

Geomagnetism is not the only Source of B&L's Energy

The two sets of steel grounding rods must be close enough to electrostatically “feel” each other to register a voltage difference between them. And there must be a strong enough geomagnetic field flowing between them to “blow out” any chance for arcing to occur which could neutralize their voltage difference. A dry soil will also help in this regard.

It is their difference in mass which conveys this voltage difference between them acquired from the Earth and from their magneto-motive reactions to the oscillations built up between them originating from within the circuit of Barbosa and Leal. It is this circuit which is the source of oscillations throughout its entire design manifesting in all of its parts not the least of which lies between these two sets of grounding rods.

Geomagnetism prevents obliteration of voltage between these two sets of rods by supplying them with immunity from decay while magnetizing them at the same time in addition to magneto-motive force built up from controlled oscillations emanating from within the circuitry of Barbosa and Leal.

An analogy exists from within Richard Hackenberger's last edition of the EV Gray motor according to its assessment by Mark McKay.

Compressed air (analogous to the flow of geomagnetism) was forced through the interior of the EV Gray motor to prevent arcing between the aluminum chassis (lined on its interior surface with Teflon) and the aluminum supports underneath the rotor/stator coils. These aluminum supports were insulated from their immediate surroundings so as to become dielectrically isolated from all other parts of the motor (including the chassis whose voltage potential just happened to be in opposition to these inner support pieces). Yet, it was the electrostatic field surrounding the rotor and stator coils which fed the polarizing charge built up among these inner supports and the chassis of the motor so long as sufficient air kept blowing in through this motor's interior to prevent arcing and an elimination of electrostatic charge existing between the chassis and these aluminum supports. This electrostatic field contributed to the motor's overunity performance as an oscillatory response to this motor's operation. This response did not go unnoticed by the motor's output despite a lack of direct connection between these two “floating” capacitor plates and the circuitry of the motor.

The Electric Keeper of B&L has to be driven by something. The contribution of voltage supplied by the AC Sinewave Inverter is one source. The Earth is the other. The Earth provides isolation so that an electrostatic buildup can occur among the two sets of grounding rods: isolation via a dry soil, but most importantly isolation between two differing masses of ferromagnetizable material possessing a potential difference of magneto-motive force (not to be confused with electro-motive force although this latter will be the end result).

Tesla used magnetic fields to quench a spark gap. The Earth, here, does the same.

UnEarthing Barbosa and Leal's Earth Captor, version 28 Jan 2017

When is a machine not perpetual motion? When it can be convincingly explained! Eureka!

Are perpetual motion

machines possible?


So, at 3:26, if something is called a perpetual motion machine, then this implies that it can't be explained how it works, because it doesn't use any Laws of Physics, and thus does not work outside of fraud or trickery. Instead, it uses hyperbole by its creator or promoter to make up for solid analysis? So, all I have to do, or anyone else for that matter, is be able to explain why something "appears" to be a perpetual motion machine, but actually isn't, merely because it doesn't defy any Law of Physics (such as the Drinking Bird Toy example), because it can readily be explained in terms we already know from having studied Physics, Thermodynamics, Electrical Engineering, Chemistry, Mechanical Engineering, etc? So, this use of the term: "perpetual motion machine", by Physics Girl, helps me to understand why so often this term is used in my face by (sometimes) not very friendly people whose patience has worn so thin, that any discussion of "apparent" perpetual motion machines never gets started, or maintained for very long, simply because no one has thoroughly, nor accurately, analyzed any candidate machine for either debunking it or explaining it - and so, consequentially, it does not exist as a true machine, but merely exists as an artistry of magic and imagination? Whew! I feel much better, now, because I understand that just because some machine is called "perpetual motion" does not make it so. In fact, it is our collective misuse of language that perpetrates this dilemma. So long as a machine can't be explained, so long is it a candidate for perpetual motion, but still not yet a fully-fledged, bonefide perpetual motion machine. In other words, a non-perpetual motion machine is a definitive machine while a perpetual motion machine is not. All we've managed to do is define what a machine is and exclude everything else which lies outside of our collective ability to define machines. A perpetual motion machine's only flaw is that it has yet to graduate to the status of a true machine and specific instances of "apparent" perpetual motion have yet to be explained. Well, it's back to the drawing boards and the study of basic and advanced scientific theory... 

Since when is secrecy an advantage in an era of an enlightened democracy?

Making Barbosa and Leal mobile within the context of an EV.

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Attempt at Applying B&L to my EV, v.25-Jan-2017

The purpose of the interleaved capacitors is to get them to phase lock their charge and discharge cycles. This is very powerful. I learned it developing my application of Eric Dollard's analog computer in Longitudinal Magneto-Dielectric mode applied to Leon Ernest Eeman's biocircuit with fantastic results. Of course, the successful replication of B&L by Clarence is used to reference any modifications...

Monday, January 23, 2017

How do I gain expertise as a critique of Barbosa and Leal?

Apparatus for the Utilization of Radiant Energy,
by Nikola Tesla – patent # 685,957 – 5 Nov. 1901.

Based on my prior work of attempting to deduce how does Tesla's Special Generator operate, I chose to create an experiment in which my consciousness during sleep at night would enter into a device on its way to Earth ground from an Earthing bedsheet. I even sought and acquired a provisional patent, but – alas – no manufacturer I contacted wanted to sell it. So, I stopped development.

Then, along came a YouTuber by the name of Faithahora asking for some advice and consequentially inspiring me to revive my experiments.

The basic premise to my invention was the simple idea of wrapping the grounding wire around a magnetizable toroid. An additional feature was to wrap two toroids with the grounding wire, each in opposite directions (clockwise versus counter-clockwise), and connect them in a loop ...

… and, thus, create a loop similar to the primary windings surrounding the Electric Keeper in Barbosa and Leal's Earth Captor (although not entirely the same since my windings were inversely wound), ...

... plus attach a permanent magnet of very high strength to both of them (preferably, a neodymium), and sandwich them together, bury them in quartz sand in a plastic bucket lined with aluminum foil.

But now, with the help of knowing about Clarence's replication of Barbosa and Leal, I've managed to restart my sleep circuit experiments without the assistance of any manmade energy source: just the Earth and my body, plus electrical components. Here's my present setup...

If you ignore the top-most diode, and ignore the resistor with neon bulb along with its aluminum plate, then the only thing I know for sure is that the bottom diode must point towards the toroid. For if it does not, then it will feel like the life force is being sucked out of the body! But by facing it upwards (towards the magnetic influence of the toroid), it acts as a shield of immunity against unsavory influences of ill will entering into one's consciousness during sleep. Also, the grounding wire must be wrapped around a ferromagnetizable toroid. This is all I know. The remainder is experimental conjecture since I have not tried out alternatives to control for variations or placebos.

What I do know, but refuse to implement, is to surround the wire wrapped toroid with a layer of aluminum foil rather than employ the use of the continuous loop of heavy gauge wire – looped once through the center of the toroid, and the neon bulb with its little resistor; these are extras thrown in for no apparent reason other than: “why not?”. But aluminum foil covering the toroid sets up an intense kundalini awakening making it difficult to get the full quota of sleep at night or at any other time. That's why I learned to put a dielectric, such as quartz sand, between the aluminum foil enclosure and the grounding wire wrapped toroid/s to “dampen” the kundalini awakening energizing effect.

Here's how my present setup looks...

Sunday, January 22, 2017

You Guys and Gals make me proud,

Because you do what I cannot...

Some of us can do it all while some us can only do so much. So, if I analyze Clarence's successful replication of the Earth Captor of Barbosa and Leal to empower each and every one of us to think for ourselves and contribute in our own way, then I will have done my job to my satisfaction.
William Lyne doesn't have all the answers anymore than I do. He's speculating on Tesla's Special Generator, because there's not enough information to complete the story of wondering how it works. But, today, I'm adding one more similarity between his story and what we know about the Earth Captor of Barbosa and Leal: the analogy between the Electric Keeper and the very long ELF winding which William has speculated exists within Tesla's Special Generator:
Besides the similarity of the larger of the two masses of steel grounding rods in B&L versus “200 pounds of iron connected to the device, a full horsepower was added to it” in Tesla's Special Generator (quoting Mr. Lyne)....
“The windings on the oscillator were about 50 miles in length, and its inductive- capacitive system allowed it to operate on a frequency which was consistent with the earth’s, at a wavelength of about 925 miles, with a frequency close to 13.5 c.p.s., sometimes mentioned in relation to Naval ELF communications. Was this part of Tesla’s long wave system for “transmission of electric energy without wires”, which he said he had completed just prior to his death, as shown in the FBI documents? Is the Navy’s ELF (“Extremely Low Frequencies”) system not only for communications, just as Tesla said, but also for broadcasting energy to submarines—just as Tesla also said?”
I'm here to tell you that a long ELF winding is not necessary given what Clarence has managed to do: eliminate the Lenz effect within the Electric Keeper. This makes the Electric Keeper infinitely long, because it can't see any mile markers along the entire length of its function as a waveguide for its amperage. And because it self-loops, it's effectively infinitely long or a super-conductor of minimalist resistance for all intents and purposes. This makes it possible for an oscillating current – without voltage – to build up within this Electric Keeper driven by the additional voltage lying outside the Keeper generated between the two sets of grounding rods. Normally, this spontaneous formation of oscillations are analogously possible only within the context of very long transmission lines, especially if they're DC transmission lines.
But because this oscillation is kept within the parameters of the AC Sinewave Inverter's output via the voltage equalizing shunt between the line of plug #1 and the Electric Keeper, its oscillations are kept in phase with the output of the AC Sinewave Inverter and, thus, the Electric Keeper's oscillations are not allowed to become parasitic (the implication of parasitic oscillations of diminishing amplitude is that beat frequencies transfer energy from the primary oscillation to the secondary beats, killing the primary and killing the beats by consequential implication).
One more clue that B&L embodies the essential parameters of Tesla's Special Generator.
Just think of the Electric Keeper as a substitute for a Homopolar Disk. Then, it is easy to see that Barbosa and Leal's device supersedes William Lyne's supposition that an electro-mechanical watt-hour meter is the only analogy we have to imagine Tesla's Special Generator.

Overunity Archetype
The Overunity (archetype) is the apparent exploitation of one or more natural resources with little or no concern for whether these resources are limited or unlimited. Thus, much of an overunity archetype's success is owed to under-accountability despite its dependency on open systems' resourcing. But this is usually not a concern if the consumption of resource is sizably reused or recycled, either by the device or by nature, in an adequate amount of time prior to its next use by the device or by anyone else.
An ideal overunity archetype is one which operates in harmony with its environment — from which is derived its main source of archetypal energy — so that its resource does not become destroyed, nor lessened, by the operation of this archetype.


Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Gmail - [OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?

Gmail - [OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?

Vinyasi . <SNIP>

[OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?

Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:36 AM
To: Earl C
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List

“This is a perpetual motion machine” and thus we should ignore this idea and the person promoting it since it can't possibly operate as he/she predicts and he/she is not reputable since no professional would make such a claim had he/she bothered to take college level courses and passed their elementary exams.

Good point. Which machine are you referring to?

The Two-Stage Oscillator of Veljko Milković is not a mechanical self-runner in that it still requires the input of a well-timed push upon its weighted pendulum, or else the assistance of electromechanical devices (generators, motors, etc) placed as intermediate steps within the context of its purely mechanical two stages of oscillation in order to continue to oscillate. Thus, perpetuity is not possible with this mechanical example. And if the device is not properly tuned, parasitic beat frequencies arise canceling its magnified output and thus killing its overunity coefficient of performance.

When tuned properly, the oscillations of both systems act together to produce “harmonic reenforcement” of the energy stored in the combined oscillatory system, and very large force amplifications are possible. When left untuned, or improperly tuned, the oscillations of the two systems cause “beat frequencies” against one another, and the force amplification is dissipated in “parasitic oscillations.” Therefore, the machine can only function as a Mechanical Amplifier when it is built well AND tuned properly.

The Earth Captor of Barbosa and Leal is also not a perpetual motion machine in that it is dependent on an Earth-based series of grounding rods. And like most machines of this type: it is not a self-starter nor is it auto-adaptive – if the Earth between the two sets of grounding rods should lack a strong geomagnetism, or become sogged with water from a rainstorm, then the electrical output of this device drops dramatically requiring more grounding rods among the larger of the two sets leading directly to the Electric Keeper...

In this electrical example, some of the output is fed back to a battery charger to recharge the battery that runs the circuit which drives the Electric Keeper which collects additional input from the Earth network of grounding rods whose contribution is of an indeterminate limit (no one knows, precisely, how much contribution from the Earth is possible). But if Clarence's undisclosed photovoltaic alternative to this Earth-based electrical system is substituted in place of the grounding rods, then geomagnetism and remaining in a fixed location no longer apply. Hence, adaption to an EV is possible, although not practical – yet. This PV alternative is fed by a single light bulb; not by external light.

Now, after looking at the situation, I can see your point of view becoming more self-evident: the mechanical two-stage oscillator of Veljko Milković is self-contained and not surprisingly is not a self-runner (not a perpetual motion machine). And the Earth Captor of Barbosa and Leal is not self-contained, but must be tied to a system of two sets of grounding rods making this not a perpetual motion machine since the Earth is contributing a potential difference between the two sets of grounding rods. Only time will tell how Clarence's photovoltaic alternative to Barbosa and Leal manages to be a self-runner since he's not publicizing his schematic; he's only publicizing his initial test results.

So, the important question to ask is: is any device an energy amplifying system? And, where does it get its amplification from? Hence, perpetual motion – as a concept – is an impediment to understanding since perpetuity ignores exterior contributions of energy.

The only important questions for us to consider is: does it work? And, is it practical? And, will somebody else please build it for me? This latter is a contradiction to prevailing social standards of the economic model of corporate behavior. Anything not requiring too much regular maintenance checks from authorized dealers under warranty, nor replacement due to quick wear-out or boredom from jaded consumers requiring a new model every year to replace the last one which still runs perfectly well, does not fit the economic model of today's society. But you already know this.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Earl C wrote:

Cool animation, however, its a perpetual motion machine. 

All the energy imparted to the hammer must first be imparted to the pendulum.  The pendulum will lose speed (energy) when the arm it hangs from comes down as it passes bottom dead center.  That energy will have to be replace by pushing on the pendulum again.

The only thing this might enable would be you could get a lot of energy out of the hammer if you locked it in the down position, then added a little energy to the pendulum on each swing to get it swinging very high.  You could then release the lock on the hammer, the pendulum would pick the hammer up the next time it swung down and the hammer would strike as the pendulum reached the top of its swing.  There may be a few progressively lighter taps of the hammer as the pendulum slows down gradually.

The total energy of the hammer would still be no more than the little pushes to the pendulum added up.

TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)


From: "Vinyasi ."
To: "RAV4 EV Mailing List"
Sent: 18-Jan-2017 22:26:30 +0000
Subject: Re: [RAV4-EV] [OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?

I knew it was incomplete when I wrote it yesterday, but I was too tired to finish. So, this morning I added this to try and make the basic idea a little more accessible to the majority point of view.


To more fully explain this principle of operating an overunity electrical device on oscillating amperage, we must bring in a mechanical example resulting from the work of Veljko Milković.

Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 3:13 PM
To: David Miller
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List <>

Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 2:03 PM
To: David Miller
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List


On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:21 PM, David Miller wrote:
Autodidacts have difficulty ascertaining when they are wrong.

Every patent of this sort is rejected without scrutiny because they are absurd.
Over the last 100 years, thousands of attempts of this sort have served only
to identify people working beyond their limits.

Try to understand a simple spring first.  Enroll in a 1st semester college physics class and
you will, at least I hope, begin to use words like "free energy" without confusing it with
force, momentum or impulse.

 I can't be nice about this because you haven't done your homework.

-David Miller

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?
Local Time: January 19, 2017 12:46 PM
UTC Time: January 19, 2017 8:46 PM

Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:46 PM
To: David Miller
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List

Einstein is no Steinmetz. The former never had to deal with what the latter could readily tackle: troubleshooting Edison's parasitic transients affecting his ability to deliver DC power to his customers.

A more germane question is: can Einstein handle parasitic transients: explain them, and put them to good use?
Perpetual motion machines is definitely off topic since it has no relevance to parasitic transients oscillating within a transmission line, nor within the Electric Keeper of Barbosa and Leal's Earth Captor.

Throwing something out does not validate the same degree of intelligence as does integration. It's easy to reject dumb inventions. But how difficult is it to profit from challenges? An oscillating current is definitely a challenge, but not unworthy of investigation.

Of course, oscillating currents are not equivalent to either AC or DC despite their being born of either one.

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:35:57 -0500
From: David Miller
Subject: Re: [RAV4-EV] RAV4-EV Digest, Vol 172, Issue 7

Albert Einstein spent all his patent office time rejecting
perpetual motion machines just like this.

Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:33 PM
To: Arthur Keller
I disagree. The content is not Off Topic since it's very difficult for people to understand parasitic transients without recourse to simple analogies from mechanical dynamics.

What is a parasitic transient oscillating within a transmission line and why should it not always be discarded as either a nuisance or as a "speculative energy sources" presumed to be not relevant to EVs? It is just such a misunderstanding and under-appreciation of this topic that I feel preserves our doubt that having a self-charging EV is not a possibility worthy of my two-cents worth to state the facts to the contrary. This is not idle speculation. This is taking responsibility for the short-comings of pursuing a non-populist opinion by taking charge of its misunderstanding.

I apologize if I tax your patience with my thoroughness.

But if you don't want me to contribute, then so be it. I won't.

This is too relevant to keep private.

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:

Arthur Keller <>
Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:21 PM
To: "Vinyasi”
Cc: Earl C, ""

The subject of this string of messages was labelled “[OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?”  That topic in not OT.  But the content of the message *is* OT, about speculative energy sources.

It is clear that this string of messages has veered off into a topic not even tangentially related to EVs.  So please take this discussion off this list.

Best regards,

On Jan 19, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Vinyasi . <> wrote:
Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:12 PM
To: Earl C
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List <>

I'll agree with you since it's irrelevant to daisy-chained multiplicity of oscillations. 

The tell tale sign is that the hammer won't lift right away. It has to wait until the oscillations build up to an amplitude large enough to move the hammer. From that point forward, the hammer will move up and down with a force not equal to the force applied to the pendulum.

The hammer is doing all the work and suffering all of the losses. Not so with the pendulum. It's only losses are from air drag and the minimalist friction at its hanging point. In fact, we can bolt the hammer to a fixed condition without any impact upon the ability of the pendulum to swing with each well timed push in the right direction.

Despite any error on my part to think that acceleration of gravity has any relevance to this discussion, the important fact is that reaction against the hammer is not allowed to affect the pendulum. Thus, in this simple two stage oscillator, reaction does not fully equate to action within the context of the entire throughput. The pendulum's reactions to every push applied to it certainly affects the hammer at some point (but not right away), but the same cannot be said of the hammer: the hammer's reactions to gravity do not affect the pendulum's swings at all. This break in the continuity between reaction and action - from which the Law of Conservation of Motion is intimately connected - violates our obsession with applying this law to every circumstance regardless of relevance. This law always applies to singular closed systems; not to multiple open systems transferring energy to each other in a non-bidirectional fashion. Within the limited domain of each oscillator, reaction has to equal action. But outside of each and between them both, their interrelationship is not unlike that of an irreversible chemical reaction. This is where reaction is not allowed to affect action and conservation does not apply. 

I believe we risk discarding something which our imperialistic consciousness highly values: control, if we should accept the inherent limitation of applying this law to each circumstance. Parasitic transients in electrical transmission lines are a fact of life: their lack of response to our control violates our sense of rigor. Only by their suppression do we achieve control over them, because they refuse to acknowledge our cherished Law of Conservation. They are a law unto themselves. We can either reject their coexistence with us, or else learn to live with them in a manner that won't entirely defeat us so that we may benefit from the relationship.

On Jan 19, 2017 8:12 AM, Earl C wrote:
I only take the time to try to help one proponent of a perpetual motion scheme each year.  Its now 2017 so you're it for this year.  I've made a careful attempt to point out the problem with your scheme.  I'll make one more comment.

You're confusing force and acceleration with energy.  It's a common point people miss.

Energy is force applied over a distance (E = F X D).  The energy you'll apply to lift the hammer's head will be the same whether it comes from force applied to pushing the pendulum through part of it's arc several times or whether it comes from just pushing down on the hammer's tail or pushing up on the hammer's head.  The only thing that may be different from these 3 approaches is that some may require less force but over longer distance applied.

I recommend you make a real version of this and try it instead of just an animation.

Best Regards,


From: "Vinyasi ." 
To: "Earl C"
Cc: "RAV4 EV Mailing List"
Sent: 19-Jan-2017 05:43:52 +0000

We have four different forces at work here and they're not all equal...
  1. The force of one's little finger periodically applied at the right moment of the pendulum's upswing and in the right direction to enhance its upward motion.
  2. The accumulating force of the ever increasing arc of the swinging pendulum.
  3. Acceleration, due to gravity, of the pendulum reaching maximum thrust at the bottom of its swing. This momentary acceleration of the pendulum eventually becomes large enough to lower the tail end of the hammer and raise its head. Upon the pendulum's deceleration as it rises upwards, the tail end of the hammer rises thus ...
  4. Allowing the hammer's head to fall and strike the anvil beneath it using the accelerative force of gravity.

Vinyasi . <SNIP>
Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 7:39 PM
To: Earl C <SNIP>
Cc: RAV4 EV Mailing List <>
It's not a cool animation, because my text did not make clear that this is not a perpetual motion machine along with the significance of the missing element in the animation: that of a person's little finger periodically pushing the weighted pendulum to gradually arrive at its full breadth of arc and maintain it there (should that person fall asleep, OOPS, there goes perpetual motion out the window). Only when sufficient arc breadth is reached (very quickly in an oscillating electrical circuit by comparison to this mechanical analogy) will the momentum of the swinging pendulum be sufficient to move the hammer up and down with a force equivalent to that of an equivalent hammer without a person gently pushing a non-existent weighted pendulum. The loss of a human 'helper' would avoid the use of a weighted pendulum responding to gravity.

It doesn't sound like you've ever pushed a child in a swing, or else have forgotten what it's like to get yourself up to a full swing on the same amount of force imparted to each swing by your legs and swinging torso, alone? This input of energy is a fixed amount with each periodic swing.

And the result is not immediate in the case of this hammer analogy. You have to wait until the breadth of oscillations reaches a certain critical minimum before any action upon this hammer could begin to happen. In the meantime, the hammer will just sit there despite the tiny swings of the pendulum - although you might be able to see the hammer wiggle a little, but surely not lift to any significant height.

I agree that the pendulum will slowly lose its momentum as it slows down and comes to a dead halt should no one be there to periodically lend a little push with their pinkie finger. That's a given.

And there is a very significant requirement, here, of accurate timing. Each periodic push to the weighted pendulum - using nothing more than a little finger - must be timed to coincide with the precise moment when the pendulum is rising upwards. If pushed at any other time or in the wrong direction, the contribution of the individual's finger will go to waste resulting in slowing down the pendulum's swing rather than broadening its arc (along with acquiring a sprained finger!).

I hope you have not forgotten about gravity's contribution to this energy equation? The fact is, it's considered 'free', because we don't have to provide the gravity - just make use of it and pray that it doesn't suddenly, and without warning, disappear.

For example, a sail boat also operates on free energy. The sailor does not provide the wind, but merely makes use of it and prays for a fair wind and avoidance of the doldrums.

This lunch is not entirely for free since the skillfulness of sailors and designers of electrically oscillating circuits have to know what they're doing to take limited advantage of forces which are not entirely under control of their circuits, and only within the context of their respective devices. The source of their device's 'free' energy is outside of their device and maintained only by the Grace of God, so to speak (or to whomever you wish to give thanks to).

Another analogy is a river powering a water wheel setup to grind corn: its owner and all of the local inhabitants will pray (if they're smart enough not to take their livelihood for granted) that their river won't move or dry up!

So, there's nothing free here. Just free in the sense that we don't always have to provide everything that we make use of. Thus, results of COP (that's an acronym for: coefficient of performance - not to be confused with percentage of efficiency) can be greater than one (and even as high as several hundred or more in some cases with some overunity devices) indicating how much contribution from the device's environment has managed to offset the device's internal losses (measured by percentage of efficiency) due to friction, and poor design.

So, to reiterate, the only input of energy in an oscillating circuit - be it mechanical or electrical, etc - is to cover losses due to friction, etc. Any other source of energy contributing to a device's net gain could be far greater than our contribution, because sources outside of our control are not dependent upon our authorship.

The lesson here is that we don't always have to micromanage everything in our lives unless we want to do things the hard way.

Take Huckleberry Finn, for instance...
Huckleberry Finn didn't pay anyone to whitewash his family's fence. He was too smart for that. He convinced his helpers to pay himself, instead, for the privilege to whitewash his family's fence! Talk about an overunity situation with a COP of greater than one, ergo: energy in does not equal energy out since Huck was able to take a nap and end up richer than before he embarked upon this chore assigned to him. Thank God his parental guardian did not impose any restrictions on 'how' to perform this chore!

You imposed upon me a very good question. And I revel in the opportunity to respond to it. It is a common mistake among great intellects who get too close to their subject matter to fail to see the bigger picture surrounding the intense interest they have in their subject along with the failure to see their subject's dependency, or interactions, with the environment. Every surfer knows the value of not forgetting the contribution the environment places upon a surfer's experience. It could be his/her last free ride down a wave if the surfer doesn't take the immense size of the wave into account!

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Earl C wrote:

Cool animation, however, its a perpetual motion machine. 

All the energy imparted to the hammer must first be imparted to the pendulum.  The pendulum will lose speed (energy) when the arm it hangs from comes down as it passes bottom dead center.  That energy will have to be replace by pushing on the pendulum again.

The only thing this might enable would be you could get a lot of energy out of the hammer if you locked it in the down position, then added a little energy to the pendulum on each swing to get it swinging very high.  You could then release the lock on the hammer, the pendulum would pick the hammer up the next time it swung down and the hammer would strike as the pendulum reached the top of its swing.  There may be a few progressively lighter taps of the hammer as the pendulum slows down gradually.

The total energy of the hammer would still be no more than the little pushes to the pendulum added up.

TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch)
From: "Vinyasi ."
To: "RAV4 EV Mailing List"
Sent: 18-Jan-2017 22:26:30 +0000
Subject: Re: [RAV4-EV] [OT] Why did I buy my RAV4 EV 2002 second hand but in otherwise mint condition?
I knew it was incomplete when I wrote it yesterday, but I was too tired to finish. So, this morning I added this to try and make the basic idea a little more accessible to the majority point of view.
To more fully explain this principle of operating an overunity electrical device on oscillating amperage, we must bring in a mechanical example resulting from the work of Veljko Milković.
The oscillating pendulum is using gravity to perform most of the work. All that is additionally needed is to push the weighted pendulum with a pinkie finger to gradually build up momentum until there is sufficient energy in each swing of the pendulum to rock the arm of the heavily weighted hammer. The swinging pendulum represents oscillations which tie up the energy contributed by one's pinkie, but also reduces the amount of energy needed to rock the hammer's arm. The swinging pendulum represents what would have been a problem had it been a parasitic transient in the midst of an electrical transmission line. But instead, here it is being used to reduce work that we have to do to make the intended outcome happen. The work of one's little pinkie finger represents the offset we have to make up for the frictional losses of the bearings and air drag imposed upon all of the moving parts of this system. But the energy required to rock the hammer's heavy arm is all done by gravity acting upon the pendulum. We need not impose any other input of power to make the hammer rock. Bravo!
This is a mechanical equivalent of an oscillating circuit. This is free energy and overunity, also known as: energy entering into the system does not equal energy coming out. The Conservation Law of Physics has not been violated since no one is going to bill Mother Nature for Her gravity contributing to making this into a very profitable enterprise. Yet, we can pray that She keeps it up!

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Vinyasi wrote:
This is way off topic and hard to take seriously by most people, but. ....

I feel pretty good about myself for theoretically solving a mystery. So,
here goes. ....

I bought my classic for two reasons: I wanted to contribute to what has
proven itself to be the best solution for going green despite the
inconvenience of driving an electric car in today's world of politically
correct bondage to the gas pump  (I administered a protest-oriented bike
ride over a decade ago protesting our dependency on foreign oil). But I
also wanted the personal inconvenience to serve as motivation  (as a
diehard activist) to see if I could do something  (no matter how small
or insignificant) to resolve and promote a better way to integrate
electric cars into our society.

On a side note, I finally relented and paid for a storage unit for my
car to protect it from the rodents chewing up my car's wiring since I
don't have a garage and my carbag lasted less than a year before its
zipper jammed in several places from dirt clogging its teeth in several

Needless to say, I don't drive it too often any more except for the
obligatory charge, drive and recharge once in a while.

I bought my car three years ago. But I lost my son six years ago.
Without a child to homeschool, I decided to teach myself electrical
theory -- something I had fastidiously avoided in college for my disgust
of equations and the apparent lack of teaching mere basic theory  (an
overview of sorts -- kind of like the equivalent to music appreciation
but in the realm of electrical engineering). That would have been nice
to take as a college course if it ever existed. But I settled on
teaching myself by - of course - lots of reading, going to conferences,
making contact with a couple savvy engineers, and perform a few

One mythological story of Nikola Tesla intrigued me to resolve the
missing pieces which has left most people wondering if the story is
nothing more than a work of fiction. But something convinced me
otherwise once I dug into the history of this particular premise.

A long time ago in a land not so far away  [here, in this country, the
United States, in fact] telegraph operators were having problems manning
their stations on days in which an anomaly repeatedly occurred: they
couldn't go near their telegraph terminal - much less touch the key - on
certain days in which the whole system was surcharged with an enormous
excess of energy.

Fast forward a few decades to the turn of the last century when the two
giants of promoting electricity, Edison and Tesla, were competing in New
York city for customers. Tesla had his transmission system based on AC,
while Edison was busy with DC.

But Edison was losing ground. AC travels long distances without
dissipation better than DC. But there's a worse nightmare saddling DC,
both its transmission for delivering power as well as for delivering
messages: the risk of parasitic transients building up somewhere within
the transmission line. They don't suck up energy from the system so much
as they tend to blow up transformers and thus initiate blackouts.

Well,. ....
Along comes a few people who have made a diligent task of studying the
problem of oscillating transients for the intention to do more than
merely prevent them, but actually go further and harness them as a
source of so-called free energy, so-called - at least in this case -
because the energy is not free - it was paid for - but paid for on the
expectation  (and pricing structure) that it would be used merely once
with the expectation that more energy would be demanded by us customemers
and priced accordingly.

Well, what if a circuit could be designed that captured energy for the
purpose of its reuse? Thus, the true cost would merely be for losses due
to friction, etc.

Such appears to be the case with a number of inventions spanning nearly
a century:

Nikola Tesla's Special Generator, as reported to us by William Lyne in his
book, entitled: "Pentagon Aliens" and also demonstrated by a coworker of a
friend of mine over ten years ago without any explanation to speak of other
than it worked with aluminum, copper and iron - just like Tesla's - and
thus has been renamed by us as: Tesla's Tri-Metal Generator.

Tesla's demonstration of a 1913 Pierce-Arrow luxury car (weighing in at over
4,000 pounds!) driven by an AC motor plus Tesla's mysterious circuitry
achieving normal highway speeds.

The Nazi's use of Tesla's invention in some of their U-boats giving them a
range of 30,000 miles. This is where it gets interesting since the one solid
clue we have of this technology is William Lyne's quotation of a Mr. Dort, sr.
who worked with Tesla in developing this system for the Nazis (Tesla was short
of funds at this stage of his life and didn't mind too much working for the
Germans since they had already stole some of his patents, outright). To with...
"For every 200 pounds of iron added to this device, one horsepower output is

My friend's coworker ran a medium sized motor from a project box the size and
shape of a notebook. The only indulgence this coworker made to my friend over
a decade ago for sharing some insight into its construction was the cryptic
answer that it incorporated the use of copper, iron and aluminum in its
construction. My friend never saw this coworker again.

Jim Murray's use of synchronous generators to save Bethlehem Steel of Michigan
thousands of dollars a month for saving them from the price gauging which the
local power company had been performing on billing the company for the use of
power to merely warm up the magnetic field coils on their rock moving
equipment's motors. This power is eventually returned back into the grid (minus
any losses) when  the motors shut down. But that didn't stop the power company
from forcing  Bethlehem Steel to shut down their synchronous generator when Jim
Murray left them to pursue other work.

Jim went to develop his Dynaflux Alternator, his SERPS switching technology,
and his transforming generator to continue to develop this concept of recycling
our use of electrical energy.

Along comes two young inventors from the Portugese district of Brazil who have
managed to design a circuit suitable for either AC or DC output which uses
the potential difference between two sets of grounding rods to drive the
amperage within a simple continuous loop of wire in the heart of their circuit
to supply the circuit's load with whatever amount of energy is required - the
caveat being that the wire gauges have to be thick enough to not overheat!
The fact that weak geomagnetic locations require the user to compensate by
enlarging the mass of one of the two sets of grounding rods (each set is
connected in series to all other rods within its set), plus the fact that the
only English speaking person (who is located here in the US) who has been the
first to successfully replicate this device insists that all of these rods
must be copper clad steel. In other words, Tesla's quote of increasing his
Special Generator's output by increasing the mass of its use of iron is
refected here. This is the best I can do to hint at a possible reincarnation of
Tesla's Special Generator in the guise of the Earth Captor of Barbosa and Leal,
but close enough to have me all enthused!



My Resumé GoFundMe

As Maharishi said, "laughter is the highest state of consciousness."
Keep laughing, dear Vinyasi. It's a beautiful sight when you do. --- Marty Zucker, coauthor of "Earthing".


As Maharishi said, "laughter is the highest state of consciousness."
Keep laughing, dear Vinyasi. It's a beautiful sight when you do. --- Marty Zucker, coauthor of "Earthing".