GET VISIBLE! Advertise Here.

Find Out More

Bedini - The Myth Of 'Free Electricity'

By John Bedini
From http://www.icehouse.net/john1/intro.html
5-27-16
 
This is also the basics for Tesla's
energy shuttle circuits

The two most important electrical energy

statements ever made!!

Gabriel Kron 1901 to 1968

Kron, Gabriel. "...the missing concept of "open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in
branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell — engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum-
point, the 'ground').  That discovery of open-paths established a second rectangular transformation matrix... which created 'lamellar' currents..." 
"A network with the simultaneous presence of both closed and open paths was the answer to the author's years-long search."  Gabriel Kron, "The
Frustrating Search for a Geometrical Model of Electrodynamic Networks," Journal unk., issue unk., circa 1962, p. 111-128.  The quote is from p.
114.

Kron, Gabriel. .  "When

only positive and negative real numbers exist, it is customary to replace a positive resistance by an inductance and a
negative resistance by a capacitor
(since none or only a few negative resistances exist on practical network
analyzers.)"  Gabriel Kron,
"Numerical solution of ordinary and partial differential equations by means of
equivalent circuits."  Journal of
Applied Physics, Vol. 16, Mar.
1945a, p. 173.

EIGENVALUES AND EIGENFUNCTIONS

Let it be assumed as an example that the V function is a potential well (Fig. 4a). Then in
the network the corresponding positive resistances
assume either a constant or a zero
value as shown in Fig. 4b. In practice it is sufficient to extend the network to, say,
twice the width of the
potential well on either side.

Let now a d.c.(or a.c.) generator be inserted

anywhere in the network parallel with one of the negative resistances (inductors), as shown. If the
values of all the negative
resistances -E?x (capacitors) are simultaneously varied by the same amount, it will be
found that the current (reactive
current) in the
generator varies and at some value of E?x becomes zero.

It should be noted that while a current (reactive current) flows in the generator the
circuit does not satisfy the differential equation, since at one
point in the
network (where the generator is connected) the currents do not add up to zero (as required
by the equation) but to the generator
current. That is, while a current flows in the
generator, the voltages ? do not represent solutions of the differential equation. Hence, only those
network conditions are of interest in which the
generator current is zero.

Now a value E of the negative resistances, at which the

generator current becomes zero, represents a state at which the circuit is self-supporting
and has a continuous existence of its own without the presence of the generator,
as the negative resistances just supply the energy consumed by
the positive resistances. (If the circuit contains
inductors and capacitors, the circuit is a resonant circuit and it oscillates at its basic
frequency.) E
is then an eigenvalue En, while the voltage distribution
across the capacitors (Fig. 4c) gives the corresponding eigenfunction
?n.

When the generator current is positive the circuit draws energy

from the source, and when the current is negative the circuit pumps back energy
into the
source. At zero generator current the circuit neither
gives nor takes energy, and theoretically the generator may be removed. All values
of
E at which the current crosses the axes and becomes zero are eigenvalues of the
equation and the corresponding voltage distribution curves are
eigenfunctions. When the
energy level E overflows the well, the discrete spectrum of eigenvalues changes into a
continuous spectrum and the
generator current is zero at all greater values of E.

When the energy E changes sign, the negative resistances become

positive resistances and at no value of -E may the circuit be self-supporting (as
it
contains only positive resistances). That is, the equation has no negative
eigenvalues.

THE STATISTICAL MEAN OF OPERATORS

To bring the measurements at the different energy levels to the same base, it is necessary
to normalize the measured ? values so that the new
values of ? satisfy the equation

The measured ? functions are normalized by plotting the square of ?. If the area under the
curve is 1/N2, all values of ? are multiplied by N. Then
N? is the normalized
?. (Actually N may contain an arbitrary phase ei? .)

The statistical mean of an operator a for a state ? is defined as

Since (a?x)? is a current (reactive current) flowing through an admittance, ?*(a?x)? is

the power (reactive power) in a single admittance. Hence
the total power in a complete set
of similar admittances, namely,

represents the statistical mean of the corresponding energy operator. That is:

1. The total power in all the vertical negative resistors is the average value of
E. (That is, E itself, since ? is an eigenfunction of H).

2. The total power in all the vertical resistors is the average value of the
potential energy V.

3. The total power in all the horizontal resistors is the same as the total
power in the vertical units, representing the average of the kinetic energy
T = p2/
2m.

That is, the total power in all positive resistors is the same as the total power in all
the negative resistors, or

THE THIRD MODEL

Let the wave equation be divided by i?c, where ?c = v? = (E/ h),

and multiplied by ?x:

In the present case:

1. The kinetic energy operator T is represented (Fig. 5) by a set of equal

inductors in series, whose inductance L1 is (2m/ h2)?x.

2. The potential energy operator V is represented by a set of unequal coils in

parallel, whose inductance L2 is 1/ V?x.

3. The total energy operator - E is represented by a set of equal capacitors in

parallel whose capacitance is now h?x. (In the second model the
capacitance was the
unknown E?x.)

The operand ? is again represented by voltages and the result of the operation a? by the
same currents as in the first model. Their variation in time
now is sinusoidal, with 2 p fc
= ?c.

Instead of varying the magnitude of the capacitors, now the

frequency of the generator is varied, thereby varying the admittance of the capacitors,
h?c
= E (and those of the inductors). Again when the generator current becomes zero the
circuit is oscillatory and self-supporting and the network
represents a stationary
solution of the equation. The corresponding eigenvalue is E = h? = h(?c
)2, rather than h?c, because of the simultaneous
variation of the
reactance of the inductive coils. The eigenfunctions ? of the model and of the equation
are, however, identical.

As the currents in the horizontal inductors are (h2/2mi?c )??/ ?x,

the results of an operation on ? by the momentum operator p = (h / i)?/ ?x are
these
currents divided by h2/ 2m?c. Hence, in the third model the momentum
operator p may be represented by a set of equal horizontal coils with
inductance L = ?x/h?c.

One slight disadvantage of this third model is that as the energy E changes sign, the
reactance of the capacitor j?ch cannot change signs. Since in
most cases no
eigenvalues exist in the negative energy range, this disadvantage is of little
consequence. Of course, the second model with fixed
frequency and variable capacitors
works in all cases, since the capacitors simply become inductors when E changes sign.

THE FREE PARTICLE IN ONE DIMENSION

An interesting special case occurs when the potential V is zero everywhere. The
one-dimensional equivalent circuit of such a free particle is a
conventional transmission
line extending to infinity in both directions (Fig. 6) in which the series inductance is
2m ?x/ h2 and the shunt capacitor
is h?x.

It is well known that such a transmission line may maintain a standing wave at any
frequency ?=?c between zero and infinity drawing no current
from the generator.
That is, the positive energy values form a continuous spectrum. If the transmission line
is considered as the second type of
model with variable capacitors, then at negative
energy values E the capacitors also become inductors and the line cannot maintain a
standing
wave. The corresponding free particle also has no eigenvalue at the negative
energy levels.

MODELS ALONG CURVILINEAR AXES

The three-dimensional Schrödinger equation for a single particle is

where ?2 is the Laplacian operator in

curvilinear coordinates.

In order to establish a physical model for it, it is necessary to change it to a tensor

density equation. (2)

The above equation in orthogonal curvilinear coordinates may be changed to a tensor

density form by multiplying it by h1h2h3 = vg giving

If the equation is multiplied through by ?u1?u2?u3, it

represents the surface integral of grad ? around the six faces of a cube of space with
volume
h1h2h3?u1?u2?u3.
The width ?ua may be arbitrary and different in the three directions.

The corresponding equivalent circuit is shown in Fig. 7. For a free particle (V=0) it
represents a generalization of the conventional one-dimen-
sional transmission line to
three dimensions.

It must be remembered that for a period during the 1960s Kron had refused to publish. Then he began to publish again, but very cautiously. Thus
he was reluctant to take my advice about the new introduction. During two successive Saturdays of intensive discussion about this matter he told
me that he was leaving his scientific colleagues behind and entering a new world, that hisnew discoveries would not be understood unless fully
elaborated, and if elaborated would be plagiarized. In any event, he had no intention of tipping his hand until he had fully tested his new theories.
As I read the new introduction, I find that he temporized. He did put his work in the perspective of its growth and development and did indicate
the direction in which he was moving, but all in great generalities. These generalities may be informative, but if they are not then one would have
to fall back on a comparison of the preliminary drafts of the new introduction - if such drafts are still extant.

We know that with the successful development of "Diakoptics" Gabe turned his attention to new and greater challenges, to the comprehension of
phenomena of a highly complex nature - multidimensional phenomena. From a philosophical point of view each such phenomenon would be
considered complex because each was conceived as constituting a system not only of manifold operations, but of manifold heterogeneous
operations. The prototype of this increasingly bold speculation and research was Gabe’s "crystal computer or vest pocket computer," as it was
sometimes jokingly referred to, which utilized the simultaneous and heterogeneous activity of a crystal under stimulation of a single electric
source. The important steps here seem to have been the perception of an analogy between the optical properties of a crystal under stimulation of a
single source of light and the mathematical properties of an electromagnetic field surrounding an electric current, together with the successful use
of topology to understand and manipulate them.

I say that the "crystal computer" constituted a prototype because I believe this work was successfully accomplished in all its theoretical aspects
long before his death, for Gabriel Kron showed me what he considered to be proof of the superiority of his new instrument. By this time,
however, something else had entered his mind. I suspect that with the theoretical background of his work in developing the "crystal computer" it
was not a big jump for the mind of a  Gabriel Kron to begin thinking of the universe itself as a crystal. I also suspect that what he was working on
when he died was a general theory applicable to the universe as a whole system. After all the universe is a complex phenomenon in which many
heterogeneous activities take place simultaneously. Perhaps Gabe had more than a vague intuition about short-cuts for interplanetary travel.

But what was Gabriel Kron up too that he was very cautious about?

I have been working in the energy field for over 30 years, I have come to the conclusion that there is no "Free Electricity". There
is only a potential radiant charge that makes up a dipole. 

 This energy makes up everything we

touch and use in our electrical circuits as we know them. The electrical circuits as we
know
them are flawed, meaning they burn up the dipole that is free in nature.

If you kill the dipole you loose the energy. The dipole killer is the electron  current in the circuit. So therefore the term free
electricity  only applies to those that have done  away with the current or have figured a way to block it from completing it's path
through the circuit. Their are no meters to measure this radiant current, and when you catch it, it has the power of the universe
and beyond. Good luck in your research . Their is only energy from the vacuum, known as radiant energy. to find out more about
this you need to read Tom Bearden's book.
 

These patents are the only key to

unlocking this radiant energy.

Perhaps it is better in this present world

of ours that a revolutionary idea or invention instead of being helped and patted be
hampered and ill-
treated in its adolescence- by want of means, by selfish interest,
pedantery, stupidity and ignorance; that it be attacked and stifled ;  that it pass
through bitter trials and tribulations, through the heartless strife of commercial
existence. So all that was great in the past was ridiculed,
condemned, combatted,
suppressed - only to emerge all the more powerfully, all the more triumphantly from the
struggle.  

 N. Tesla

"Today's scientist have

substituted mathematics for experiments and they wander off through equation after
equation and eventually build a
structure which has no relation to reality."

Nikola Tesla

Here in the Tesla patent once again we see

the use of radiant energy. As I
have said above their is only a radiant current, and this current is passed
through the system by the capacitor and only a capacitor. The next step in the system is the
amount of time it takes to charge this capacitor, and
then the amount of time it takes to discharge the capacitor
for they all have their own time,
and each one of these things must be in sync in their
own time.

It is so funny to sit here now and think

that Benjamin Franklin had it all at his finger tips, if he would have used the capacitor
the correct way.

It's the most simple thing in nature to do, and the hardest for mankind to understand because of the mind blocks. Their is no math for radiant
current, for are
instruments do not measure it. It's even sick to see meters all over these machines,
because their is no possible way to measure the
Aether flow. The people have had it all along and yet a little "meter" has
stood in their way from the truth. Meters only measure wasted
energy in
the system.

Yes here it is, THE REAL McCoy

(all patents are core technology, now using inverted radiant

circuits)

BTI systems inc.

Radiant currents are just like Tesla

said a gas in nature

the transformation converter is the

Capacitor.

An answer to David Thomson

David this is great stuff and I admire your

work, but the dipole we are talking about are two different things. first of all the math
does not apply
since their are no equations for it. The math of today's scientist only
runs you around in equation after equation, "just like Tesla said". All are
electrical equations are only designed to burn energy in current. I understand the The
Casimir effect, but this does not have anything to do with
the
charge of a magnetic moment. this does not take any high voltage since the stress field is
always there. Our circuits are designed to split the
magnetic moment before it becomes
magnetic, this is where the radiant comes from. If we go back to Tesla and what he was
doing in the end we
find out he was studying through small experiments how this Radiant
gas behaved, and what shapes it worked best with. His work with different
lattice was very
detailed and this is where The Casimir effect comes into
play. As for the Radiant work their only three patents by Tesla  which
discusses
anything, and no math. The only thing we have to use at this time is VQ without the I (current) but it should be Vr =Q ( voltage from
the split Radiant = Charge) The only other factor is TIME to get the Vr. If a long time is required to collect charge in this split then C (capacitor)
should be very small so that
the highest V (voltage) is
obtained. If the Vr is very
quick in splitting this magnetic moment then C can be very big.
Also frequency of this magnetic moment is very
important. You must release the Radiant voltage into a radiant current de-void of any
electrons.
So what is charging the batteries in My system is pure Radiant Current. This means that since their
is no electrons to pile up on the Ions of the
battery nothing can move, this forces the
Ions to change their state and they move on their own, this is nothing more then a
impedance shift, if
you have a low impedance in the battery you have real power, if you
have high impedance in the battery you have nothing. Nature takes time to
move at her own
rate, so the battery may take a long time to charge but charge it will with a different
form of energy. This brings me to a different
point, That all that is driving the
switching solid state wise is a difference in potential across the battery inverted. This
then means that the whole
flow theory is out the window, meaning that the semiconductors are working on potential charge de-void
of electrons so their is no heat generated
in the semiconductor. As for the battery it
fill's in it's own electrons. I  must say that Tesla was right.

John

Answer Two

David and Darren

First of all with all due respect and

admiration for your work, I must still state that My work has nothing to do with "Strong Charge", or
Resonance in our circuits. My work is based
on real working models, and these real working models are saying something much different
than
what the equations are saying. My magnetic moment is based on what is occurring in
the front end circuit before the normal current builds up,
and then to capture the radiant voltage and then split this voltage
into a current de-void of electrons to charge the batteries.  So here we differ
again I'm not looking
for electrons to power anything, in your model you can not get away from the electrons. My
models are telling me that the
equations must be revised to work properly with My model. I
not only have one model that is working I have 30 that do the same thing plus the
solid
state models. Radiant energy goes away when electrons enter the picture. Read very carefully what Tesla said about the power stations when
they
were DC powered, I think you will catch it. I have never seen
anybody that did science right do the equations before they had a working
model on the
bench.  Also it's not "Professional" to speak of another fellow scientists
working in the field as regurgitated Bearden concepts, when
nobody has check the
references to find out if he is right. I have worked with Tom Bearden for 30 +years and
those theories come from my bench
models that are working. Now others are getting to first
base and soon they will be on third base, soon you will see these machines powering
loads
and charging their own batteries, then where will all the math models sit? If my patents
were understood it would be found out that the
Mono Pole motor is not a Motor, it is a mechanical Radiant oscillator with a one to
one transformer inductively triggered. being a one to one
transformer you can not get more
out then you put in, unless something else is flowing through it, it does not fit the math
models, so this washes
the forward converter theory down the drain. I say this, if I take
your model and understand it correctly, everybody should have their lights
burning right
now! What bench model do you have running on this theory?   I say these things
to you with all do respect for your hard work.

John Bedini

These pages are for serious

researchers only, doing serious work. I do not have time to answer
questions on where you buy magnets or how you
wind coils. You must be an engineering type
of person and have machine experience. In the future I will be putting up pages on
other systems
according to Tom Bearden's new book.

Energy From The Vacuum

Concepts &Principles
You
may order this book from the Tom Bearden Website at

www.cheniere.org/

I will be adding experiments, with the concepts of  Nathan Stubblefield's work on ground wave transmission. I have completed my test and have
had very good results with over 10 miles  distance, even through the water pipes, rivers, streams in the local area. The circuits involved in these
transmissions involve  vacuum tubes  and  high voltage. The researcher is warned that if  you have no experience in  ground wave radio
transmission and FCC rules and regulations, stay away from these experiments. I take no responsibility for " your " actions, and you experiment
at your own risk. If you cause interference to anything, you must stop your experiments, because the fine will be something you will never forget.
By doing these experiments, you assume all responsibility. You will be shocked to see that you need no RF ( Radio Frequency) whatsoever. In the
days of Nathan Stubblefield, they did not even understand the vacuum tube, so Nathan built many induction transformers to do this
communication. If the experiments are understood , one may find that a whole new experimental field is now open. By phasing the
transmission. it is possible to generate 3D special systems in sound and voice.
 

Quote from Stubblefield:  " I have

solved the problem of telephoning without wires through the earth as Signor Marconi has of
sending signals
through space."

Stubblefield in his workshop

To get insight into Stubblefield go to
www.nathanstubblefield.com

and order the book

Disclaimer

Donate to Rense.com Support Subscribe To RenseRadio!

Enormous Online Archives, MP3s,
Free & Honest Journalism At   Streaming Audio Files,  Highest
Rense.com
Quality Live Programs