Multiple Scientists Confirm The Reality of Free Energy – Here’s The Proof

free energy1Who is benefiting from suppressing scientific research? Whose power and wealth is threatened by access to clean and free energy? Who has the desire to create a system where so few have so much, and so many have so little?

It’s become extremely obvious, especially within the past few years, that Earth’s dependence on fossil fuels is not needed at all. Yet we continue to create war, destroy the environment and harm mother Earth so we can continue using the same old techniques that generate trillions of dollars for those at the top of the energy industry. Corporate media continues to push the idea that we are in an energy crisis, that we are approaching a severe problem due to a lack of resources.  It’s funny how the same group of shareholders that own the energy industry also own corporate media. This seems to be both another fear tactic and another excuse to create conflict. How can there be a lack of resources when we have systems that can provide energy without any external input? This means that these systems could run for infinity and provide energy to the entire planet without burning fossil fuels. This would eliminate a large portion of the ‘bills’ you pay to live, and reduce the harmful effect we are having on Earth and her environment. Even if you don’t believe in the concept of free energy (also known as zero-point energy), we have multiple clean energy sources that render the entire energy industry obsolete. This article however will focus mainly on the concept of free energy which has been proven time and time again by researchers all across the world who have conducted several experiments and published their work multiple times. A portion of this vast amount of research will be presented in this paper.

These concepts have been proven in hundreds of laboratories all over the world, yet never see the light of day. If the new energy technologies were set free world wide the change would be profound. It would affect everybody, it would be applicable everywhere. These technologies are absolutely the most important thing that have happened in the history of the world.   – Dr. Brian O’Leary, Former NASA Astronaut and Princeton Physics Professor.

The Research

These concepts are currently being discussed at The Breakthrough Energy Movement Conference.

The Casimir Effect is a proven example of free energy that cannot be debunked. The Casimir Effect illustrates zero point or vacuum state energy, which predicts that two metal plates close together attract each other due to an imbalance in the quantum fluctuations(0)(8). You can see a visual demonstration of this concept here. The implications of this are far reaching and have been written about extensively within theoretical physics by researchers all over the world. Today, we are beginning to see that these concepts are not just theoretical, but instead very practical and simply very suppressed.

Vacuums generally are thought to be voids, but Hendrik Casimir believed these pockets of nothing do indeed contain fluctuations of electromagnetic waves. He suggested that two metal plates held apart in a vacuum could trap the waves, creating vacuum energy that could attract or repel the plates. As the boundaries of a region move, the variation in vacuum energy (zero-point energy) leads to the Casimir effect. Recent research done at Harvard University, and Vrije University in Amsterdam and elsewhere has proved the Casimir effect correct (7).

A paper published in the Journal Foundations of Physics Letters, in August 2001, Volume 14, Issue 4 shows that the principles of general relativity can be used to explain the principles of the motionless electromagnetic generator (MEG)(1). This device takes electromagnetic energy from curved space-time and outputs about twenty times more energy than inputted. The fact that these machines exist is astonishing, it’s even more astonishing that these machines are not implemented worldwide right now. It would completely wipe out the entire energy industry, nobody would have to pay bills and it would eradicate poverty at an exponential rate. This paper demonstrates that electromagnetic energy can be extracted from the vacuum and used to power working devices such as the MEG used in the experiment. The paper goes on to emphasize how these devices are reproducible and repeatable.

The results of this research have been used by numerous scientists all over the world. One of the many examples is a paper written by Theodor C. Loder, III, Professor Emeritus at the Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space at the University of New Hampshire. He outlined the importance of these concepts in his paper titled Space and Terrestrial Transportation and Energy Technologies For The 21st Century (2).

There is significant evidence that scientists since Tesla have known about this energy, but that its existence and potential use has been discouraged and indeed suppressed over the past half century or more (2) – Dr. Theodor C. Loder III

Harold E. Puthoff, an American Physicist and Ph.D. from Stanford University, as a researcher at the institute for Advanced Studies at Austin, Texas published a paper in the journal Physical Review A, atomic, molecular and optical physics titled “Gravity as a zero-point-fluctuation force(3)” . His paper proposed a suggestive model in which gravity is not a separately existing fundamental force, but is rather an induced effect associated with zero-point fluctuations of the vacuum, as illustrated by the Casimir force. This is the same professor that had close connections with Department of Defense initiated research in regards to remote viewing. The findings of this research are highly classified, and the program was instantly shut down not longer after its initiation (4).

Another astonishing paper titled “Extracting energy and heat from the vacuum,” by the same researchers, this time in conjunction with Daniel C. Cole, Ph.D. and Associate Professor at Boston University in the Department of Mechanical Engineering was published in the same journal (5).

Relatively recent proposals have been made in the literature for extracting energy and heat from electromagnetic zero-point radiation via the use of the Casimir force. The basic thermodynamics involved in these proposals is analyzed and clarified here, with the conclusion that yes, in principle, these proposals are correct (5).

Furthermore, a paper in the journal Physical Review A, Puthoff  titled “Source of vacuum electromagnetic zero-point energy (6),” Puthoff describes how nature provides us with two alternatives for the origin of electromagnetic zero-point energy. One of them is generation by the quantum fluctuation motion of charged particles that constitute matter. His research shows that particle motion generates the zero-point energy spectrum, in the form of a self-regenerating cosmological feedback cycle.

Before commenting on the article, please read the article, look at the sources and watch the video. Many of your questions can be answered there. We come across many who are quick to comment without examining the information presented. This is a clip from the documentary Thrive, you can view the full documentary by clicking on the title. 

We’ve had major military people at great risks to themselves say yes these things are real. Why do you think the military industrial complex doesn’t want that statement to be made, because you start thinking about what kind of technology is behind that, that’s the bottom line.  – Adam Trombly, Physicist, Inventor

As illustrated multiple times above, the energy these systems use is extracted from the fabric of the space around us. That means it cannot be metered, which creates a threat to the largest industry on the planet, energy. An industry that is partly responsible for the destruction of our planet, and an industry that rakes in hundreds of trillions of dollars every year. No blame is to be given, only a realization is to be made that we have the power to change this anytime we choose. These technologies would completely change everything, but it’s important to remember that operating technology depends on what level of consciousness the operators are operating it at. Is the human race ready for such a transformation? Nothing can work unless the consciousness behind it comes from a place of love, peace, co-operation and understanding. The desire for the benefit of all beings on the planet would be the driving force for the release of these technologies.

These technologies are locked up in black budget projects, it would take an act of God to ever get them out to benifit humanity (2) – Ben Rich, Former Director of Lockheed’s Skunkworks Division

I hope I’ve provided enough information here for those interested in furthering their research on the subject. There is a lot to this technology, and it branches into many other areas from ancient history to sacred geometry and all the way to UFOs. The technology described in this paper is similar to what Dr. O’Leary states here with regards to propulsion systems and an isolated field of energy.  For more on this subject, please visit our exopolitics section under the alternative news tab as it does correlate with the technology of anti-gravity and free energy.

Collective Evolution has covered this topic before. We’ve demonstrated the reality of the Searl Effect Generator.

We’ve also written about the Free Energy Devices.

This article was simply to provide you with more information and research to show you just how applicable these concepts are and the tremendous implications they can have.











More From 'Energy'

CE provides a space for free thinkers to explore and discuss new, alternative information and ideas. The goal? Question everything, think differently, spread love and live a joy filled life.

352 comments on “Multiple Scientists Confirm The Reality of Free Energy – Here’s The Proof

  1. Pingback: World Renowned Physicist Explains The Reality Of “Free Energy” & How It’s Accessible | Follow Your Dreams, Transform Your Life!

  2. sgrinsma

    If free energy would exist then everything we know, from Maxwell to Tesla to Einstein and Feynman, would all have to be called into question. Free energy would undermine the foundations of science as a whole. Why? Because science relies on the laws of thermodynamics to be true, and by the first law of thermodynamics free energy (perpetual motion / infinite energy) cannot exist. So, either you claim that your “free energy” isn’t as free as you claim it to be and thus limited, or you reject the laws of thermodynamics in which case no one in the scientific community will ever take you seriously. Assuming you do not reject those laws you apparently claim that there is some abundent source of energy so big it is seamingly infinite. Please explain to me what that source then is. The earths’ magnetic field? In that case this would mean you would be draining energy from this magnetic field. In that case; how much energy is stored in the earths’ core and what will happen if too much energy is taken from it? Surely, even if you’re not talking about the earths’ magnetic field, these are typical questions you must have thought about and cracked the numbers on. I look forward to your reply.

    • Kev

      There is a book called “The Sea of Energy in Which the Earth Floats” By Dr. Thomas Henry Moray, that explains much of what you are asking, sgrinsma.
      The Earth is simply an oscillating toroid, an accumulator of magnetic waves. The Earth is constantly rotating, and if you actually studied Teslas work, or Einsteins, you would have a better understanding of what energy is and how it can’t be created or destroyed.
      What you are actually referring to as energy, is electricity, which is conjoined magnetic waves. The separation of these waves creates a “twang” in time-space, which is caused by a monopolar wave collapsing, creating an inductive event, time. Gravity is a back emf wave of this induction.
      The separation of this conjoined magnetic oscillation in no way destroys the waves, but merely converts them from an electromagnetic wave into two opposing magnetic waves. These opposing waves are torsion or spin waves, and can be regathered, rejoined, and reused. The conduit for trapping a back emf wave can be created using a toroid with opposing coils, and a very simplistic avenue for experimentation on this would be a joule thief circuit.
      Any oscillating body is in essence contracting and expanding. This means it is heating and cooling simultaneously. Rotation of a mass through space creates inductive resonance due to this movement of energy. This flow can be directed through toroidal induction principles.
      You may also want to look into a basic Tesla LC circuit. You may be aware that this is a bi-toroidal circuit, a separator of magnetic waves, which simply splits a magnetic wave into two opposing spins, and then combines the wave outside of the collection area of the circuit using diodes and capacitors. This is a very simple circuit to build.
      Also, have a look at his non-linear oscillator-shuttle-circuit. You can read up on this OSC type system here:

      By the way…there was never a Law that hasn’t been broken. These laws are developed by existing knowledge and in no way limit further understandings or explorations on the subject matter in question.
      Once the understanding of quaternion algerbra is applied, the Maxwellian electromagnetic principles once again come into focus as being more along the lines of a four point potential with the higher topology algerythms.
      The math is complicated, but I find the reactions to be very simplistic.

      You may also want to look into the potential between the Earths crust and the Ionisphere. The differential of capacitance allows for the flow of electromagnetic energy, as the 1600 strikes per minute indicate. This is a very powerful electrostatic accumulator, and the currents are in the millions of amps.
      You must understand that all of this is free. It is electricity, it is naturally occurring, and it is free, says Odin and his son Thor.
      I said it before and I will say it again. This is the easy part, people!
      The deeper understanding of the relationship between electrogravitics, matter, torsion fields and time-space is where this get really interesting.
      Separating magnetic waves into opposing spin, using toroids and LC circuits, and recombining them as an electromagnetic wave is hardly complicated material.
      Children do this. So can you!
      Here is a youtube link showing you how to build a very simply circuit for collecting, splitting, and recombining magnetic oscillations into an electromagnetic wave.
      I connected one of these simple circuits to a microwave transformer that I rewired into an oscillator last year, and I maintained a 100 volt standing electromagnetic wave without a power supply attached to it .It was an extremely low amperage, but it conducted, and this simple circuit design can be built into a series or into a cascade collector, utilizing massive antennae and ground taps to increase the wave.
      I have several hundred patents involving toroidal applications as well as teslas papers and patents on his free energy circuits.
      I also have some interesting papers regarding microwave plasma discharges, and some very interesting research into the anomalies associated with these high frequency discharges that draw energy from the environment through a hyperspacial pathway or conduit for scalar or magnetic lines of force. I would argue that gravity has an interaction along these pathways, as bi-toroidal oscillators seem to show us this.
      Feel free to email me at if you require any information along these lines.

    • Kev

      “Because science relies on the laws of thermodynamics to be true, and by the first law of thermodynamics free energy (perpetual motion / infinite energy) cannot exist”.

      I find that holding to this idea, while observing the entire galaxy in perpetual motion, uniquely ambiguous.

      Also, equally unnerving, is attempting to explain matter as energy to people clinging to this backwards thinking.
      Yes. Matter is energy folks. It is simply resonating at a different frequency.

      The laws of thermodynamic show us that energy is free. The sun, the wind, the rain and the tides are all a result of this movement through time-space. All of this is resonance. All of this is flow of force.

      Any oscillating mass creates torsion fields: gravity: magnetic waves. These fields of force can be collected, augmented, utilized.

      Science relies on results, not theories.. People rely on the results of repeatable experimentation, based on theories, but not confined to them. to them.
      Plain and simple.

      Hardly complicated material, unless one stays in the box too long.



      • James

        You must not have heard the recent news…
        ” In such fluctuating environments the fundamental laws of thermodynamics that govern our macroscopic world need to be rewritten. An international team of researchers from Barcelona, Zurich and Vienna found that a nanoparticle trapped with laser light temporarily violates the famous second law of thermodynamics, something that is impossible on human time and length scale.”

        Not to mention the fact that MIT has made LED light with an efficiency of 230 percent

        Read more: MIT Researchers Create More Than 100-Percent Efficient LED Light | Inhabitat – Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building

        Or that the US government has made solar cells with over 100% efficiency

    • James

      If you read just about any of the hundreds of published peer reviewed reports on zero point energy you would see the energy comes from the aether, not the Earths electro magnetic field.

      Tesla was in agreed with aether theory and so did Maxwell and Einstein. Here is a speech from Eistein on the ether…

      “Since according to our present conceptions the elementary particles of matter are also, in their essence, nothing else than condensations of the electromagnetic field, our present view of the universe presents two realities which are completely separated from each other conceptually, although connected causally, namely, gravitational ether and electromagnetic field, or – as they might also be called – space and matter….

      Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.”

      And then there is Maxwells lost equations. Half of his math has been mostly ignored…
      “As a result of this artificial restriction of Maxwell’s theory, Einstein also inadvertently restricted his theory of general relativity, forever preventing the unification of electromagnetics and relativity. He also essentially prevented the present restricted general relativity from ever becoming an experimental, engineerable science on the laboratory bench, since a hidden internalized electromagnetics causing a deterministically structured local spacetime curvature was excluded. ”

    • Crysta Williams

      The answer is simple, if this tech was real, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WEAPONIZED!

      A better source of energy, is our sun, via space based collection arrays (even just orbital, its over 10x as efficient at collecting energy. and if it was setup in a close sun orbit, say about half the distance of mercury, we could feed the entire energy needs of the planet, with a few dozen small collection arrays)

      In one second, our sun produces enough energy for almost 500,000 years of the current needs of our so-called civilization.

  3. Pingback: Man Builds His Dream Mini-Home In Only Six Weeks For $9,000 - A Sheep No More

  4. Pingback: Visual Proof: Free Energy Devices Are Real : Conscious Life News

  5. Pingback: Man Builds His Dream Mini-Home In Only Six Weeks For $9,000The Daily News Source | The Daily News Source

  6. Kev

    Hey Colin,
    If you are referring to the patent of Barbosa and Leal, from 2013, it is only one of many hundreds of patents involving toroidal induction.
    If anyone wants to view it, here it is.
    This chapter is based on motionless pulsed systems, and there are many.
    I have designed my own system based on similar concepts and experimentation with microwave transformers. It is loosely based on Hubbard and Hendershot systems, which were based on similar work done by Tesla and others.

  7. colin

    it’s OK it is over, there has been a patent released from Brazil two boys have harnessed the earths electro magnetic energy, just like Tesla. All-tho it could be a hoax if it comes out to be a hoax will probably just be suppression and murder.

  8. Pingback: The Illusion Of Matter: Our Physical Reality Isn’t Really Physical At All - Obscure Vision

  9. Pingback: We’re not doomed. :) |

  10. Sun House – ‘Free Free Energy’

  11. Pingback: The Rodin Coil: Is It The Greatest Discovery of All Time? | TRUTH SEEKER1313

  12. hubertvommuehlviertel

    FREIE ENERGIE ist nicht patentierbar! Opensource, sofortige Veröffentlichung im weltweiten Netz mit allen technischen Unterlagen, das heißt, man schmeißt all seine Erkenntnisse ohne Rückhalt samt Bauplänen, Zeichnungen Prototypen und Dokumentationen in die Öffentlichkeit. Dann ist eine Entwicklung nicht mehr zu verhindern, weil er durch die, oder jeden bereitwilligen Tüftler dann selbst zu verifizieren, zu bauen und vor allem auch weiterzuentwickeln bzw. zu modifizieren ist.
    In der Gemeinwohlwelt gibt es genug spezialisierte fachlich qualifizierte Menschen Gruppen, die gemeinsam Fortschritt generiert, sich nicht mehr mit Lizenzen, Patenten, (weil solche leicht zu kassieren und auf Nimmerwidersehen in die Schubladen der Energiegiganten wegzusperren sind) umgeben. Prof. Dr. Claus Turtur sprach in einem seiner zahlreichen Vorträge dazu mal von 5000 Patenten, welche das mittlerweile auf dem freien Energiesektor betrifft. Also die befürchtete Annahme oder Behauptung, “dass den Entwicklern eines Tages mal was passieren kann” wäre damit erfolgreich und leicht abzuwehren…
    Darum ACHTUNG, wenn jemand meist wertlose Pläne oder Lizenzen verkaufen will! alles beste

  13. Re the 2013 Gravity Comprehension!

    On The Nature And Origin Of The Universe…
    Classical Science Replaced By 2013 Gravity Comprehension !!!

    איך נברא היקום יש מאין
    New Science 2013 versus classical science
    Attn classical science hierarchy ( including Darwin and Einstein…)
    “I hope that now you understand what gravity is and why it is the monotheism of the universe…DH”
    Gravity is the natural selection of self-attraction by the elementary particles of an evolving system on their cyclic course towards the self-replication of the system. Period
    ( Gravitons are the elementary particles of the universe. RNA genes and serotonin are the elementary particles of Earth life)

    כח המשיכה
    כח המשיכה הוא הבחירה הטבעית להיצמדות הדדית של חלקיקי היסוד של מערכת מתפתחת במהלך התפתחותה המחזורית לעבר שיכפולה. נקודה
    ( הגרוויטון הוא חלקיק היסוד של היקום. הגנים, הנוקלאוטידים של חומצה ריבונוקלאית והסרוטונין הם החלקיקים היסודיים של חיי כדור הארץ) Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)

  14. Pingback: The Rodin Coil: Is It The Greatest Discovery of All Time? | Collective-Evolution

  15. tom
    • Confused or part of the underlying system?
      • tom


        • F.R.A.S.

          Confused? Then don’t read this Tom.

          Or this…

          Or this.

          Are you able to read and understand any of this Tom?. It may only serve to confuse you more. Crackpot index indeed…

          Quit wasting peoples time with your baloney.

          You attempt to spread confusion through your self absorbed and fundamentally inaccurate understanding of physics.
          You define parameters that do not exist.
          You are not able to, or simply refuse to do the research and experimentation yourself.

          It is no wonder that you are confused, Tom. You are simply stuck in a world that does not exist. You have defined this world through other peoples work, inaccuracies included.

          This limited understanding now defines you.

          This not be permanent. You may be able to modify your understanding of gravity immensely by coming to the realization that there is a copious amount of information available on these subjects that you have not, as yet ,bothered to inform yourself about.
          Take some time to do this. This is important information.

          Please quit being such a tool Tom, old boy. It is time to take your head out of that hole.

          A Report by Professor Paul S. Wesson, F.R.A.S.*
          Department of Physics
          University of Waterloo
          Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 Canada for The California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics 366 Cambridge Avenue Palo Alto, California 94306 U.S.A.

          B. HAISCH
          Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Lockheed Martin
          3251 Hanover St., Palo Alto, CA 94304
          A. RUEDA
          Dept. of Electrical Engineering & Dept. of Physics
          California State Univ., Long Beach, CA 90840

          Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Vol. 1, 1904

          By E. T. Whittaker.
          [Received 11 November, 1903, -- Read 12th November, 1903]

          “Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by
          power obtainable at any point in the universe…it is a mere
          question of time when men will succeed in attaching their
          machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.”
          - Nikola Tesla

          • TTMWTA

            F.R.A.S. said:

            Confused? Then don’t read this Tom.

            I say: No, but I’ll avoid the condition by following your advice Kev. If there is anyone on this forum who darts from topic to topic and cannot focus it’s you. So of course I’ll leave the rest unread.

          • Kev

            This is all about energy. All of this is related.

            When you discover this, you can move forward.

            Some of this is complicated information. Some of it is extremely complicated.
            However, It is all interrelated through cavitation and induction, through torsion dynamics and magnetism.
            Ignoring this information is the response of a closed mind.
            I did not expect you to see the connections, as you do not have the expertise, or the commitment to learn about these interrelated mechanisms, and how they are the fundamental forces that we utilize when we couple waves into electromagnetic, inductive frequencies.
            My point was, and is, that this is a complicated field of investigation and all things are connected. Even the 4th dimension of time is an effect of these fields of force, interacting with oscillating mass.
            If you could only read and understand this information, you would see that I have never left this topic, only expanded this discussion past your ability to recognize these connections.

            What you may realize, if you decide to follow through on your education, is that the fundamentals being taught are being taught incorrectly.
            The Original Maxwell’s Equations Were Severely Butchered To Remove The Potential For Free Energy Systems.

            1. It eliminates the internal EM inside the scalar potential.
            2. No Definition of Electrical Charge or of Scalar
            3. Equations Still Assume Material Ether Per Maxwell
            4. Use of Force Fields in Vacuum is False (and
            Known to be So).
            5. Treats Charge q as Unitary Instead of Coupled
            System q=ø(q)m(q).
            6. Confuses Massless Potential Gradients as Forces
            7. Does Not Utilize Mass as a Component of Force
            8. Erroneously Assumes EM Force Field as Primary
            9. Topology of EM Model Has Been Substantially
            10. Does Not Include Quantum Potential or Action at
            a Distance.
            11. Does Not Include Superluminal Velocity of Inner
            EM Components.
            12. Does Not Utilize Extended Near-Field Coulomb
            Gauge Effects.
            13. Does Not Include EM Generatrix Mechanism For
            Time Flow.
            14. Does Not Unify Photon and Wave Aspects
            (Requires 7-D Model).
            15. Does Not Include Electron Spin and Precession.
            16. Treats EM Energy As Existing in “Chunks,”
            Instead of as Flow.
            17. Confuses Energy and Energy Collection.
            18. Discards Half of Every EM Wave in Vacuum.
            19. Erroneously Uses Transverse Vacuum Wave; It’s
            20. Arbitrarily Regauges Maxwell’s Equations to
            Eliminate Overunity Maxwellian Systems.
            21. Omits Phase Conjugate Optics Effects (Which are
            the Rule in Internal EM).
            22. Does Not Include EM Cause of Newtonian
            Reaction Force.
            23. Erroneously Assumes Separate Force Acting on
            Separate Mass.
            24. Confuses Detected Electron Precession Waves
            as Proving Transverse EM Waves in Vacuum
            (Remnant of Old “EM Fluid” Concept).
            25. Due to Error in String Wave, Omits the Ubiquitous
            26. Assumes Equilibrium; Not True Unless Include
            Vacuum Interactions.
            27. Higher Toplogy Required, to Model
            Electromagnetic Reality.
            28. Lorentz surface integration discards Poynting
            energy transport.
            29. Has nothing at all to say about form of EM entities
            in massless space.
            30. Eliminates the infolded general relativity using
            EM-force as curve agent.
            31. Does not include longitudinal EM wave phase
            conjugate pairs as time domain oscillations.
            32. Does not include EM mechanism that generates
            time flow and flow rate.
            33. Does not include time-excitation charging and
            34. Does not utilize time-reversal zones.

            One you can understand that the self imposed limitations that you superimpose on others, are a product of a flawed mathematical interpretation of electomagnetic theory, you may begin to understand why I find these limitations so confounding, confusing, and simply unacceptable. This may take some time, but please don’t continue to ignore this very pertinent information. This is the only direction to travel. To not follow through, to not try to come to a pertinent understanding, relegates you to being left behind, stuck in the proverbial mud, so to speak.
            If you are comfortable with that, so be it.
            I however, am not. This is the reason I have continued my investigation into these very interesting and very entertaining experiments. This is why I share information the way I do, to elevate all of us, to inform, to ask the questions that no one seems ready to answer.
            I have found answers. These have led to more questions, many questioning the intellect and the sincerity and the credibility of the professionals who created this standard of education. These have led to many. many more questions.
            Now I am looking for answers, once again.

            O(3) electrodynamics has been verified to a precision of 10 to the 21st in the Sagnac Effect.
            — Dr. Myron Evans
            September, 2003

          • tom

            Nice cut and paste. But you should have included the paragraph that defined ‘EM.’ Since all that followed address it, not telling us what you are talking about renders the cut and paste an exercise in pointless blather. “Torsion dynamics?” “electron precession?” “The Original Maxwell’s Equations Were Severely Butchered To Remove The Potential For Free Energy Systems.” (How do you know?) Your list is eclectic and pointless.

            You’re right, my ability to give a shit about your nonsense just hit zero.

          • Kev

            Here is a nice article on torsion waves and magnetism. It is THE BREAKTHROUGHS OF DR. N.A. KOZYREV.

            Thanks for sending me this link in your email, Alan!


  16. tom

    The Crackpot Index
    John Baez

    A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics:

    A -5 point starting credit.

    1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.

    2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.

    3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.

    5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.

    5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.

    5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).

    5 points for each mention of “Einstein”, “Hawkins” “Tesla” “Newton” or “Feynman”.

    10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

    10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.

    10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)

    10 points for mailing your theory to someone you don’t know personally and asking them not to tell anyone else about it, for fear that your ideas will be stolen.

    10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.

    10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.

    10 points for each statement along the lines of “I’m not good at math, but my theory is conceptually right, so all I need is for someone to express it in terms of equations”.

    10 points for arguing that a current well-established theory is “only a theory”, as if this were somehow a point against it.

    10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn’t explain “why” they occur, or fails to provide a “mechanism”.

    10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

    10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a “paradigm shift”.

    20 points for emailing me and complaining about the crackpot index. (E.g., saying that it “suppresses original thinkers” or saying that I misspelled “Einstein” in item 8.)

    20 points for suggesting that you deserve a Nobel prize.

    20 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Newton or claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

    20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if they were fact.

    20 points for defending yourself by bringing up (real or imagined) ridicule accorded to your past theories.

    20 points for naming something after yourself. (E.g., talking about the “The Evans Field Equation” when your name happens to be Evans.)

    20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.

    20 points for each use of the phrase “hidebound reactionary”.

    20 points for each use of the phrase “self-appointed defender of the orthodoxy”.

    30 points for suggesting that a famous figure secretly disbelieved in a theory which he or she publicly supported. (E.g., that Feynman was a closet opponent of special relativity, as deduced by reading between the lines in his freshman physics textbooks.)

    30 points for suggesting that Einstein, in his later years, was groping his way towards the ideas you now advocate.

    30 points for claiming that your theories were developed by an extraterrestrial civilization (without good evidence).

    30 points for allusions to a delay in your work while you spent time in an asylum, or references to the psychiatrist who tried to talk you out of your theory.

    40 points for comparing those who argue against your ideas to Nazis, stormtroopers, or brownshirts.

    40 points for claiming that the “scientific establishment” is engaged in a “conspiracy” to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.

    40 points for comparing yourself to Galileo, suggesting that a modern-day Inquisition is hard at work on your case, and so on.

    40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)

    50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.

  17. tom

    A good friend put this together. Apply it to the stuff CE claims or presents to get a better view of the world:

    The Bullshit Detection Kit

    Sagan makes a few suggestions about the “tools” a skeptic should keep ready in their Baloney Detection Kit. These are not just measures to identify bad arguments, but constructive ideas about how to come up with better alternatives:

    Seek independent confirmation of alleged facts.
    Encourage an open debate about the issue and the available evidence.
    “In science, there are no authorities. At most, there are experts.”
    Come up with a variety of competing hypotheses explaining a given outcome. Considering many different explanations will lower the risk of confirmation bias.
    Don’t get too attached to your own ideas, lest you get reluctant to reject them even in the face of evidence to the contrary.
    Quantify whenever possible, allowing for easier comparisons between hypotheses’ relative explanatory power.
    Every step in an argument must be logically sound; a single weak link can doom the entire chain.
    When the evidence is inconclusive, use Occam’s Razor to discriminate between hypotheses.
    Pay attention to falsifiability. Science does not concern itself with unfalsifiable propositions.

    • Kev

      Tom stated:
      “Science does not concern itself with unfalsifiable propositions.”

      Tom is not a scientist. If he were, he would not state such absurdities.

      Tom also stated:
      March 12, 2014 at 8:22 pm
      Nice cut and paste. But you should have included the paragraph that defined ‘EM.’ Since all that followed address it, not telling us what you are talking about renders the cut and paste an exercise in pointless blather. “Torsion dynamics?” “electron precession?” “The Original Maxwell’s Equations Were Severely Butchered To Remove The Potential For Free Energy Systems.” (How do you know?) Your list is eclectic and pointless.
      You’re right, my ability to give a shit about your nonsense just hit zero.”

      You started at zero Tom. Staying there shows a serious flaw with your ability to process information and move forward.
      What a surprise. I am overwhelmed. No, really. You need an incorrect and incomplete definition explained to you, so you can move backwards into your cold dark cave? Really Tom? Grow up.

      The bedrock of much of modern science is Classical Electromagnetic Theory (CEM).
      James Clark Maxwell developed this 136 years ago in an exotic algebra known as quaternions
      . In order to render it more assimilable for use by working electrodynamicists, it was deliberately re-written in much simpler language by Oliver Heaviside (and Gibbs) in 1903.
      This simplification (and truncation) eliminated a whole subset of the equations including the scalar electromagnetics and the gravitational aspects that were contained in the original theory.

      Tom finds this information eclectic and pointless…I however do not.

      At last count, there are at least thirty-four known flaws in Maxwell’s hoary old theory, which is what is still taught in today’s classrooms. Some of the world’s leading scientists, such as Wheeler, Feynman, Bunge, Margenau, Barrett, Cornille, Evans, Vigier, and Lehnert have all written about CEM’s deficiencies. When this missing “Heaviside subset” of Classical Electromagnetic Theory is restored, and the brilliant 1903 and 1904 work of a Cambridge University mathematician, E.T. Whittaker, factored in, all of a sudden one has the supposedly elusive Holy Grail of Science – a true Unified Field Theory that unites General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Mind and Subtle Energy Phenomena and Classical EM Theory.
      But in fact, for the advancement of humanity, the real Holy Grail could be argued to actually be contained in this missing subset, not in the more grandiose sounding Unified Field Theory. For it is this “scalar potential” that stresses local space-time, i.e. the 3 spatial dimensions AND time, which allows the “bleed-through” of additional electromagnetic energy to create overunity electromagnetic systems. Indeed, the restoration of this missing subset also shows that Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity was also only a subset of the real theory that he was trying to write. Even though Einstein has been lionized for his theory of General Relativity (Time Magazine “Man of the Century”), he himself is on record as saying that the so-called foundations of physics need constant review, and that his Relativity Theory was not necessarily cast in concrete.
      A further impediment to the theoretical extraction of “free” energy was also imposed on what was left of Maxwell’s already diluted EM Theory by H.A. Lorentz around 1902. He simply arbitrarily threw away the monstrous amount of current outside the circuit that was not intercepted by the circuit, and that he could not theoretically account for, which was simply another massive flaw in the conventional understanding of electromagnetism.

      Tom, you asked me how I know this.

      Perhaps a little bird told me…

      • tom

        Tom stated:
        “Science does not concern itself with unfalsifiable propositions.”

        Tom is not a scientist. If he were, he would not state such absurdities.

        Tom says: First, you don’t know who or what I am. Second, A basic tenant of the scientific method is to prove yourself wrong. Look up unfalsifiable propositions as taught by Popper et al, along with the null hypothesis. They go hand in hand weeding out hacks, wannabees, frauds and bias. It’s clear why you resist the scientific method: It creates a hostile environment.

        • Kev

          You have proved beyond all doubt that you are not a scientist or even remotely capable of higher thinking Tom.
          You show this when you state:
          ” But you should have included the paragraph that defined ‘EM.’ Since all that followed address it, not telling us what you are talking about renders the cut and paste an exercise in pointless blather. “Torsion dynamics?” “electron precession?” “The Original Maxwell’s Equations Were Severely Butchered To Remove The Potential For Free Energy Systems.” (How do you know?) Your list is eclectic and pointless.
          You’re right, my ability to give a shit about your nonsense just hit zero.”
          Tom do you need me to define electromagnetism for you?
          I don’t think I will. I do not teach remedial math. You have included nothing scientific in your excruciatingly painful commentary. You state nothing but your opinion, as screwed up as it is. A regurgitation of long disproved and redundant math, based on unproven theories and flawed hypothesis of energy, gravity and matter.
          You limit yourself based on limitations that are nonexistent!

          The Einstein-Cartan theory first established a theoretical basis for the existence of torsion fields in 1913. The theory predicts that there will either be right-handed or left-handed torsion in space, depending on the location. Subsequent discoveries in quantum physics related to the notion of “spin” confirmed that “electrons” will either have “right-handed” or “left-handed” spin, meaning that movement is detected that will either be clockwise or counterclockwise. All atoms and molecules maintain varying degrees of balance between right and left-handed spin. Dr. Kozyrev determined that strongly right-handed molecules such as sugar can shield torsion effects, whereas strongly left-handed molecules such as turpentine will strengthen them. Subsequent Russian investigations also determined that common polyethylene film acted as an excellent shield for torsion waves, and were used in many different experiments such as those discussed by Dr. Alexander Frolov.Such results have been repeatedly documented in the 20th century and studied in the laboratory, as we wrote in Convergence: The Science of Oneness.
          The aether’s existence was widely accepted without question in scientific circles until the early 20th century, when the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1887 was co-opted to “prove” that no such hidden energy source existed. However, more recent breakthroughs involving “dark matter,” “dark energy”, “virtual particles”, “vaccum flux” and “zero-point energy,” to name a few, have brought reluctant scientists to acknowledge that there must be an unseen energy medium throughout the Universe.
          As long as one uses a benign term like the “quantum medium” and not the forbidden word ‘aether,’ you can talk about it in the mainstream press without much fear of ridicule. The mainstream scientific establishment is very heavily polarized against anyone who gets too close to an ‘aether’ theory, as they “know” that such a theory must be false and will therefore fight vigorously against it. However, such suppression only increases the desire and commitment that many others have put into solving the puzzle. One early example of proof for the existence of the aether comes from Dr. Hal Puthoff, a respected scientist from Cambridge University.
          Puthoff frequently mentions experiments from the early 20th century that were designed to see if there was any energy in “empty space,” conducted before quantum mechanics theory ever existed.
          This is what I refer to as “Torsion Dynamics”.
          Tom, you are an ignorant person. When I mentioned the butchering of Maxwells original mathematics by Oliver Heavisides renditions of it, you said:
          “How do you know?”
          I know this by research and experimentation. I know this through enormous amounts of reading and testing his thesis.
          Einstein’s theory of relativity suggested, all of physical matter is ultimately made of pure energy, and there are no “hard particles” to be found in the quantum realm. More and more, the scientific community is being forced to accept that atoms and molecules are akin to candle flames, where the energy that they release (such as the heat and light of the flame) must be balanced by energy that they absorb (such as the wax of the candle and the oxygen in the air.)
          This “candle analogy” is a hallmark of Dr. Hal Puthoff’s model, which he uses to explain why the hypothetical electron does not radiate away all of its energy and crash into the nucleus. This seemingly “perpetual motion” within the atom is simply explained away as “the magic of quantum mechanics” in the mainstream view, or simply ignored by people like Tom, who are unable to grasp the higher dimensionality of oscillating or resonating electromagnetic impulses or waves.
          This is well understood by today’s academia.
          However, Tom’s malevolence in this forum cannot be understood.

          • tom

            Kev, go back and re-read what I said: ‘Define EM.’ Go back and read what you said: You still didn’t define it, going off the res instead. It’s not my job to intuit what you are thinking. You have to tell us.

            That also goes for your math: It is customary to define terms, units etc. Not everyone uses them the same way. Hell, different disciplines use sum and deriviative symbols differently, so I quit reading when I encounter writing that assumes I know what the writer is thinking.

            Assuming we know what you carry on about without defining it is simply arrogant, if not impolite.

            Honestly, you need to take a writing class. You would benefit from physics, calculus, biology and chemistry too.

          • tom

            Kev – I don’t need or want you to teach electrodynamics, I wanted you to tell us what ‘EM’ meant. Erasmus Mundis? Environmental Management? How juvenile of you to be a snot when asked to define it.

            My malevolence is a reflection of yours. Read your latest glurge for examples.

            You copied most of your screed from here, so you owe them attribution:

            Aether – Maxwell and friends came up with the term to describe wave propagation in a vacuum. Then they found out no medium is necessary to transmit light, elecromagnetic radiation or nuclear radiation and adjusted their theories accordingly. As a self proclaimed expert on Maxwell I’m surprised you didn’t know that. But then, you copied it from the divine cosmos site, and we already know your editing skills are wanting. End of surprise.

            Torsion Field is a pseudoscience:

            Dr. Hal Puthoff, a respected scientist from Cambridge University is also a remote viewing expert and paranormal researcher who was caught using sleight of hand to prove his theory. Oopsie!

            Kozyrev spent 10 years in prison compliments of Stalin and fell behind on current research, so like Kev, he clung to what he knew vs what was known. It happens. Psyclosclerosis – hardening of the ideas.

            Rather than move on toward what works, you are stuck in time with your library of disproved theories, frauds and hacks. Press on, I hope you succeed at producing something useful, but so far all I see is parlor games and self deception.

      • tom

        After all that jibber jabber Kev still fails to define ‘EM.’ Focus Kev, Focus!

        • Kev

          Tom, you need me to define electromagnetics?
          You don’t seem even remotely capable of understanding it. You need me to point out the relevancy, or you miss it completely.

          You are certainly not a scientist, Tom. Talking to you in scientific terms, using terminology that you do not understand, is redundant.
          I will not waste my time doing this any longer. I will not try to convince you, as I have given you this information already, several times, and you are unable to comprehend it.

          Focus on learning something useful.
          So far your commentary is baseless, childish and condescending, and mired in erroneous theories, long disproved through experimentation.

          You focus, Tom. My vision is clear.

      • tom

        When you cut and paste please give attribution and a link. Failing to do so is plaigerizing.

        • Kev

          I am not interested in helping you Tom. Without a link, you are simply useless.
          I feel that this is better for everyone, as you have contributed nothing here.

    • Kev

      “Science does not concern itself with unfalsifiable propositions.” says Tom…
      Really? Since when?!?
      That’s not “For Your Information”. It means something else entirely…

      “Scientists need not concern themselves with falsifiable propositions.”

      This is more than likely what you meant to say, however you were not able to realize this on your own.

      Science has no concerns.
      Only scientists do.
      Try doing your own work for a change Tom, instead of copying other peoples ideas, thoughts and comments.

      • tom

        Calling names again I see. We all know what that means.

        I found it interesting that you consider my use of google with attribution bad form yet you paste the work of others without attribution and feel no hypocrisy. I admit, when you cut and past you sound halfway intelligent. When you freelance you sound like an ignoramus. Stick to stealing the work of others. It’s more gooder.

        Back to the topic at hand: “Science does not concern itself with (non- or ) unfalsifiable propositions.”

        Said another way:

        If a statement is to be scientific rather than metaphysical it must be falsifiable.

        Perhaps what’s bothering kev is the negative connotation. However, upon reflection, it is the more rigorous. Here’s an example: Westerners usually say the golden rule in the affirmative: Do onto others as you would have them do unto you.’ But the original text was “Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.’ The negative connotation is awkward but more meaningful.

        Back on topic:

        Faith-based arguments are by design non-falsifiable.

        Here’s a link to the rigorous argument:

        While there are better sites out there that discuss the topic, I chose the one below because it rather nicely addresses another red herring that special interests use with wild abandon and great ignorance. Read on:

        And the edited text here:

        Quote: NPR offers a perfect example of how an unfalsifiable, infallible theory works

        January 9, 2014

        NPR didn’t mean to offer a perfect example of how an unfalsifiable, infallible theory works. It’s stated goal was to have people better understand what a polar vortex is. However, when it chose to interview “Andrew Freedman, senior science writer for Climate Central, an independent non-profit organization that researches and reports on the science and impact of climate change,” Mr. Freedman, true to his climate change beliefs, came up with a good one.

        Before I get to Mr. Freedman’s words, let me make sure we’re all on the same page about an unfalsifiable, infallible theory. Mike McDaniel has an easy-to-understand, elegantly stated explanation. An unfalsifiable theory “requires no proof, for like religious dogma, it is rooted in faith. One either believes or not; proof is not necessary and opposing proof may therefore be disregarded. Such beliefs are, in the language of science, non-falsifiable.” Non-falsifiable theories do not stand alone. Because they cannot be proved wrong they are, by definition, infallible. Like God, they are what they are, with no actual explanations required.

        With that in mind, please enjoy Mr. Freedman’s response to the NPR interviewer’s question about the current polar vortex and climate change:

        GREENE: I mean, is climate change playing some sort of role here in the cold we’re seeing this week?

        FREEDMAN: We actually have these possible connections between the Arctic – which is warming rapidly, and which is losing sea ice – and these perturbations, these shifts in the jet stream over North America and over Europe. And many scientists are convinced that there’s enough circumstantial evidence to potentially convince a jury that there is this link, and that the weather patterns are becoming more and more suspicious as being influenced by human activities. But the physical connections, the actual smoking gun that would link Arctic warming to weather patterns that we see right now – like this one – isn’t quite there yet. It hasn’t quite been proven. So whether or not it would convince a jury of scientific peers in this case is unclear. And I think in the next few years, we’ll know a lot more. But certainly, climate change is influencing every weather pattern that occurs today, in some ways large and small.

        Without all the unnecessary prevarication, what Mr. Freedman said is “We have no actual evidence that anthropogenic global warming has anything to do with this. That doesn’t worry us, though, because our operating, unchallengeable baseline is that anthropogenic global warming (which we now call “climate change” so as to be more encompassing) is behind every weather phenomenon that has ever happened since we decided that there’s something called anthropogenic global war. . . . er, climate change.” This is unsurprising. Mr. Freedman’s paycheck comes from an “independent non-profit organization that researches and reports on the science and impact of climate change.” No climate change means no non-profit organization, which means Mr. Freedman and his cohorts are out of a job.

        Just to demonstrate further that Mr. Freedman is operating within a closed, unfalsifiable system, let’s scoot over to Time Magazine for a minute. As Ed Driscoll reports (in a post beautifully titled Time Magazine Swings Both Ways), the United States experienced a whopper of a polar vortex in 1974. Back then, Time breathlessly informed its readers that the problem was global cooling and that we trembled on the verge of another ice age. This time around, of course, the pathetic shadow that was the once mighty Time, now reports equally breathlessly that global warming caused the big chill.

        Faith is a wonderful — and dangerous — thing.

        End quote.

        So you see Kev, it’s real. Party on dude!

  18. Kevin

    any possibility of making one of these at home?

    • Kev

      Yes indeed, Kevin.
      I have several simple designs using microwave transformers, that are fairly simple to build. You don’t need a degree in torsion physics to understand these systems, or to build them.
      First, try building a dual coil induction system, which allows a refraction of the back emf wave function, as a frontal pressure wave into the opposing vortex.
      One of the simplest ways of doing this is using Daniel Cook’s patent on improvement to induction coils, from 1871. This is very similar to Edward Leedskalnins’ “generator”, and the basic design in Dr. Nikola Tesla’s LC circuit.
      There are many combinations and designs to this idea, such as the patents from Barbosa and Leal, from 2013 in Brazil.
      T. Henry Moray, Alfred Hubbard, T. Thompson Brown, Lester Hendershot, Nikola Tesla, and many, many others understood and used these systems to replace galvanic batteries.
      Clemente Figuera had ideas similar to this as well.

      Daniel McFarlane Cook’s idea is very simple and very practical. It is a very simple design to build.

      The dual core/coil design allows for a refraction of the back emf wave, allowing it to accelerate the opposing vortex. This acceleration creates a greater back emf wave function, which, in turn, accelerates the opposing magnetic field. These systems self accelerate, to what is called resonant capacity. The term “Harmonic Resonance” is often used to explain the resonant capacity of matter, that is, the capacity to retain a state of charge. Different materials are able to absorb different amounts of energy.
      Opposing magnetic vortices may be combined outside the frame of this device, as an electrostatic or electromagnetic discharge. This induces a magnetic vacuum in the frame of the device, allowing for a furtherance of inductive capacity, and due to the self resonance of bi-toroidal induction systems, quickly re-builds itself to it’s resonant capacity, and maintains a state of charge.
      Cooks patent can also be viewed here.

      Feel free to contact me Kevin, or anyone else requesting information along these avenues.
      I can be reached at
      I have many patents and corresponding information, with hundreds of different systems and inventors and we can all benefit from learning about them and their work.
      Many critics self evaluate these ideas and impose impossibilities, most stating laws of thermodynamics.
      When one of these critics say” That’s impossible. Energy can’t come from nowhere.”
      I answer “Define Nowhere.”
      Nowhere does not exist. Therefor, energy can’t come from nowhere, can it?
      It comes from the place it goes, after the inductive wave collapses and uncouples. It becomes a scalar function, a monopolar magnetic wave, which is a gravitic function.
      So, in fact, this energy comes from a torsion field that is created through oscillation, the planetary oscillation.
      This is gravity. This is inertia. This is monopolar collapse. This is a scalar field. This is a hyper-dimensional wave form. This is tensor torsion physics.
      This is also what is now being described as ZPE, or zero point energy.
      All of these are the same function.

      Konstantin Meyl wrote several articles on this effect.

      So did Thompson Brown, Nikola Tesla, T. Henry Moray, Thomas Bearden, Paul LaViolette, Fran De Aquino, Harold Aspen,John Searle, Vesselin Petkov, and many, many others. These are only some of the people that have investigated. The list is quite intimidating, to say the least. I have the names of over 400 scientists and inventors that can be researched.

      Send me an email. I freely share information with anyone inquisitive enough to ask me for it!



  19. Kev

    Actually, Tesla’s oscillating transformer was a way of redirecting the back EMF wave, and recapturing it through an opposing oscillator as an accelerating magnetic oscillation. This is called bi-toroidal induction. It is a proven fact. There are only dozens of patents issued on this technology. I share them with anyone who wants them, the most recent that I have was issued June, 2013, to Barbosa and Leal, in Brazil. My earliest is from 1871, by Daniel Mcfarlain Cook. In fact, I have an entire chapter of motionless pulsed systems, which includes these types of transformer arrays, and others. There are many, many patents and many scientists working on these systems.

    If anyone wants information on these types of systems, or any others that I have previously mentioned, just email me and ask.

    Tom should re-read Nikola Tesla’s article… Perhaps he may find what he missed, and how it pertains to Heavisides equations, concerning electromagnetic induction. This is why Nikola Tesla was profoundly interested, as he had already designed the radio circuit some decades before this. It was through these studies that he disproved Dr. Hertz theory and Oliver Heavisides equations. It was through frequency and resonance that he discovered how to accumulate an electrostatic charge using step up, step down transformers.

    We can’t create electricity, after all…we can only collect it and disperse it. These are, after all, simply magnetic waves, in opposing spin. They are an effect of the planet spinning through space..

    What is so hard to understand about this? Nothing. Nothing at all. This is the easy part.

    • Fusion is coming if not already here. Mine requires next to nothing. Magnetic energy has been disproven because magnets lose their magnetic fields eventually. Just wait and see. We’ll have power out the wazoo.

    • Love your post Kev x

  20. This is silly!

    I mean, if this really existed, many people with a lot to lose might work against it being built, but somebody who realized the wealth potential would build it and use it exclusively for as long as possible to become rich themselves.

    The reason that none of this has happened is simply because it’s pure nonsense.

    • AC

      Large Businesses & Corporation s thrive on making billions off of oil, gas and energy and if this was made public to everyone they would lose all their wealthand power. Majority of this is political, those who control all those resources can charge however they want and have a legitimate excuse to pursue those resources iif they lack any.

      wake up and realize that this world is not a close minded world. information and possibilities are all around us, you just have to stop lying to yourself and acceptthat.

      • tom

        AC says ‘Large Businesses & Corporation s thrive on making billions off of oil, gas and energy and if this was made public to everyone they would lose all their wealthand power.

        I say: Do you really think being profitable is a secret? It’s about market share, and those greedy companies produce stuff people want. Nobody holds a gun to your head and says: “Buy from Large Businesses & Corporations or die.” You have alternatives, but most people don’t like them.

        ‘Free energy’ gadgets etc discussed here failed to deliver years ago, and shills like Kev keep them alive while ignoring physics, chemistry, biology and logic. Kev is always ‘about to do’ something miraculous and astounding, but never actually does it. He’s a librarian, caring for failed ideas and pitching them as repressed secrets that you can cash in on: Just send money. The ‘casimir effect’ so breathlessly discussed in Arjun’s main article takes nanometer quantum mechanics and applies it to the larger world where it doesn’t apply. If you’ve read the links Arjun included you’d know this.

        The greens are shutting off your most economical energy alternatives like coal, nuc and hydro in favor of high-priced wind and solar. So far, wind and solar produce about 5% of the world’s energy, mostly because it is stupidly expensive and stupefyingly unreliable: There has to be a power dam, coal or gas plant in spinning reserve to pick up the load when the wind quits or the sky occludes. As long as they are spinning, the reserves might as well be the firming power, not reserve power. The cost difference is zip.

        AC says: wake up and realize that this world is not a close minded world. information and possibilities are all around us, you just have to stop lying to yourself and acceptthat.

        I say; wake up and go slower on the kool Aid. Use your favorite search engine to get info from ‘hostile’ sources. For rural readers, that would be your co-op power company, forced to buy power at 3-10x higher prices to satisfy the greenie’s need for a ‘diverse’ (read boutique) power.

        AC says: Majority of this is political, those who control all those resources can charge however they want and have a legitimate excuse to pursue those resources iif they lack any.’

        I say: Partly true. but probably not for the reasons you think: It depends on the flavor of your Kool-Aid. Many of the resources come from federal land, and politics has closed millions of acres to exploration of any sort. The Sierra Club’s web site has a page dedicated to the end of coal, which produces 45% of US power. They have an army of lobbiest in all levels of government. Nuclear plants produce 20%, yet CE is anti-nuke. I bet they aren’t powering their server farm with bicycles. If it weren’t for the glut of natural gas from fracking we’d be in serious trouble as greenies cheeer the breaching of power dams and closure of land to exploration. What if your ‘Large Business & corp’ paid the feds dearly for leases to explore those lands? Too bad so sad, no refunds. Finally, small power co-ops have been set adrift by politics: Forced to buy at spot prices (remember Enron) because the Bonneville power administration, a federal agency – reneged on long-term contracts so they could sell ‘green’ hydro-power to California at a higher rate. They stole from farmers so old hippies can plug in Chevy volts.

        The list of perfidious acts are long and ignoble.

        • Sheila Stoner

          I mostly agree with your reply, however the true cost of coal is horrendous.
          I would prefer Thorium, but that would take a lot of research. I favor nuclear energy when the life cycle and safety is taken into account. Sadly this has not been the case.
          I used to live a few miles from Three Mile Island and I was only worried long after the incident.
          Green energy is a viable and needed part of our energy policy and should be promoted.
          Calling people Greenies demeans the exchange of ideas, along with suggestions of drug use.
          The uninhibited exploitation of our environment does no one any lasting good.
          Nor does the opposite.
          There are breakthroughs in science and engineering (my field) every day and there is nothing wrong with looking at what might be considered crazy. Think solid state electronics, especially the tunnel diode when it came out.

          • tom

            Sheila: Thanks for the reply. I have a few questions.

            What is your field?

            What’s great about tunnel diodes?

            What outliers do you consider when you say the true cost of coal is horrendous?

            Can you clarify your statement about TMI?

            What is better about Thorium vs Uranium? It was considered back in the 50s and lost favor. Is there a new process afoot that doesn’t require a plutonium ignition source?

            My cool-aid comments are aimed at information sources, not pharmaceuticals. For example, the Sierra club has an anti-coal and nuc agenda, so their spin is different from that of a power supplier that has to watch cost. I live in Montana, where the two gigawatt plants built in the 70′s at Coalstrip East of Billings are under attack for burning coal when they do it the most efficient way possible – at the mine mouth in the middle of nowhere, and put the slag back in the hole under DEQ and Sierra club scrutiny. Not good enough for some.

            The owners have offered to upgrade their 40 year old plants to modern designs but the Sierra club and EPA inserted carbon capture into the upgrade permit – a technology that doesn’t even exist. So the utility has the choice of either leaving things as they were 40 years ago or invent new technologies. Or shut down and scrap the plant, the real goal of the Sierra club.

            The plants are for sale, but due to unknown cost of upgrade or disposal, they sport a negative $166 million price tag.

            If you pull out a Montana map you’ll note that Coalstrip is literally in the middle of nowhere, and the land is so poor it takes 200 acres to graze a cow/calf unit. That’s next to useless, and there’s nothing but jackrabbits 100 miles downwind. Yet the Sierra club gets pissed when someone digs a hole or releases anything but pure ferret farts made of 100% prairie dog or sage hen.

            On a different note, the MT public service commission decreed that all power companies and coops have to have a portolio of 25% ‘green’ power. Their words, not mine.

            We have several dozen power dams on the Madison, Jefferson, Missouri, blackfoot, and Colombia rivers generating terrawatts of power. By bureaucratic fiat, none of it qualifies as ‘green’ power, forcing companies and coops to buy power from wind farms at 3x hydro prices. That cost does not reflect the reality of tax subsidies for siting, construction, distribution lines and power production.

            The subsidies mask the true cost of wind power,, so if congress ends the subsidies, the utility will end up passing the 5-10x increase on to the consumer.

            As an engineer you know there is data-tag output, and there is reality. If the data tag on a wind generator claims 2MW output, and there are 100 fans in a farm, the owners claim farm capacity of 200MW. That’s wishful thinking. First, all have a duty cycle of 20% or so, so if the wind is right, they have to feather it 80% of the time or run it at 20% capacity all the time to stay within thermal limits. But the wind doesn’t blow optimally very often, so that’s the true limfac. Then there is reliability: How many fans in a farm are feathered for maintenance at any given time?

            Forced into buying from them, power managers learn thru experience what a farm’s dependable output is. Most average 8% of the data tag rating, or 16MW from a 200 MW farm. Whatta deal.

            Solar panels have to be kept scrupulously clean or output falls off rapidly. Those big panels are also damage prone to wind and hail – tho I don’t know the reliability numbers. Then there is night. Some claim we can ‘store’ the day’s output for night use, but after much ado about hydrogen storage, super batteries and flywheels, what little storage there is is hydro dams running backwards, and there is very little of it in the USA.

            As a result, green power provides about 5% of the USA power demand, maybe 10% on a sunny windy day.

            That’s a long ways from a coal/nuc/hydro/gas turbine that can make 100% data tag rating 24/7 except for maintenance. And they are energy dense, taking a fraction of acreage of wind or solar.

            My local co-op has been the only source of much of that info. So my kool-aid is different than the Sierra club’s. One is a producer, the other an obstructionist. Which makes YOUR life better?

        • You would do well to actually seek out a device and see it for yourself “Tom” love Leasa Nolson Free Energy Party Uk political party leader xx

          • tom

            “Leasa”: If you have a working device of some sort tell me more!

          • Kev

            The tunnel diode has a region in its voltage current characteristic where the current decreases with increased forward voltage, known as its negative resistance region. This characteristic makes the tunnel diode useful in oscillators and as a microwave amplifier. The element germanium, a magnetic compound, is used in this device.
            Also known as the Esaki diode, it is a type of semiconductor that is capable of very fast operation, well into the microwave frequency region, made possible by the use of the quantum mechanical effect called tunneling.
            It was invented in August 1958 by Leo Esaki when he was with Tokyo Tsushin Kogyo, now known as Sony.Back in 1973, he received the Nobel Prize in Physics, jointly with Brian Josephson, for discovering the electron tunneling effect that these diodes use.
            Tunnel diode is the p-n junction device that exhibits negative
            resistance. That means when the voltage is increased the current through it decreases. Esaki reported the first paper on tunnel diodes in Physical Review in 1958.
            This is based on an understanding of back emf wave resistance and creating negative resistance by redirecting it into an opposing, oscillating magnetic wave.
            This is the main component of bi-toroidal induction.


        • Kev

          The interesting part of this is that the wind and the tides are simply a secondary effect of our gyrating orb. Rather than tying into these fields, as secondary conduits, it is possible to tie into the prime force through inertia, and utilize this same force through inductive resonance.
          Induction of magnetic waves, through torsion dynamics is not only possible, it is highly classified and being used by Industrial Military Corporations such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing Aerospace, Hughes, Bell, and dozens of others. I believe that Electrogravitics was first discovered by Nikola Tesla, and his experiments with resonating transformers, back in the 1920′s. He wrote several papers about this anomaly, which he felt disproved Dr. Hertz’s theories and also Oliver Heaviside’s equations.
          And it did.
          However, to my dismay, conventional thinkers cling to these obsolete ideas, even though the current quantum models show these to be false, or at least, incomplete.
          James Clark Maxwell’s original theory of the electromagnetic field is one of the main pillars of modern theoretical physics and, of course, played a key role in the formulation and the development of Einstein’s special theory of relativity.
          The history of special relativity may be taken to begin with Poincaré in 1899 when he claimed that optical experiments really depended only on the relative velocity of the bodies in question and that absolute motion in this sense was undetectable.
          For more details, see Whittaker 1951.
          Poincaré in 1904 and Einstein in 1905 announced the principle of relativity stating that no experiment could distinguish one inertial frame from another and hence that all physical laws should reflect this nonvariance. It extended the Newtonian principle of relativity from mechanical to all experiments.
          The true understanding of what is now called special relativity originates with Einstein’s paper of 1905. It is not entirely clear whether Einstein was aware of the Michelson–Morley experiment at the time, it appears that he probably was. In any case, Einstein had no need of an ether and accordingly rejected it. He argued, roughly speaking, that one should keep the inertial frames of Newtonian theory but should include, in addition, this much stronger principle of relativity, together with the assumption that each inertial observer would measure exactly the same speed of light, independently of its direction with respect to that observer.
          One cannot retain the Galilean transformations, since they are inconsistent with this assumption. Einstein then calculated the (consistent) transformations between inertial frames needed to replace these Galilean transformations and gave the first real physical derivation of the Lorentz transformations, which had, in fact, been used earlier by Voigt and Lorentz and named after Lorentz by Poincaré.
          From this, it followed that Newton’s absolute time had to be abandoned as inconsistent with these transformations. Absolute space was essentially as in Newton’s theory.
          Einstein was also able to show that the contraction hypotheses of Fitzgerald and Lorentz arose naturally in his theory and that it was of a kinematic rather than a physical nature. He also showed that the preservation of time by the Galilean transformations in Newtonian theory was replaced, in his theory, by an equation describing the ‘relative’ nature of time for inertial observers.
          After an earlier and incomplete attempt by Lorentz, of which Einstein was apparently unaware, Einstein was able to use the assumption that Maxwell’s equations are invariant in form under the Lorentz transformations, as required by the principle of relativity, to find the relations between the electric and magnetic fields in two inertial frames. It turned out that the electric field for one inertial observer is a particular combination of the electric and magnetic fields of the other observer, the precise nature of which depends on the kinematic relationship between the two observers, and similarly for the magnetic field.
          It follows that the electric and magnetic fields do not, in this sense, have a separate existence but rather are observer-dependent manifestations of a single electromagnetic field.
          Einstein, in his 1905 paper, referred to the strange asymmetry in the physical description of the important experiment of Faraday as being at variance with the experimental symmetry. This problem arises as a consequence of its being described by a single observer in terms of his electric and magnetic fields and the dependence of these fields on the observer.
          Thus, Maxwell’s work, together with Einstein’s special relativity theory, constituted a unification of the electric and magnetic fields into a more meaningful electromagnetic field.
          This work continues to evolve. Much of this evolution has been classified by the Military Industrial Complex, which control the patents as well as the scientists doing this research.
          Complex, yet uniquely coherent. The natural evolution of this enigmatic knowledge continues.

          • SiD

            Why do your replies always quickly turn into nothing more than a history lesson? You’re not making any actual points. It reads as if your just misdirecting from having no real argument, to me.

          • Kev

            Well SiD, if you want to understand the current theories being used in electromagnetics,you need to understand how these theories were originally presented, by James Clark Maxwell, and how they were authenticated by Nikola Tesla.
            The entire World needs a history lesson on this subject. This way they can better understand how the current logistics misrepresent the understood function.
            If you want some modern information, look into Hyperdimensional Physics, Microwave plasma Physics, and Torsion Physics. The modern evaluations of induction, implosion and interferometry are at odds with Newtonian laws, which many people adhere to as if it were a life raft, and they would sink to the depths of the ocean without it.
            Perhaps this is why I quote the work of others, long passed. This work needs to be re-evaluated, and science is showing us this a little bit more every day.

            People like Nikola Tesla, Townsend Brown and Thomas Henry Moray were cutting edge pioneers in this field. Most of their work has been destroyed, or commandeered by government agencies.
            Perhaps a history lesson is needed by many of us.

            Simple questions do not always receive simple answers, SiD.
            Sometimes the complexities are overlooked.
            Sometimes it is the simplicity.


        • Kev

          Tom stated:” Kev is always ‘about to do’ something miraculous and astounding, but never actually does it. He’s a librarian, caring for failed ideas and pitching them as repressed secrets that you can cash in on: Just send money.”
          Wow. Really?
          Let’s be clear. Tom has no idea what he is talking about.
          My fingers are cut and raw from building circuits, windings and oscillating toroids. A librarian I am not, but thank you for that slip up. I am informed and somewhat educated, and I do have access to volumes of information. This is true.

          I am not interested in acquiring funds from anybody. This is what Tom has continuously misrepresented in this forum.
          This is fear mongering, plain and simple. It is deceitful commentary.
          This would be expected from someone working for energy interests, and not towards the common good of mankind.
          Tom stated ” Kev is always ‘about to do’ something miraculous and astounding, but never actually does it.”
          How would you know this Tom? You have no idea who I am or who I am working with. You have no information regarding my accomplishments or in the direction that my interests lay. You do not know about the products that I have invented and sold, or the remuneration that I have acquired through this work. Tom continuous to reference financial concerns, without any understanding that these concerns are minimal to me.
          If all else fails, I have properties in a tropical country. I have fertile farmland that can support a community. I have windmills and solar power systems running irrigation.
          I can walk away from this material life any time I wish, but due to my production of monoatomic material, I now have several hundred people requesting my services, and need to build the large scale production and development facility first. This has the potential to become quite extensive and incredibly profitable. I have already reached my limitations on production, using my current method, and the orders keep coming in.

          I am also using monoatomic elements in hydro/aeroponic gardening, as it is non-chemical and a natural, organic method of production. It is also an anti-fungal and being used against fusarium oxysporum, more commonly known as powdery mildew.

          I am currently doing tests on this compound as an antibacterial, and so far, it has been very effective.

          I have been on this forum for several months, that is all. My current project, due to it’s scale, and also conflicting obligations, will take me over two years to complete. It is important that I follow through with this task, all other concerns and responsibilities aside. This will not be instantaneous.

          Tom expects magic. Science is not magic.

          This is hard work. Time consuming expensive work, compounded by mistakes and injuries, as the physical task is much more frustrating and time consuming than the design process.
          I wish Tom could understand this, instead of continuously printing inaccurate information about my intentions, simply to attempt to discredit my work, my mind, and my values.

          I am not sure what you value Tom. You state:
          “The greens are shutting off your most economical energy alternatives like coal, nuc and hydro in favor of high-priced wind and solar. So far, wind and solar produce about 5% of the world’s energy, mostly because it is stupidly expensive and stupefyingly unreliable: There has to be a power dam, coal or gas plant in spinning reserve to pick up the load when the wind quits or the sky occludes. As long as they are spinning, the reserves might as well be the firming power, not reserve power. The cost difference is zip.”

          The cost difference is massive.

          The long term medical costs of what Tom calls economical energy alternatives, are not alternatives at all, but the cause of the rise in cancer rates today. These added costs today are in the billions, the long term cost are in the trillions..

          The long term genetic damage form what Tom calls economical alternatives, are astounding. I have no idea why he listed hydro, as this is along the lines of wind energy, being clean and renewable.
          You talk about “the greens” Tom, as if they are not a socially conscious, morally based group of conservative ideologists, more intent on preserving this planet that we call home, than exploiting it’s reserves and letting the rest of us pay for the consequences. This is a term used by zealots, more intent on protecting their profits, than actually benefiting humankind
          The terminology Tom uses has convinced me that he is an internet troll, working for the energy interests, and not committed to changing anything. I have observed over the past several months, that there are several people in the energy forums using the same arguments (laughable) and the same terminology and rhetoric repeatedly, doing little more than confusing people here.
          Many of us know that people speaking openly about ideas to convert magnetic waves, into usable electricity, are being subjected to ridicule by these internet trolls who are working for big energy interests.

          There are other avenues to improve the response of wind generators, using dual-lever pendulum oscillators, similar to Veljko Milkovic designs and patents. These simple systems can be used to augment the initial compression, allowing 10 times more force into the reaction, through oscillation.

          The future is extremely bright, once we break the chains holding us back. These chains are imaginary. They are mental constraints, designed to hold the minions back, the peasants, the unyielding masses.

          I also recognize that I would not feel comfortable discussing toroidal induction concepts with a bunch of inbred hillbillies. I would first see which William Hill had the ability to understand these processes, what type of character this person may be, where his intentions might lay, before moving forward with sharing this information.

          This is the mindset of the technological elite. Persons with an intellectual understanding of advanced concepts are weened out of the basic curriculum at an early age. Some of my family has been approached by secretive organizations, offering work in specialized fields. Some have taken the plunge, only to regret it in later years. I made my intentions clear, from an early age, that I had no interests in masonic organizations, secret groups and meetings, or classified operational security protocols. If I was approached, my position was abundantly clear.
          I had an opportunity to work within a specialized investigation into quark theory, particle physics, working with an accelerator, and decided this was not my avenue of interest.
          I was able to study chemistry and physics at the University of Victoria when I was 16. I was part of a group of advanced students from Lambrick Park, who had the opportunity to become involved in these fields at an early age. My score was 97.4%. I decided to not pursue this direction, as there were too many limitations imposed through academia.
          I moved into horticulture, through organic chemistry, and then into medicine.
          It is unfortunate that you are unable to see the connections between much of the information that I have referenced. I can understand your confusion, as it has taken me many years to see these intricacies.
          I am no dummy Tom. I am also not interested in your funds, your threats or your limited imagination.
          I simply have work to do.

    • hummingbirdcyborg
      Your prediction is already in force, they have used this without your knowledge for detrimental things, drones, LNER and HAARP is also a Tesla invention, if they allowed everyone to have these, which we are working towards at the free energy party “they” lose the monopoly which allows abundance and thrive instead of striving to survive. The reason they have had to suppress it is because of this fear they have of scarcity which they have created and we all have bought into it.. I can assure you this is real.

    • Kev

      Your logic defeats itself, little cyborg. You simply have no idea how the system actually works, and what is at risk to these industrialists you silly little robotic bird!
      The financial constraints alone are unreal. The political and industrial power brokers will constrain it, if they have any thoughts that someone is mass producing cheap, renewable sources of energy. Anyone can make one of these systems for themselves if they have some time, money and a little ingenuity. It is much harder to make hundreds of thousands of systems, without running up against those who are dead set against it.
      It is time for a reality check. What is real is that these systems exist.
      What is unreal is the resistance and the opposition to this clean energy. This is what I have a hard time believing.
      These people, some being deceptionists, and their blunt refusal to even contemplate these ideas, are simply unreal. And infuriating.
      There is only so much consideration that I can manifest, when dealing with these faceless zealots, only so much patience that I have for these discussions.
      There is no such thing as pure nonsense, or pure ignorance. Only truth is pure.
      This is what we are attempting to acquire.


  21. Pingback: The Illusion Of Matter: Our Physical Reality Isn’t Really Physical At All | MYSTICALIME

  22. My thoughts exactly Steve, get the plans out there, let people test them, build them themselves… if it truly can be free, you have a moral responsibility to make the knowledge available to everybody… why keep trying to convince us that it’s possible when it’s all such a secret… publish the plans

    • Kev

      How many are you looking for Vickie? Send me an email. I will send you 400 or so.
      I hope you have a decent sized mailbox!

  23. Pingback: What’s Going On In Venuezeula? | Collective-Evolution

  24. Steve

    Hey Kev, why not crowdsource your free energy machines? Too busy arguing about their existence?

    • Kev

      I send information out to dozens of people everyday Steve. I am currently working with dozens of cancer patients, all extremely concerned with the current changes coming here in Canada on April 1st. I have obligations with many people with disabilities, illnesses and injuries, that still need my time and attention.
      I am currently working with Magnetic Oscillators, toroidal induction, to be precise. I am just one of many people working in these fields, as they are quite old. I have documentation and issued patents going back to 1871 on these types of systems. This is the low key end, Steve. There are many other avenues of research available. I just finished testing LG’s microwave Plasma Discharge Lamp. This device was serial number two, and the very first tests were done by me, in Canada. It produced 215 000 lux, or lumens, at a 730 watt draw, at 225 volts.
      Many companies are using this type of step up step down transformational energy, for decades. The frequency taps the collapsing gravitic wave. This is a component of enertia. This science is real. Heavisides renditions of Maxwells original theories are incomplete. There is no scaler, or time component. It is three dimensional math in a Four dimensional world.
      If you want to see someone who is “crowdsourcing”, look into Patrick J. Kelly.
      I have my own system designed, and I am still trying to find the time to build it. I have my own idea of how to increase the inductive influence of a bi-toroidal inducer. The early tests that I conducted were successful. I maintained an active, oscillating 100 volt electromagnetic field without a power supply attached. All it took was a series of spikes with a small battery to start the oscillation, and it continued on it’s own. I used a tesla circuit, attached to this device to split the magnetic wave into an electromagnetic wave. I electrified several dozen people with device. I have moved into a serious investigation of these refractionary systems, spending many thousands of dollars over the past two years collecting and ordering newly declassified material from Germany, and several other countries, as well as over half a million feet of ceramic coated copper magnet wire, and a coil winder from japan. Thousands of dollars has been spent ordering the components for the larger inducers, but it will take several months of consistent work to complete just the framework of this device. Then the induction circuit needs to be designed.
      If you want any information regarding these devices or this technology, emal me at, and I will send you some information along the lines of my current investigation and experimentation.

      I also have two different business obligations, and am currently conducting a two year investigation into monoatomic elements. I have several brand new, and incredibly innovative products that I am trying to bring into the public market through awareness of these compounds.
      So..this is why. I am about the knowledge my friend. Those that can’t keep up, are not going to slow me down.
      I have reached many many people through these forums, many hundreds of people have contacted me over the last few months, as my interests are incredibly diverse, and incredibly complicated.
      Arguing interpretations of our physical world with people unable to comprehend it, has caused many people to question what they think they know, and contact me for information explaining the realities of our natural world. An electromagnetic oscillator. It really is that simple. I am glad for this opportunity that the people at Collective Evolution have provided, as I have met many like-minded people interested in truly exploring these very real concepts.
      Give me a buzz at my email Steve. i will be happy to share the many thousands of files that I possess on this material. It is truly quite unreal.


    • Kev

      Email me Steve. Then you can see how much information is already published. Thousands of documents are available.
      My responsibility is not about pleasing everyone, just those who take the hard road. Real research needs real sacrifice. This takes time, energy, and money. Those of us who take this on, share the knowledge with whomever we wish. I openly discuss these concepts with those that take the time to contact me directly.

      Those that feel that they simply deserve it, without any understanding of the principles behind this technology, are greatly mistaken. These systems will first benefit those who understand them, and improve the designs of them. There are many, many people working on this material, not just myself! There are thousands of people worldwide, working to free themselves from the energy cartels. I am in contact with hundreds of them.
      Mr. Steele took the time to explain his device to Tom, in great detail. Read that discussion.
      He was very patient, explaining everything in detail, but Tom completely disregarded his information, because he does not have the ability to do much, other than copy and paste other peoples work and explanations.
      I know infants that can do that.
      I have an understanding of Mr. Steeles system, using dual oscillating capacitors to induce electromagnetic induction, utilizing the back emf waves. Mr. Steele has been in contact with me and sent me all his information, which I have already investigated and understand completely, due to my research of Nikola Teslas electrostatic accumulators. I explained to Mr. Steel several variations of his device, as inductive oscillators. I also pointed out several similar devices here:

      Through example, we can lead the way out of this fog of corruption, complexity and deceit.
      Those who choose to contact me, and dive into this research, have my respect and gratitude. These are the people that will change the world. And we need you.
      Thank you.

      • tom

        Where is the Mr. Steele discussion? I cannot find it.

        • Kev

          No kidding Tom. This is what happens when you mix technical data with disinformation. It gets confusing.
          Mr. Steel Brayden contacted me so I read your discussion with him. You argued pointless rhetoric and antiquated theories, trying to confuse readers about his invention. Perhaps you should consider why and who you are berating.
          Steel Brayden is a retired engineer who I have been in contact with. I recognize his system as being bi-toroidal, using opposing magnetic fields to accelerate the opposing force through back emf induction. A very simple idea.
          You need to ask people for their work, Tom, instead of berating or negating it. They will be more forthcoming this way.
          Sheila Stoner is a heavy ground radar specialist, with an expertise in electronic warfare, robotics and computer systems/networks. I received an email from her, requesting patent data last week.
          You could learn a thing or two from her.and others here, if you weren’t so distressing and argumentative. I would be very surprised if she answered any of your questions, as none were relevant.
          Your dialogue into drug abuse, directed at me, was more than likely what she was referring to.
          Tom, you stated that
          “My local co-op has been the only source of much of that info. So my kool-aid is different than the Sierra club’s. One is a producer, the other an obstructionist. Which makes YOUR life better?”
          Which one is which? You seem to be intent on obstructionism, anti-experimentation, and conflict. Most of tour commentary, when dismantled and examined, defies logic entirely.
          Your knowledge of technical data, mixed with obsolescence, combined with the obstructionist attitude that you have displayed here, is a reminder of Thomas Edison’s flagrant rants about the dangers of AC current. Soon after, the psychopath started electrocuting dogs, horses and elephants, trying to terrorize the masses into believing his deception.
          Much of what you failed to understand in my descriptive commentaries is understood by advanced thinkers. The concepts we are dealing with is energy, which cannot be created or destroyed. It can be collected, and pulsed, to increase the wavelength of monopolar collapse.
          This is what Edison failed to realize. He was not able to think outside the box that his original information arrived in. Static thinking, so to speak.
          What he failed to comprehend, is that direct current uses the charge, while AC current uses the charge as a receiver, and the magnetic wave attracted into this higher frequency discharge, or pulse, is an oscillatory force, meaning it reverberates like a pendulum, providing much more work than a static discharge. This is why it travels further, with more usable force, as the attracted magnetic wave does the actual work through this system of induction, and not the initial charge or output.

          Sheila mentioned in her email to me,
          “One of our devices actually used a mag amp. (Magnetic Amplifier) Which the Germans used on their subs. Basically a saturable core transformer that you apply a variable dc current to, to control the amount of coupling and therefor the output. Not too many folks know about that simple circuit..”
          This is how toroidal systems and oscillators work. It is through induction and conduction, or transfer of electromagnetic wave function, and redirecting the back EMF wave through conduction into an inductive resonant field, in opposing polar vortices, and then simply allowing the repetition of this process to continue unimpeded.
          Edward Leedskalnin used a very simple device to do this, based on Daniel McFarlane Cooks’ twin coil resonator, patented in 1871, which I presented in this forum.
          So did Lester Hendershot and Alfred Hubbard. This is the same concept used in Professor Searls’ SEG device.
          This is where I am focusing my time and resources, as I am already using hydrodynamic electrostatics, combined with a monopolar torsion field, to condensate monoatomic elements, through induction.
          This is very real.
          Old is new again.


          • tom

            Kev: Just to refresh your memory, on 26 feb you wrote to Steve that:

            “Mr. Steele took the time to explain his device to Tom, in great detail. Read that discussion.
            He was very patient, explaining everything in detail, but Tom completely disregarded his information, because he does not have the ability to do much, other than copy and paste other peoples work and explanations.

            i then asked: ‘Where is the Steele discussion?”

            Your response is: “No kidding Tom. This is what happens when you mix technical data with disinformation. It gets confusing.
            Mr. Steel Brayden contacted me so I read your discussion with him.”

            So Mr. Steel(e)’s patient explanation is a lie, and you mix technical data with disinformation. Good to see you documenting it so well. I think that’s one of the first honest and verifiable things you’ve said.

          • Kev

            The Tom commenting in the discussion that I mentioned was fully capitalized.
            The conversation I refer to, is this explanation of a resonating alternator.

            Steele Braden :
            I have produced an alternator that CANCELS out ALL BACK-TORQUE!!
            The only work that the small drive motor has to do is overcome very small air and bearing friction.
            As you know, all “standard” alternators, produce back-torque when an electrical load is connected to their output.
            The lower the resistance of the load, the more mechanical energy that has to be put into rotating the alternators shaft.
            My machine on the other hand, has no connection between the rotational energy requirements of the small drive motor and the output energy.
            Basically, two rotary capacitors that are 180 degrees out of step with each other, RECYCLE a charge back and forth between them indefinitely.
            When one rotary capacitor is fully “meshed” (maximum capacitance,) the other cap. is unmeshed (minimum capacitance.)
            To placate the “conservation of energy” guys, this machine certainly conserves power, in that it RECYCLES power, so does not deplete the initially placed charge.
            The machine would normally lose about 9 microamps through imperfect insulation etc, but the machine also keeps the HT charge topped up.
            My machine is only small, so not very practical, but a larger machine would produce some useful output.
            For every 440 picofarads swing, 20 watts flows.
            This is at high voltage and low current AC and has to be stepped down to e.g. 12 volts, where the current rises to something useful.
            Much more on this if you are interested.
            Remember, the bumble bee cannot fly .Aerodynamic expets have proven this.
            Its body weight is far too heavy in proportion to its wings surface area.
            However, just don’t tell the bumble bee this.
            Heavier than air powered machines will never fly!
            Until the Wright brothers came along.
            Remember – that a man could never fly with just his own body energy, until a guy flew across the English Channel.
            Remember the sound “barrier”.
            The “Conservation of energy “law” has no formula and only serves to put a millstone around the necks of would-be inventors, who give up before even trying after being “informed” on this “law”.


            December 15, 2013 at 6:15 pm
            surely then, you know what entropy is. please explain how your machine deals with energy loss via entropy, and enthalpy.

            steele braden
            December 19, 2013 at 7:37 pm
            Hi Nick, my machine RECYCLES power into and out of two rotary capacitors.
            As you know, capacitors are open-circuit devices, so cannot loose their charge.
            My circuit never has a capacitor connected via its terminals directly to the load.
            Instead, the capacitors are connected in series and in series with the load.
            The load only gets power when the rotary capacitors are actually rotating and sending the current back and forth between them
            This certainly CONSERVES power as it is being recycled.
            If you simply connect a load to a single capacitors terminals (or a battery), yes you will run down the charge of the cap. or battery.
            We are not doing that here.
            As explained earlier, there would be about 9 microamps leakage through imperfect insulation etc., but the machine also works as a HT DC generator which tops up the otherwise wasted HT losses.
            The unmeshing cap. DOES have some back electrostatic drag, but at this same instant, the rotary cap. that is going INTO mesh, experiences attraction assistance in closing.
            These two forces are identical and so CANCEL each other OUT!!
            Thus the small drive motor “feels” no work other than very small bearing and air friction.
            The output of the machine has no relationship to the rotational energy requirements of the drive motor, so the word “efficiency” has no meaning.
            Efficiency, normally applies to the ratio between input power and output power.

            Thanks Steel Braden, for providing a description of your experiment and all your work.
            Thank you for contacting me with this information.

            Every time that you call me a liar Tom, you degrade the conversation and demean the information that it contains. The only untruthful person in this conversation, it seems, is you, whoever you are.
            You are the one still hiding your identity, even though I have asked you who you are and what your background is, many, many times. Only dishonest people feel the need to wear masks. What are you so afraid of…no do not feel obligated to answer. I know what you fear. The truth may show your ignorance. I am not afraid of this, because I am not fearful of being proven wrong, as the outcome is that I can correct my equations, and move forward. This is what I am currently doing, but you keep wanting to argue irrational and obsolete theories that were never properly explained or understood when they were developed decades, even hundreds of years ago.
            I certainly do not have time for this as I am simply moving on with the conversations that I am having with technical specialists, engineers, physicists and students of electromagnetic principalia.
            You, Tom, well, you just make me sick.
            I do wonder who your employer is, and what they pay you to sculk around energy forums. You lie often about me, saying That I am a fraud and that I am here soliciting investors. That is a complete lie. You repeat this vernacular often adding other inconsistencies. Other inaccuracies. Other lies.

            Tom said:
            So Mr. Steel(e)’s patient explanation is a lie, and you mix technical data with disinformation. Good to see you documenting it so well. I think that’s one of the first honest and verifiable things you’ve said.

            Kev says:
            Once again, everything that I have stated is honest and verifiable and I freely share the patents, theories and technical data with anyone who asks. You Tom, strangely, are not one of these people. Perhaps not so strange, regarding your employer.


          • tom

            Kev says: ‘The Tom commenting in the discussion that I mentioned was fully capitalized. The conversation I refer to, is this explanation of a resonating alternator. – ‘

            I say: None of the rest appears in this blog, so I assume you are making it up. Good that you put your name to it as author so no rational person need take responsibility to phrases like “the capacitors are not connected, they are connected in parallel to the load.’ Got it.

            Or “The lower the resistance of the load, the more mechanical energy that has to be put into rotating the alternators shaft.” Great, less work so work harder.

            Kev says: “Remember, the bumble bee cannot fly .Aerodynamic expets have proven this.”

            I say: What expets said it? Who exactly? That’s an old wives tale, no aerodynamicist ever said it, because the evidence is obvious and easily falsifiable.

            Kev says: “Remember – that a man could never fly with just his own body energy, until a guy flew across the English Channel.”

            I say: Who said that? Aother bromide: Study Otto Lilientahal.

            Kev says The “Conservation of energy “law” has no formula ”

            I say: The first law of thermodynamics is well described mathematically, look it up

            It’s good that your imaginary Mr. Steele admits that his resonating alternator is both impractical and useless unless it is scaled up. Exactly like the Casimir effect, polar vortices, intermolecular hydrodynamic enertia, etc. You get the idea.

            Remember, the gold standard of the scientific method is a working model. Oh that’s right, you think the SM is a stupid ‘theory.’ How silly of us to want proof.

          • tom

            Kev says: Once again, everything that I have stated is honest and verifiable and I freely share the patents, theories and technical data with anyone who asks. You Tom, strangely, are not one of these people. Perhaps not so strange, regarding your employer.

            I say: Who’s my employer Kev?

          • Kev

            My guess is that your income is directly related to military spending. My reasons are simple.
            Your earlier rhetoric, and military terminology tells me that you haven’t moved very far away from this. You stated earlier that you have a military background and then followed up with terminology related to military indoctrination. Your inability or unwillingness to even remotely accept the possibilities of these very well understood principles of induction and interferometry, shows me that you have a very deceptive agenda here.

            Your obsession with free energy discussions, coupled with your unwillingness to properly investigate the pertinent information in these fields, and your attitude and direction of thought being in direct opposition to the leading minds on our planet, leads many of us here that are reading your commentary, including myself, that you obviously have some other agenda in these forums, than sharing information with others. Your hatred and condemnation is apparent. And quite useless here.

            You seem to do anything that you can to stop people from doing their own investigation, Tom.
            You use childish terms, and fear mongering, financial commentary that is non-pertinent and fraudulent, as well as insolence and defamatory statements.
            Your conclusions are nothing more than adolescent opinions, based on the public education system and high school physics manuals that you transcribe here, on these forums, without evaluation or an understanding for the terminology.
            Who is your employer Tom?
            And for the sixth, or seventh time, what is your agenda here, as it certainly isn’t about sharing useful information, is it?
            You spread lies and deceit as if you are spreading seed for next seasons harvest.
            What do you intend to grow with this?
            The fact remains, that the systems that I describe, are very similar to solar panels, except instead of collecting the bonded electromagnetic wave, via “photon” bombardment, these electrostatic accumulators receive the magnetic waves and combine them into electromagnetic waves.
            Magnetic waves are ever present, and these accumulators simply combine the magnetic fields, via opposing oscillated circuits, into electromagnetic, electrostatic and electromotive force.
            I can provide numerous factual representations and devices, along with schematics, patents, and discussions on how these systems work, and advice on building them yourself. These are available to anyone who asks.

            What are you so afraid of Tom?
            You keep asking for proof.
            Try to prove to me that you actually exist.
            Try and convince me.
            Good luck.


          • tom

            Link inop. The url is jibberish

          • Kev

            Tom, how can we expect you to be intelligent, when you can’t even figure out a misprint? It is obvious, simply by reading it,(Yes! Reading!) that it is a link to a collective evolution article.
            It should be obvious, to anyone with intelligence, that this was a collective evolution link. Your failure to recognize this is the epitome of your combined intellectualism.

            Your lack of investigative ability is paramount to evaluating your commentary.
            It is simply this lack of foresight and intelligence that reflects on your ability to adequately discuss this complicated subject matter and evaluate it thoroughly.


            Tom said:
            So Mr. Steel(e)’s patient explanation is a lie, and you mix technical data with disinformation. Good to see you documenting it so well. I think that’s one of the first honest and verifiable things you’ve said.

            Kev says:.
            “Tom, you are irresponsible. You are also vicious, arrogant and incredibly ignorant. And now your behavior has become narcissistic, demeaning and foolish.
            Thanks for showing us this.”

            The issue remains; you seem to be unable to do even basic research on your own.
            Get some help. Perhaps with help from several smarter individuals,you will be able to understand some of this:

            and this:


          • tom


            Thanks for sending a working link. My apologies for your time spent finding accurate info to share.

            While following your link back in time I note there were two people who outclass me in brevity and clear thinking. They were ‘skeptic’ and ‘Nick,’ who took on true believers in free energy and gave you an intellectual thrashing. I want to be skeptic, because he teaches. Both promote the scientific method and both specify that if you have a magnetic motor or some other ‘over unity’ device it needs to be proven by an independent person while the inventor is not present. My hat is off to them for their crystal-clear logic and science-based arguments.

            Kev, I suggest you also take that trip and apply what they suggest to your approach. You will certainly learn something.

          • Kev

            I would argue that David Bowlings was informative and articulate, while I felt that Skeptic was more argumentative than informative.
            I also feel that the only person being schooled through that conversation was the Skeptic. He seemed to learn several concepts by investigating the information provided by David. He did not discover this on his own, but was led by the hand by someone who is actually involved in the technical examination via experimentation, and the results of these experiments.

            A basic Tesla circuit is a free energy device. This circuit has been tested extensively. It uses the differential between the ionosphere and terrestrial waves, the same way an anode and cathode work in a battery.




            This one is from the International Journal of Geophysics.

            There is a very simple method for charging small systems. It takes 4 germanium 1N34 diodes (nedoymium N34 grade.), two .22uf ceramic capacitors and two 100uf 50v electrolytic capacitors.
            Magnet wire, solder, an iron rod for ground, and a copper antenna is all you need to build one of these.
            Here is a link to this basic circuit.


            The output is low, and depends very much on the antenna.
            These circuits can be combined in series to increase the output.
            Here is a link to a wiring diagram for a more complex variation of this circuit.


            Anyone with an interest in electronics, electrical systems or electromagnetic engineering and circuitry should be able to build one of these without any difficulty. It doesn’t need to be as complex as the above diagram. I would start with the basic schematic.
            I connected this basic circuit to an oscillator that I built using a microwave transformer. I used a drained double “AA” rechargeable battery to induce a standing 100 volt electromagnetic wave in the circuit. The voltage in the battery was measured at 0.000 volts. Even with no measurable voltage, the 100 volt wave was continuously produced.
            A 120 volt spark gap, used to measure household current, was soldered into the circuit. This small charge indicator stayed lit for several minutes connected to the oscillator, even with the battery completely removed.
            This was viewed by dozens of people, many hundreds of times.
            I tried this with a Duracell AA, non rechargeable battery. It was measured at 1.1 volt. In under 30 seconds, the battery became so hot that the casing started to melt. I tried to remove it from the battery connection but it was too hot too touch.
            I tried this with 9 volt and 12 volt batteries. They all overheated within seconds. Only the rechargeable batteries, without the internal diode, operated without issue.
            It was a very neat and a very simple, inexpensive experiment. It can be replicated by anyone with the vision to do so.
            I have moved on to much more complicated experimentation, which is also much more expensive, and time consuming.
            I am now designing the same toroidal emf function into a much larger system. It will be composed of 16 separate coils, the 8 primaries being 18AWG and of some 6500 turns, the secondaries being 33AWG and over 17 000 turns. The key here is to match the mass of the copper in the coils.
            I am basing this system on patents and designs that I have found over the last two decades or so, from the likes of Nikola Tesla, Lester Hendershot, Alfred Hubbard, T. Henry Moray, Edward Leedskalnin, and several others.

            I have found more designs lately, that are very similar and use the same toroidal and poloidal interaction of magnetic oscillators.
            Here is a link to some corresponding work, experimentation and designs, including several patents.



        • Name (required)

          Tom you are incorrect.

          Here is just one article, relating to your flagrant inaccuracies.



          The finest minds on this planet are convinced that Tom is incorrect, yet still, he persists.

          Tom intentionally and continuously tries to deceive people reading this forum.
          My question is “Why?”

          What sort of ostentatious buffoonery neccessitates such egoic, self congratulation?

          T.rolling O.thers M.emorandum,

          Bravo. Now read a book. Learn something.

      • Kev

        Hi Leasa, thanks for the email!
        I am happy to hear of progressive ideas moving in that direction. I have not heard about Dave Parker running in the U.S. as I am Canadian and I also rarely watch commercial television or take the time to follow “the news” as I dismantle most of what I am told through television as it is childish, demeaning, incendiary and laughable in most cases. Most of the historic data is nonsense, as is much of the scientific evaluations being held to and taught as science.
        I consider the current government establishment, simply an extension of the Club of Rome. The political system as it exists, makes me sick. People seem to confuse democracy and capatilism as the same thing.
        Watching people here quote rationalwiki, and base these understandings on close minded and misunderstood theories that they do not have the capacity to evaluate, and then watch as they try to convince others of this irrationality, through repetition and badgering, is infuriating.
        Attacking people and belittling them for using terminology that they misunderstand, or simply fear, seems to be the nature of some of the individuals here.
        These ideas are not new, and they are not complicated. Particle physics is complicated. Torsion physics is complicated. Ancionic math, using higher topology algebraic equations, or quaternions, is complicated.
        Induction and conduction is not complicated. Our entire planet is a magnetic oscillator. It is the inductor. The planets crust, is a conductor. This is where they Ley Lines come into play, as they provide the conductive pathway for the inductive event. We are already connected to the electrostatic accumulator.
        Now, it is all about understanding how to “compress” this wave, although compression is hardly the correct term.
        Nice hearing from you Leasa!
        Please keep in touch.

    • Kev

      Done Steve.
      Why haven’t you found them? Too busy denying their existence?

  25. Pingback: Fukushima Radiation Already Damaging Thyroid Glands Of California Babies

Leave a Reply

Nikola Tesla Secret
Subscribe to CE Magazine Monthly For Exclusive Content!

We Recommend