Free electricity?

[Sylvia Else]

On 11/11/2010 10:00 PM, Lawrence Logic wrote:

"Felix_the_cat"<go_away@not_here.biz> wrote in message
news:7goCo.1844$MF5.395@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com



Depends what you mean by "for real"?

If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna,
the answer is yes. Crystal radios have always worked this way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio

Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that
technology quiet.

Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no
signal for the receiver to receive.

If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on
your electricity bill, the answer is no. The amount of energy that can be
extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a
crytal radio for their listening pleasure these days.

Sylvia.

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to power it?
What about using a bigger antenna?


I heard about someone in the mid-80's who'd erected a large complex antenna
to harness radio signals, and then modulated them down to 240V 50Hz to power
his house. Apprently he was caught because no-one beyond his house could
pick up 2WS.

I don't know if the story is true but it's technically feasible. It's just
like a transformer except the secondary winding is some distance from the
primary winding. That's pretty much how a radio works anyway...

It seems highly implausible. He'd have to be capturing a significant
proportion of the total transmitter output. It's certainly an urban myth
created by someone with some knowledge, but not enough.

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 11/11/2010 3:49 PM, DavidW wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Felix_the_cat"<go_away@not_here.biz> wrote in message

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to
power it? What about using a bigger antenna?

**It's not about size. It's about location. The size of the antenna
relates to the frequency of operation. Your TV enatenna, for example,
sucks a minute amount of energy from the TV transmitters. Think in
terms of pico Watts (10^ -9 Watts). And a TV antenna is not a small
device. Location, OTOH, is vital. It you (could) run an antenna a few
hundred kms straight up and anchor it (somehow) in orbit, you could
extract significant amounts of power by virtue of the antenna
'cutting' the magnetic lines that surround our planet. Scientists are
working on just that. It is WAY beyond the home constructor. Even the
guys at NASA can't yet develop the technology required. The hurdles
are significant.

Won't that weaken our magnetic field and maybe screw us up completely?

Generators don't use up their magnetic field.

But the Earth's magnetic field appears to flip from time to time, over a
period that's uncertain. If Earth's population started depending on the
field for generating power, it could find itself up a creek without a
paddle.

Sylvia.

 

[kreed]

On Nov 11, 10:42 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote:

On 11/11/2010 10:00 PM, Lawrence Logic wrote:



"Felix_the_cat"<go_away@not_here.biz>  wrote in message
news:7goCo.1844$MF5.395@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com

Depends what you mean by "for real"?

If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna,
the answer is yes. Crystal radios have always worked this way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio

Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that
technology quiet.

Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no
signal for the receiver to receive.

If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on
your electricity bill, the answer is no. The amount of energy that can be
extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a
crytal radio for their listening pleasure these days.

Sylvia.

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to power it?
What about using a bigger antenna?

I heard about someone in the mid-80's who'd erected a large complex antenna
to harness radio signals, and then modulated them down to 240V 50Hz to power
his house.  Apprently he was caught because no-one beyond his house could
pick up 2WS.

I don't know if the story is true but it's technically feasible.  It's just
like a transformer except the secondary winding is some distance from the
primary winding.  That's pretty much how a radio works anyway...

sort of.

It seems highly implausible. He'd have to be capturing a significant
proportion of the total transmitter output. It's certainly an urban myth
created by someone with some knowledge, but not enough.

Sylvia.

Agree. If this worked, it would be a well known method for radio
jamming.

 

[kreed]

On Nov 11, 10:42 pm, Sylvia Else <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote:

On 11/11/2010 10:00 PM, Lawrence Logic wrote:



"Felix_the_cat"<go_away@not_here.biz>  wrote in message
news:7goCo.1844$MF5.395@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com

Depends what you mean by "for real"?

If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna,
the answer is yes. Crystal radios have always worked this way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio

Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that
technology quiet.

Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no
signal for the receiver to receive.

If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on
your electricity bill, the answer is no. The amount of energy that can be
extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a
crytal radio for their listening pleasure these days.

Sylvia.

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to power it?
What about using a bigger antenna?

I heard about someone in the mid-80's who'd erected a large complex antenna
to harness radio signals, and then modulated them down to 240V 50Hz to power
his house.  Apprently he was caught because no-one beyond his house could
pick up 2WS.

I don't know if the story is true but it's technically feasible.  It's just
like a transformer except the secondary winding is some distance from the
primary winding.  That's pretty much how a radio works anyway...

It seems highly implausible. He'd have to be capturing a significant
proportion of the total transmitter output. It's certainly an urban myth
created by someone with some knowledge, but not enough.

Sylvia.

You might have a shot with stringing a wire under high voltage power
lines and tapping off it.

Holding a 40w tube in the air under 330kv lines with the other end
grounded will light it dimly,
so you might be able to light a fluro tube if you go high/long enough
and ground the other end.

Likely very illegal and very noticeable unless you use very thin wire,
and probably dangerous.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

"DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote in message
news:yBKCo.23435$3f.8909@newsfe12.iad...

Trevor Wilson wrote:
"Felix_the_cat" <go_away@not_here.biz> wrote in message

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to
power it? What about using a bigger antenna?

**It's not about size. It's about location. The size of the antenna
relates to the frequency of operation. Your TV enatenna, for example,
sucks a minute amount of energy from the TV transmitters. Think in
terms of pico Watts (10^ -9 Watts). And a TV antenna is not a small
device. Location, OTOH, is vital. It you (could) run an antenna a few
hundred kms straight up and anchor it (somehow) in orbit, you could
extract significant amounts of power by virtue of the antenna
'cutting' the magnetic lines that surround our planet. Scientists are
working on just that. It is WAY beyond the home constructor. Even the
guys at NASA can't yet develop the technology required. The hurdles
are significant.

Won't that weaken our magnetic field and maybe screw us up completely?

**No.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[cth]

On 11-Nov-10 4:49 PM, Mauried wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:27:31 +1000, Doug Jewell
ask@and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote:

On 10/11/2010 1:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com


Put it this way - if there was heaps of free electricity
available, would the electricity companies go to the hassle
of burning expensive coal or fusing expensive uranium etc to
make power?


--
What is the difference between a duck?


Anyone noticed that just about all the free energy schemes you see
advertised on the Net require you to buy a book.
Dont you think its a bit odd that no one has actually bothered to put
the details on the Net .

http://www.xkcd.com/808/

says it all...

CTH

 

[Doug Jewell]

On 12/11/2010 12:09 AM, kreed wrote:

On Nov 11, 10:42 pm, Sylvia Else<syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote:
On 11/11/2010 10:00 PM, Lawrence Logic wrote:



"Felix_the_cat"<go_away@not_here.biz> wrote in message
news:7goCo.1844$MF5.395@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com

Depends what you mean by "for real"?

If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna,
the answer is yes. Crystal radios have always worked this way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio

Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that
technology quiet.

Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no
signal for the receiver to receive.

If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on
your electricity bill, the answer is no. The amount of energy that can be
extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a
crytal radio for their listening pleasure these days.

Sylvia.

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any
practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to power it?
What about using a bigger antenna?

I heard about someone in the mid-80's who'd erected a large complex antenna
to harness radio signals, and then modulated them down to 240V 50Hz to power
his house. Apprently he was caught because no-one beyond his house could
pick up 2WS.

I don't know if the story is true but it's technically feasible. It's just
like a transformer except the secondary winding is some distance from the
primary winding. That's pretty much how a radio works anyway...

It seems highly implausible. He'd have to be capturing a significant
proportion of the total transmitter output. It's certainly an urban myth
created by someone with some knowledge, but not enough.

Sylvia.


You might have a shot with stringing a wire under high voltage power
lines and tapping off it.

Holding a 40w tube in the air under 330kv lines with the other end
grounded will light it dimly,
What you are actually picking up there is the electric

charge across the air. There is a large potential difference
between the ground, and the end of the tube 3m off the
ground. Because the air has a very high resistance, the
current flow is very small, but sufficient to light the lamp.

so you might be able to light a fluro tube if you go high/long enough
and ground the other end.

Likely very illegal and very noticeable unless you use very thin wire,
and probably dangerous.
I've heard of cases where farmers have run coils of wire

under power lines across their property and got usable
amounts of power.

They've been found out though, because the power co's can
detect if there is a drain on the system.

As for the video in the OP, I believe that he genuinely is
charging his phone - ie the video isn't faked. But it
doesn't work for the reason he thinks it does, and the power
isn't free. He is using his house wiring as the primary of a
transformer and the antenna as the secondary. Consequently
his load (although miniscule) would be registered by the
power meter on his house. I can guarantee his mobile phone
charger would stop working if he walked outside, or turned
most of his other appliances off.

Because seppo-land house wiring is lower voltage, and hence
higher current than here in Aus, the EM field is stronger.
Consequently it will develop more power than it would in the
same scenario in Aus.

--
What is the difference between a duck?

 

[Mauried]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:20:23 -0800 (PST), Wolfgang Wildeblood
<wolfgangwildeblood@gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 11, 1:49=A0pm, maur...@tpg.com.au (Mauried) wrote:

Anyone noticed that just about all the free energy schemes you see
advertised on the Net require you to buy a book.
Dont you think its a bit odd that no one has actually bothered to put
the details on the Net .

Actually no. That's one argument I think doesn't hold water. If I had
a technology for obtaining free energy I certainly wouldn't go sharing
with all and sundry on the internet. Woud you? Really? If so, why?
It's an easy assumption to make - if it really exists someone,
sometime, will have made a video and popped it on YouTube, taken
photos and stuck them on Flickr and boasted about it all over usenet/
Geocities/Facebook* - but it's an assumption that doesn't follow from
any logic I can see. There are lots of things that are real but have
no internet presence at all.

* Whatever happened to Geocities?

If I had such a technology, I wouldnt be putting the details on how to

duplicate it in a book either.
Id be actually making the machines and selling them for $100 million
each.
Why hasnt someone who has boughjt the book, put the details on the
Net.

 

[Felix_the_cat]

On 11/11/2010 9:11 PM, kreed wrote:

On Nov 10, 1:03 pm, Felix_the_cat<go_away@not_here.biz> wrote:
Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com

No.

--
rgds,

Pete
=====

"Julia finally got something right. Older people don't vote Labor, because they have seen too many incompetent, mismanaging, money-wasting Labor governments"

Don't know, there may be some old enough to remember that the Labor
party back then actually stood for the workers, and did some positive
things for them.

There are plenty of people still living the remember the Whitlam era,
the Cain/Kirner years, etc., You are possibly one of the persons paying
their pensions.

The ones that vote for them would still be naive enough to believe
that they still do this,vote for them because they always have done,
or are still living in the old days.

Some might think Julia is sexy,

Some may just hate the liberal/national/green parties more than
Labor.

In the case of the coalition, would that be an irrational hatred, or one
born of a lack of intelligence and common sense?

"If you think utility prices are high now, watch them go through the roof with the Green/ALP carbon tax"

The insane Greens! ..http://tinyurl.com/insane-Greens
"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money"

"Those who tolerate intolerance will cease to exist"

"Truth is the new hate speech"

"Political correctness is a polite form of tryanny"

You are dead right on those - probably more right than you realise.

Why would I not be able to appreciate the significance or meaning of
what I have chosen to write?

--
rgds,

Pete
=====

"Julia finally got something right. Older people don't vote Labor, because they have seen too many incompetent, mismanaging, money-wasting Labor governments"

"If you think utility prices are high now, watch them go through the roof with the Green/ALP carbon tax"

The insane Greens! .. http://tinyurl.com/insane-Greens

"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money"

"Those who tolerate intolerance will cease to exist"

"Truth is the new hate speech"

"Political correctness is a polite form of tryanny"

 

[kreed]

On Nov 13, 10:21 am, Felix_the_cat <go_away@not_here.biz> wrote:

On 11/11/2010 9:11 PM, kreed wrote:



On Nov 10, 1:03 pm, Felix_the_cat<go_away@not_here.biz>  wrote:
Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com

No.

--
rgds,

Pete
====
"Julia finally got something right. Older people don't vote Labor, because they have seen too many incompetent, mismanaging, money-wasting Labor governments"

Don't know, there may be some old enough to remember that the Labor
party back then actually stood for the workers, and did some positive
things for them.

There are plenty of people still living the remember the Whitlam era,
the Cain/Kirner years, etc., You are possibly one of the persons paying
their pensions.

The ones that vote for them would still be naive enough to believe
that they still do this,vote for them because they always have done,
or are still living in the old days.

Some might think Julia is sexy,

Some may just hate the liberal/national/green parties more than
Labor.  

In the case of the coalition, would that be an irrational hatred, or one
born of a lack of intelligence and common sense?

That's right - and if you look around modern Australia, there is NO
shortage of
people with lack of intelligence and/or common sense,

there are also large numbers on handouts, who vote for them in order
to keep the handouts
coming and increasing.

"If you think utility prices are high now, watch them go through the roof with the Green/ALP carbon tax"

The insane Greens! ..http://tinyurl.com/insane-Greens
"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money"

"Those who tolerate intolerance will cease to exist"

"Truth is the new hate speech"

"Political correctness is a polite form of tryanny"

You are dead right on those - probably more right than you realise.

Why would I not be able to appreciate the significance or meaning of
what I have chosen to write?

The last couple just hit me so hard with how right and obvious they
were from many angles, and summarised into a single sentence.

--
rgds,

Pete
====
"Julia finally got something right. Older people don't vote Labor, because they have seen too many incompetent, mismanaging, money-wasting Labor governments"

"If you think utility prices are high now, watch them go through the roof with the Green/ALP carbon tax"

The insane Greens! ..http://tinyurl.com/insane-Greens

"The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other peoples money"

"Those who tolerate intolerance will cease to exist"

"Truth is the new hate speech"

"Political correctness is a polite form of tryanny"

 

[kreed]

On Nov 13, 7:24 am, maur...@tpg.com.au (Mauried) wrote:

On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:20:23 -0800 (PST), Wolfgang Wildeblood



wolfgangwildebl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 11, 1:49=A0pm, maur...@tpg.com.au (Mauried) wrote:

Anyone noticed that just about all the free energy schemes you see
advertised on the Net require you to buy a book.
Dont you think its a bit odd that no one has actually bothered to put
the details on the Net .

Actually no. That's one argument I think doesn't hold water. If I had
a technology for obtaining free energy I certainly wouldn't go sharing
with all and sundry on the internet. Woud you? Really? If so, why?
It's an easy assumption to make - if it really exists someone,
sometime, will have made a video and popped it on YouTube, taken
photos and stuck them on Flickr and boasted about it all over usenet/
Geocities/Facebook* - but it's an assumption that doesn't follow from
any logic I can see. There are lots of things that are real but have
no internet presence at all.

* Whatever happened to Geocities?

If I had such a technology, I wouldnt be putting the details on how to
duplicate it in a book either.
Id be actually making the machines and selling them for $100 million
each.
Why hasnt someone who has boughjt the book, put the details on the
Net.

With the amount of other "secret" and sensitive stuff leaked on the
net already, if these things had any validity they would already be
out there.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 11/11/2010 5:20 PM, Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:

There are lots of things that are real but have
no internet presence at all.

Can you give me a URL for that?

Sylvia.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 24/11/2010 2:23 PM, kreed wrote:

As for car engines, for example - a huge % of energy is lost from an
internal combustion engine as heat,
if there were some way to either reduce this loss or collect this heat
energy and turn it into extra horsepower, then engine efficiency would
go up
by an enormous amount. (Of course in cold climates where this "waste"
heat is used to heat the car interior, then its not such a practical
idea)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle

 

[kreed]

On Nov 11, 4:20 pm, Wolfgang Wildeblood <wolfgangwildebl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Nov 11, 1:49 pm, maur...@tpg.com.au (Mauried) wrote:

Anyone noticed that just about all the free energy schemes you see
advertised on the Net require you to buy a book.
Dont you think its a bit odd that no one has actually bothered to put
the details on the Net .

Actually no. That's one argument I think doesn't hold water. If I had
a technology for obtaining free energy I certainly wouldn't go sharing
with all and sundry on the internet. Woud you? Really? If so, why?
It's an easy assumption to make - if it really exists someone,
sometime, will have made a video and popped it on YouTube, taken
photos and stuck them on Flickr and boasted about it all over usenet/
Geocities/Facebook* - but it's an assumption that doesn't follow from
any logic I can see. There are lots of things that are real but have
no internet presence at all.

I'm sure that if there are such things out there that were real
someone would have revealed them
by now.

There are plenty of people out there who would release info on "free"
electricity, alternative car fuels
etc, simply to destroy oil companies, state government electricity
providers etc etc.

Environmental groups might, but in modern reality IMHO they are simply
about gaining and exercising power
and control of people and resources and no longer have much to do with
real environmental issues,
so you wouldn't expect them to necessarily help promote these things
if they existed.
release such info.

Heard last night that their latest rubbish philosophy is that mobile
phone and wi-fi RF is deforming and killing trees.

Probably another push for NBN and optic fibre as optic fibre radiates
no magnetic field or RF. (joke)




Various things I have heard of over the years include corporations
burying patents on things such as:

-Tyre compounds that are so durable that they last virtually the life
of the vehicle
-Engine technologies that give approximately 6x the mileage of current
technology

(Note, current technology at the time this was stated might have been
a lot less efficient than now).

I am not an automotive engineer or chemist specialising in rubber
compounds so I cannot say if these
are feasible or not, but they do at least sound plausible to some
extent. I can assure you that I have found from personal experience
that tyres now last a lot longer than they did during the 1980's/90s
so improvement has happened.

As for car engines, for example - a huge % of energy is lost from an
internal combustion engine as heat,
if there were some way to either reduce this loss or collect this heat
energy and turn it into extra horsepower, then engine efficiency would
go up
by an enormous amount. (Of course in cold climates where this "waste"
heat is used to heat the car interior, then its not such a practical
idea)

There are others, but I'm just giving 2 examples here that may be
feasible.
---------

On the other hand - claims that involve "pulling KW's of power out of
thin air with coils and capacitors" can only be
regarded as total rubbish,

Or claiming that solar panels can be made that collect more energy per
sq metre than the sun can emit.

---------------------------------------

Finally - if these "patents" do actually exist for these "wonder"
technologies, there is another problem with releasing them to the
public

The ideas or technologies involved in them may be so complex or
require so much R&D $$, exotic materials or skilled manufacture that
they would be way outside the ability of the average home constructor
- or even outside the experience or skill level of a good engineering
shop.

If for example, something along the lines of nuclear or highly toxic
materials were needed for any reason - this would probably only be
available to specialist contractors under very tight security
agreements and great expense.

If the costs involved in commercially developing these things ran into
the $100s of millions or billions, then a large company, lots of plant
and equipment and skilled specialists of many fields would be needed,
as well as a large number of very rich and very trusting investors,
and even assuming they do pull it off, and have a viable product, that
is affordable to the general public, and get public acceptance and
trust, they can be crushed for patent infringement. The company would
probably eventually be bought up by the patent owners, shut down and
the technology would "disappear". Someone may be irate enough to leak
all the design and research documents to Wikileaks or similar, but
"settlement agreements for the hypothetical patent infringement" may
prevent anyone from thinking of doing this, and there probably arent
that many people who would have access to such material therefore it
would be easy to narrow down and sue those involved.

If the patent owner does not want this technology developed (IE an oil
company not wanting super efficent engine technology on the market for
example) then they aren't going to grant a license to manufacture, or
are going to put such costs and conditions on it that it would never
get off the ground. The company would then fold.



* Whatever happened to Geocities?

Yahoo bought it out and eventually absorbed it into Yahoo
They shut it down completely last year.

Was a shame, I used to post photos on there and haven't got around to
finding a substitute.

 

[Alan]

On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:23:20 -0800 (PST), kreed
<kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote:

Various things I have heard of over the years include corporations
burying patents on things such as:

-Tyre compounds that are so durable that they last virtually the life
of the vehicle
-Engine technologies that give approximately 6x the mileage of current
technology

(Note, current technology at the time this was stated might have been
a lot less efficient than now).

Like these:
http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=785
--
Sell your surplus electronic components at
http://ozcomponents.com
Search or browse for that IC, capacitor,
crystal or other component you need.
Or find new components at http://auscomponents.com

 

[kreed]

On Nov 24, 3:53 pm, Alan <m...@somewhere.com.au.invalid> wrote:

On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:23:20 -0800 (PST), kreed

kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Various things I have heard of over the years include corporations
burying patents on things such as:

-Tyre compounds that are so durable that they last virtually the life
of the vehicle
-Engine technologies that give approximately 6x the mileage of current
technology

(Note, current technology at the time this was stated might have been
a lot less efficient than now).

Like these:http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=785
--
Sell your surplus electronic components athttp://ozcomponents.com
Search or browse for that IC, capacitor,
crystal or other component you need.
Or find new components athttp://auscomponents.com

Very interesting, thanks for that.

Locally for some years they have advertised a device on TV called the
Hi-Clone that promises substantial increases in fuel
efficiency, from what I have seen it looks like it makes the incoming
air "swirl around" like a cyclone.

Don't know if it works or anyone who has tried it.

http://www.fuelsaver.com.au/

 

[Rod Speed]

Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:

On Nov 11, 1:49 pm, maur...@tpg.com.au (Mauried) wrote:

Anyone noticed that just about all the free energy schemes you see
advertised on the Net require you to buy a book.
Dont you think its a bit odd that no one has actually bothered to put
the details on the Net .

Actually no. That's one argument I think doesn't hold water.

Wrong, as always.

If I had a technology for obtaining free energy I certainly
wouldn't go sharing with all and sundry on the internet.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of what an incomplete arsehole you are.

Woud you?

Yep.

Really?

Yep.

If so, why?

Because so many would benefit from that, stupid.

It's an easy assumption to make

Taint an assumption.

- if it really exists someone, sometime, will have made a video
and popped it on YouTube, taken photos and stuck them on
Flickr and boasted about it all over usenet/ Geocities/Facebook*

How odd that they have done that about everything else that works.

- but it's an assumption

Nope.

that doesn't follow from any logic I can see.

Then you need new glasses.

There are lots of things that are real but have no internet presence at all.

Have fun listing even one.

 

[fritz]

"Felix_the_cat" <go_away@not_here.biz> wrote in message news:7goCo.1844$MF5.395@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...

On 10/11/2010 2:03 PM, Felix_the_cat wrote:

Is this for real..??

http://www.teslasecret.com



Depends what you mean by "for real"?

If you're asking whether it's possible to extract energy from an antenna, the answer is yes. Crystal radios have always worked
this way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_radio

Note the historical lack of any government attempts to keep that technology quiet.

Indeed, energy always has to come from an antenna, or there'd be no signal for the receiver to receive.

If you're asking whether it can be used to have a measurable impact on your electricity bill, the answer is no. The amount of
energy that can be extracted from an antenna is miniscule, which is one reason no one uses a crytal radio for their listening
pleasure these days.

Sylvia.

So it's not possible to build a generator large enough to have any practical use, because of the limited capacity of an antenna to
power it? What about using a bigger antenna?

Build a kite, connect a few hundred meters of wire and fly it in a thunderstorm.