The mystery of free energy

I came across this article this morning and thought that this might be of interest to every one. I think that the article is probably more interesting to everyone that is following this blog than who is going to be the next president of the United States.

THE MYSTERY OF "FREE ENERGY": WHERE DOES IT COME FROM?

Submitted  by: Rolf Schaffranke

Since major breakthroughs in the physics of non-conventional energy generation and energy conversion have already been made in several countries, it seems appropriate to present the main points of the ongoing changes in research in a convenient Question and Answer format which allows a selective overview of the highlights of newly established facts and observations.
Please remember that big name, long established companies have long abdicated the main part of their research initiative to government planners and we no longer can look to them for leadership.
Question: "Where does the energy potential for the operation of the new "converters" actually come from?" Answer: The energy is extracted from the G-Field, formerly known also as the Ether-Field, identifiable today as a real acceptable, subnuclear and sub-quantic medium. In the past, this medium was given various names, such as PRANA, by the Indians; ORGONE, by Dr. Wilhelm Reich; ODIC FORCE, by Baron Von Reichenbach; ANIMAL MAGNETISM, by Franz A. Messmer; MUMIA, by Paracelsus; BIO-COSMIC ENERGY, by Dr. Brunler; ELOPTIC ENERGY, by Dr. Hieronymus; X-FORCE, by Dr. Eeeman (U.K.)
Today, it is commonly referred to by one of the following definition NEUTRINO SEA, by Prof. P.A.M. Dirac; RADIANT ENERGY, by Dr. T.H. Moray, FERMI SEA; PRIMARY ENERGY; TACHYON FIELD, Prof. G. Feinberg; ZERO POINT ENERGY; GRAVITY FIELD ENERGY; or G-FIELD; SPACE ENERGY, all merely euphemisms...what Aristotle once chose to call "ETHER".
Question: "What is the magnitude of this field energy potential?"
Answer: The energy content of the G-Field was calculated as (1) 1033 cm3 by Sir Oliver Lodge, England, 2) 8.8xl08 volts/cm by Prof. S. Seike Japan, 3) 250 billion Joule/ml by Rene L. Vallee, France.
To repeat a popular conversion figure published in Switzerland, the energy content of One Liter SPACE is about equal to the energy of 5000 Liters of gasoline.
A remarkable confirmation of the claims of Nicola TESLA who, more than 100 years ago, expressed his belief that "before many generations will have passed," mankind will be able to extract unlimited power at any place." Question: "Which scientists of repute (Nobel Prize winners) are, or were in favour of the "ETHER" (G-FIELD)?" Answer: Some of the world renown scientists who affirmed their belief in the existence of a universal ETHER or Forcefield are:
JAMES CLERK-MAXWELL: "A material substance of a more subtle kind than visible bodies, supposed to exist in those parts of space which are apparently empty." Prof. Paul DIRAC, N.L. 1951, deBROGLIE, N.L. 1959, MICHELSON: "Even if relativity is here to stay we don't have to reject the "ETHER." Sir OLIVER LODGE: "The Ether is a physical thing..we can only get it electrically" STARK, N.L.; ARRHENIUS, N.L.; A. H. COMPTON, N. L., P.E.A. LENARD, N.L.; H. UUKAWA, N.L.; F. SODDY, N.L.; Albert EINSTEIN: "There are weighty arguments to be adduced in favor of the ether hypothesis. To deny the ether is ultimately to assume that empty space has no physical qualities whatever. The fundamental facts of mechanics do not harmonize with this view... .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..."
The above quote by Dr. Albert Einstein was published in 1920, based on Einstein's speech at the University of Leiden, Holland, (May 5, 1920).
The publication was in German, and translated by Sir Oliver Lodge into English, quoted from his book, "Ether and Relativity" (1925). However practically all textbooks in physics omit this fact. Einstein himself has gone on record stating on his 70th birthday:
"Now you think that I am looking back at my life's work with calm satisfaction. But, on closer look, it is quite different. There is not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm and I am not sure if I was on the right track after all."
Question: "What about conservation of energy law pertaining to the operation of cosmic energy converters and motors?"
Answer: "...every emission or absorption of a virtual particle is already accepted to totally violate conservation of energy. That is, emission represents the sudden appearance of extra energy in the ordinary universe, and absorption represents the sudden disappearance of some energy from the ordinary universe. Every charged particle in the universe constantly does both processes. Even the neutron is continually breaking into different virtual, charged particles. So every piece of mass in the universe, ACCORDING TO ORDINARY PARTICLE PHYSICS—is already violating conservation of energy on the microlevel...
...a strong magnetic pole represents an additional stress in space-time, (the G-Field, R.S.) as does a strong static electric charge. Either of these situations warps and twists space time itself. This in the region of a magnetic pole or of a strong static charge, conservation of energy need not apply. Specifically, for large, massive atoms of some heavy elements, violation of ordinary "linear" magnetism—and hence of the linear conservation of energy law—has already been noted.

This is particularly interesting since, with a permanent magnet, one can apply spatiotemporal (G-Field) stress in a locality without any further input of energy. The entire business of using this to produce a free energy device depends simply on the cleverness of the inventor. It is also possible to time the applications of both effects—static electric stress and magnetic monoploar stress - with an ordinary electromagnetic rotary device to produce seemingly "Free" energy. And so the potential is there for free energy.To the question,"Can it in principle be done?", we must definitely answer, "Yes, if we believe our present physics." The second question, "How difficult is it to do?", can be answered in several ways; possibly the best is: "If one is clever and gets back to absolute, simple fundamentals, it may be possible to do it cheaply and in a straightforward, practical manner."
Tom Bearden, "WHY FREE ENERGY IS POSSIBLE" in PEGASUS, VOL. @, Ed. 1, January 1984, ASGFE. Question: "Operation of such a G-Field or Tachyon Field energy converter would be in violation of the scientific fact that a perpetuum mobile is clearly impossible. Any comments?"
Answer: This applied only to so-called "closed systems" in our technology, like turbines, combustion engines, steam
engines, etc.
Nature shows that the movement of electrons around the atomic nuclear, planets around the suns, etc. are indeed all
genuine "Perpetuum mobiles" since they represent "open systems," interacting with various fields of electrical, gravitational etc. nature.
Examples of Perpetuum Mobile Actions are, among others: A) the Bessler Wheel (1712 to 1717), B) The Foucalt Pendulum (France) both are powered by the rotation of the earth. "The earlier, original concept of perpetual motion refers merely to any device that does work in excess of its energy input. This does not exclude an unseen energy source (such as the G-Field!) as the input to a perpetual motion device. It is this that separates practical perpetual motion from the laws of thermodynamics!"
Quoted from: Earth Rotation as a Source of Free Energy" by Martin Ruderfer, published in PROCEEDINGS of the First International Symposium of Non-Conventional Energy Technology, October 23-24, 1981, University of Toronto, Canada.
Question: "Why are permanent magnets so important in connection with design of G-Field converters?"
Answer: Permanent magnets act as "cosmic energy pumps" or "gravitational diodes." The space energy or G-Field
can be concentrated, focused, magnified and compacted by strong magnetic fields. The development of very strong
magnets, so-called "Super-Magnets' (NIB's) made from exotic alloys, makes G-Field converters and generators possible.

QUOTE: "I think it is possible to utilize magnetism as an energy source. But we science idiots cannot do this; this has to come from the outside. " (Werner Heisenberg, Nobel Laureatus as quoted in the book: "Energie im Uberfluss" by Hilscher, 1981.

Question: "What are the prerequisites for successful R & D efforts leading to mass production and licensing of G-Field converters?"

Answer:
1) Identification and refinement of the best developed, most economical, most promising conceptual approach.
2) Close international contacts to assure a flow of up to date information about all new developments in this technology area in order to avoid dead-end approaches.
3) Follow the newly developed super-magnet technology in all countries, with special emphasis on samarium-cobalt and neodynium compounds (neodynium-iron-boron) and other new materials.
4) Application of vortex-technology within the known laws of fluid-dynamics and nuclear dynamics.
5) Sufficient long-term funding for success by attracting venture capital, by offering of tax write-offs plus an inflation-proof potential return. (As a tax write-off, it can be more attractive to an investor than giving to a favorite charity. Note: Over 100% in the U.S.A.)
6) In general, logical thinking and ethical handling of the project in question by all partners, will assure success. (Note: In reference to Item 5 above): Since the IRS vrs SNOW case of 1974, it is held that a new limited partnership organized for the purpose of financing the development of a new process or product is entitled to deduct research, experimentation and development costs.
It is of course extremely difficult to put a price tag on the results of R & D in an area of revolutionary technology. However, there is no doubt whatsoever about the feasibility of the technology as such.


Dr. R. Schaffranke, h.c.

Hope you found this interesting. Until next time keep those inventions coming.