PDA

View Full Version : A question for Dr Wolff and anyone who can bring light about clean energies



Carl Frensch
Saturday, July 22nd, 2006, 04:46 PM
Dear Dr Wolff,
I can't recall exactly if I read on the forum that you were an engineer or a physicist, but I'd like to have your professional opinion about something I suspect.
All other interventions are welcome, by the way.
I think that the technologies for clean energy are much more developed that publicly admitted, or even fully operational. Though, the geo-political consequences of a "We don't need you anymore, for anything" to the OPEC counties are deemed dangerous and overwhelming by the politically correct weaklings who call themselves "leaders". The selfish drives of oil big business doesn't help, either.
Do you see the dawn of endless clean energy coming, or are you rather pessimistic?

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, July 23rd, 2006, 05:46 AM
Dear Dr Wolff,
I can't recall exactly if I read on the forum that you were an engineer or a physicist, but I'd like to have your professional opinion about something I suspect.
All other interventions are welcome, by the way.
I think that the technologies for clean energy are much more developed that publicly admitted, or even fully operational. Though, the geo-political consequences of a "We don't need you anymore, for anything" to the OPEC counties are deemed dangerous and overwhelming by the politically correct weaklings who call themselves "leaders". The selfish drives of oil big business doesn't help, either.
Do you see the dawn of endless clean energy coming, or are you rather pessimistic?

Dear Carl Frensch,

I am neither an engineer nor a phycist nor even a doctor. My screen name is taken from one of my heros, Otto Skorzeny, who used the name "Dr. Solar Wolff" to gain access to the Hungarian Citadel, I believe it is Burgberg in German. "Dr. Solar Wolff" (Skorzeny) was allegedly an Archaeologist and wanted to study the archaeology (actually the fortifications) of this old fort. He later regained control of the faultering Hungarian government, preventing them from doing a flip-flop to the Allies, all with the cost of very little in terms of human life.

But I am a big fan of free energy so I will give you my opinion, qualified or not. Free energy doesn't violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics in which energy is neither created nor destroyed. The energy in "free energy" is just unrecognized by modern physics. The situation would be the same if it were solar energy and we were all blind.

Free energy is very real. You can google the search words: "Hans Coler Device" and get the actual British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee report from 1946. The British commissioned inventor Hans Coler to replicate a simple model free energy device he had built for the German Navy. The British watched his every move. The device worked, producing energy. Devices of this simple kind produced a tension of 13 volts for days or weeks. Another, more powerful type of device he built produce 6 kilovolts of continuous energy. Sorry, I don't know the amperage. The British finally de-classified the report in 1978. There are other working devices such as the John Bedini device.

So, there is no question that science within governmental control know of this technology. For private industry the problem is money for investment. How do you get money which your device can't possibly work according to conventional science? Nevertheless, work is and has always been done on these devices. The Swiss Testatika device is a great example. A Swiss religious group, the Menerthenia Society (probably spelled wrong) built a free energy device years and years ago. They now have many working models and have submitted them to inspection by scientists. Nobody has ever found fault or fraud with them. The problem is that this society will not release the vital methodology to replicate the devices.

Someday, somewhere some country will bring one of these devices into the open. It might be a third world country which now, suddenly must explain why it can produce all the electrical energy it needs. It might be a private group wanting to sell home generators. There are scientists in Argentina on the verge of success. Someday, somewhere it will happen but it will probably first be spun as a discovery of a new type of energy which can then be a source of energy rather than a magical black box producing apparently free energy.

For just plain clean energy, the field is wide open. For instance, in a forest, trees die, fall down and rot. This process produces heat, carbon dioxide and methane. Methane is a greenhouse gas as is carbon dioxide. But, if you cut up the tree and burn it in a fireplace, you get only heat, carbon dioxide and water vapor. So, burning is more enviornmently friendly than watching wood rot.

I have heard of a German technology for buring old automobile tires to produce electricity which yields no pollution. There is oceanic frozen methane which might be harvested someday and burn cleanly. There is always the hope for cold fusion or even the sonofusion methods of Dr. Ronald Richter. Biodiesel fuel and ethanol are here or coming. All these things are less polluting than current methods.

Orlon
Monday, December 11th, 2006, 03:14 PM
Free energy is very real. You can google the search words: "Hans Coler Device" and get the actual British Intelligence Objectives Sub-Committee report from 1946. The British commissioned inventor Hans Coler to replicate a simple model free energy device he had built for the German Navy. The British watched his every move. The device worked, producing energy. Devices of this simple kind produced a tension of 13 volts for days or weeks. Another, more powerful type of device he built produce 6 kilovolts of continuous energy. Sorry, I don't know the amperage. The British finally de-classified the report in 1978. There are other working devices such as the John Bedini device.

So, there is no question that science within governmental control know of this technology. For private industry the problem is money for investment. How do you get money which your device can't possibly work according to conventional science? Nevertheless, work is and has always been done on these devices. The Swiss Testatika device is a great example. A Swiss religious group, the Menerthenia Society (probably spelled wrong) built a free energy device years and years ago. They now have many working models and have submitted them to inspection by scientists. Nobody has ever found fault or fraud with them. The problem is that this society will not release the vital methodology to replicate the devices.

Someday, somewhere some country will bring one of these devices into the open. It might be a third world country which now, suddenly must explain why it can produce all the electrical energy it needs. It might be a private group wanting to sell home generators. There are scientists in Argentina on the verge of success. Someday, somewhere it will happen but it will probably first be spun as a discovery of a new type of energy which can then be a source of energy rather than a magical black box producing apparently free energy.


Unfortuantely I'll have to call BS on this. Free energy would be a billion-dollar invention, and even though these ideas are outside the realm of conventional physics, millions of dollars are invested annually in these ideas, and have been for as long as we've had electricity. And what has this yielded? Nothing.

As far as I've seen, these "entreprenours" all have three things in common:

1. They all say that thay are on the brink of the invention of the century that which will change the world, if they just get a chance, and some funding ;)

2. They all bring along with them all-new theories of how their machine is supposed to work. No use of occams razor here, this apparent deviation from standard scientific methods is never explained and no other experimental proof of the new theories except their devices are presented.

3. They're all repressed by the mainstream-scientific community, funded by the evil oil-industry...

Come on... Who is researching biodiesel, fuel cells, fusion? All are potential threats to the oil industry. And this viewing of the scientific community as a closed "guild" seems rather ignorant of how things really are.

In fact, it makes it very unlikely that the person in question is any form of scientist himself, or he'd know that the scientific community in fact is a great many "guilds", ;), and these in turn consisting of individuals, all who'd have to be paid zillions to miss out opportunities like these. So, we see the following alternatives:

1. Most of the worlds scientists, along with the politicians, rich people and the evil capitalists are in it together in trying to keep things as they were...

2. These inventors is a bunch of cuckoos.

The rest everyone should be able to figure out (hint: Occams razor)

When it comes to clean energy, I'd say you'd better look up more on the following:

1. The new generation of nuclear powerplants, utilising breeder-cykles, fuel reprocessing and other new inventions that could make nuclear industry much more "green". Using these two mentioned technologies (the tip of the iceberg really), we could cut down the ammount of nuclear waste thirty times.

2. New liquid fuel technologies based on ethanol, mixed-alcohols, biodiesel and, perhaps most interesting, the new BTL (biomass-to-liquid) processes that make hydrocarbon fuels that chemically are nearly identical to sulfur-free gasoline (and directly useable in the same engines) from renewable sources.

3. Classical renewable energy-sources like wind, wave and geothermal energy used together with newer fuel cells and perhaps direct-to-liquidfuel processes (like those making methanol or hydrocarbons)

Mazorquero
Tuesday, December 12th, 2006, 04:08 AM
This thread is uncommon in this forum, so bravo for you, Carl Frensch, we Germanics must also worry about the worls in which our children will live.
I personally don't know very much about free energy, but the other alternative sources mentioned by Dr. Solar Wolff and Orlon are the most known and with future indeed.
In these times engineers and scientists are trying first to improve the efficiency of combustion engines. Efficiency is not the same as power, and are not necessarily related. For example, let's suppose your car has a 2liter engine with 100HP; now if a Formula 1 engine had 1 liter of volume, it will develop 270-300HP, far more potent than your engine, but it will require maybe as much fuel as your engine or even more (this example is based on reality). So we say that your car's engine is more efficient than the Formula 1, believe it or not, there are reasons for that.
You may find three limiting factors in a combustion engine: thermodynamics laws, mechanical limits (reliability of systems, material's strenght, etc.), and chemical limits (gasoline for example, can't be used with very high presures because it tends to detonate instead of burning, thus causing harm to the engine). Now many try to improve those limits to augment efficiency. Present diesel engines are more efficient than Otto (the common with gasoline) and if used with biodiesel are even better, plus the biodiesel is less harmful than common gasoil. Here is Argentina and other European countries, compressed natural gas is used succesfully. Ethanol and methanol provide more energy per unit of weight than rocket fuel. The problem is not how to use them, but how to produce them, since many now speculate on the rise of cereal prices due to the future demand to produce ethanol, so there's politics and commercial interests (those of petrol companies) behind all this.
New engines are being developed to replace Ottos and Diesels, like the Wankel (Mazda is the only one which uses them, but they have wear problems) or even turbines (in the way choppers use them, not as jet aircrafts); Stirling engines are a good alternative, nowadays they are used to produce liquid gases, but there are still some troubles to make them work the other way (that is, to produce work and not to use it, which is what cooling does). If ceramic materials could be used succesfully to make engines, you may consume 30% less fuel or better. By the moment I think these are the goals, to improve present combustion engines so to give time to develop new energies.
Hidrogen is mentioned quite often, and it promises very much, but obtaining hidrogen is not easy (an irony, since it's the most common of all elements in Universe) and it's not well known the effects when pure hidrogen is in excess in the athmosphere.
Nuclear energy has a ghost around it, but it offers the best combination of safety, economy and pollution. The smoke you see out of nuclear plant's chimneys is only water vapor, whereas in any other combustion plant that smoke is the rest of combustion processes (smog). Modern technology can deal perfectly with radioactive materials and safety measures. Eolical plants and hydraulic ones produce energy in a clean way, but they depnd too much on the geography and modify it quite a lot, I personally think they should be used as "personal sources", meaning that it would be more effective to put solar panels and eolic generators (or even little hydraulic turbines if living in coastal or litoral areas) in each one's house, at least as a backup in peak demanding moments.
The main problem with energy is a horrible term that no engineer wants to hear: entropy, a quantity that defines how "chaotic" the energy is. Electricity is a very organised energy, whereas heat is very deorganised. The worse is that organised energy is the most expensive (compare the price of a match box and a common AA battery). How you transform one type of energy into another has to do as well with efficiency. For example, when you use an electric kitchen, you are transforming pretty organised electricity into ugly deorganised heat; summing up, you've wasted energy.
As you see, it's a complicated panorama but it's not imposible, just imagine that until half of XX cent. the polio was feared all around the world, and nowadays not many people know what's polio. There are very clever people working on this, but people is not as conscious about this issue as they should be (just ask anyone which is their priority towards public transport).

Dr. Solar Wolff
Tuesday, December 12th, 2006, 07:36 AM
Unfortuantely I'll have to call BS on this. Free energy would be a billion-dollar invention, and even though these ideas are outside the realm of conventional physics, millions of dollars are invested annually in these ideas, and have been for as long as we've had electricity. And what has this yielded? Nothing.

As far as I've seen, these "entreprenours" all have three things in common:

1. They all say that thay are on the brink of the invention of the century that which will change the world, if they just get a chance, and some funding ;)

2. They all bring along with them all-new theories of how their machine is supposed to work. No use of occams razor here, this apparent deviation from standard scientific methods is never explained and no other experimental proof of the new theories except their devices are presented.

3. They're all repressed by the mainstream-scientific community, funded by the evil oil-industry...

Come on... Who is researching biodiesel, fuel cells, fusion? All are potential threats to the oil industry. And this viewing of the scientific community as a closed "guild" seems rather ignorant of how things really are.

In fact, it makes it very unlikely that the person in question is any form of scientist himself, or he'd know that the scientific community in fact is a great many "guilds", ;), and these in turn consisting of individuals, all who'd have to be paid zillions to miss out opportunities like these. So, we see the following alternatives:

1. Most of the worlds scientists, along with the politicians, rich people and the evil capitalists are in it together in trying to keep things as they were...

2. These inventors is a bunch of cuckoos.

The rest everyone should be able to figure out (hint: Occams razor)

When it comes to clean energy, I'd say you'd better look up more on the following:

1. The new generation of nuclear powerplants, utilising breeder-cykles, fuel reprocessing and other new inventions that could make nuclear industry much more "green". Using these two mentioned technologies (the tip of the iceberg really), we could cut down the ammount of nuclear waste thirty times.

2. New liquid fuel technologies based on ethanol, mixed-alcohols, biodiesel and, perhaps most interesting, the new BTL (biomass-to-liquid) processes that make hydrocarbon fuels that chemically are nearly identical to sulfur-free gasoline (and directly useable in the same engines) from renewable sources.

3. Classical renewable energy-sources like wind, wave and geothermal energy used together with newer fuel cells and perhaps direct-to-liquidfuel processes (like those making methanol or hydrocarbons)

Orlon, I do understand your objections. Years ago I would have laughted at me now. Perhaps you are an engineer or physicist. Assuming that you are, I do have a standard response. It is a British Intelligenc Objectives Subcommittee report from 1945-46, declassified in 1978 on the Alleged New Source of Energy (Hans Coler). The British grabbed Coler because his device was being funded by the German Navy as well as being produced by Siemens. I think this is the complete report:

http://www.rexresearch.com/coler/colerb~1.htm

Coler built two types of machines and many actual devices. The type of machine, Magnetstromapparat, is a small demonstration device. The British supplied the raw materials and watched Coler as he built the device. Then, they took it apart trying to find fraud. But they were not the first ones to do this. Professors Kloss, W.O.Schumann, and Frolich had all done this prior to the British and their reports are translated into English and included in the British report. Coler's problem was none of the problems you mentioned. Coler's problem was tuning. He had to tune-in the machine after each use, by hand.

Please look at the report and tell me, in conventional terms, how it worked. Or, if you still do not believe it didn't work, please tell me where the fraud lies.
This machine was replicated in 1981, producing a small voltage tension. The larger Stromerzeuger has never been built after the war, so far as we know.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Wednesday, December 13th, 2006, 04:35 AM
Mazorquero quote:
The main problem with energy is a horrible term that no engineer wants to hear: entropy, a quantity that defines how "chaotic" the energy is. Electricity is a very organised energy, whereas heat is very deorganised. The worse is that organised energy is the most expensive (compare the price of a match box and a common AA battery). How you transform one type of energy into another has to do as well with efficiency. For example, when you use an electric kitchen, you are transforming pretty organised electricity into ugly deorganised heat; summing up, you've wasted energy.


How I agree! Orlon will not want to deal with this right now but a British physicist who had good knowledge of Karl Schappeller wrote to me once and explained at least one type of free energy as having negative enthropy. He was talking about aether. As we know, at absolute zero, electricity just keeps circulating through a circuit at no loss of evergy, forever. Cold produces this. So, in the vast areas of interstellar space, full of aether but near absolute zero, cold organizes energy rather than energy disorganizing matter as seen in explosion technology on earth. Further, a black hole (Black Sun) draws in energy and matter, compressing it in this deep cold environment. This cold compression is an organizing priniciple and therefore is negatively enthropic. Viktor Schauberger says that the only natural negatively enthropic force on earth is life itself. Life organizes and grows. Death disorganizes and decays, so death is enthropic. Black holes and life are positive forces in nature. Black holes, using the crushing force of gravity, (actually the aether pressure of its absorbtion by matter), combine all the processes of physics and chemistry using both matter and energy to generate the most powerful force in the universe. Black holes radiate all the waves of the electromagnetic spectrum and must also re-radiate aether energy since, in reality, the Second Law of Thermodynamics does apply. We are only confused by this law because modern physics does not recognize all the forms of energy.

Mazorquero
Wednesday, December 13th, 2006, 06:05 PM
Indeed Dr., I don't know very much about Black Holes, but I do know that life seems to go against thermodynamics laws. The second law of thermodynamics can be expressed in various forms, but one of them is "Entropy can augment or keep constant, but it cannot be destroyed" and lifeforms can diminish the entropy. Schrödinger (one of the greatest scientist of XX cent.) suggested that we must study the quantum physics of aperiodic crystals, because they are similar to chromosomes (sorry, but I have no idea what an aperiodic crystal is, maybe a new kind of materials which lack of crystalline structure and which seem to have excellent electric properties, but I'm not sure).
Cold zero temperatures pros can be explained by modern physics. The Carnot ideal engine is the one with the highest efficiency, it can be demonstrated, but no one was constructed because it's an ideal engine, making it could be imposible or too expensive, but in calculi it's used to compare the efficiency of real engines. In Carnot, efficiency is:
n=(T1-T2)/T1 where T1 is the highest temperature that your engine develops and T2 is the lowest one (temperature must be expressed in Kelvin degrees). If T2=0 then efficiency equals 1, the maximun for any engine, meaning that all the energy you use is transformed into useful work. In a modern state-of-the-art combustion engine, no more than 30% (n=0.3) of the energy of the gasoline is used as useful work, due to practical problems I mentioned. However, electrical engines use up to 95% of the input energy, and that can be still improved if ambient-temperature superconductors are developed. The problem is still how to generate that electricity, but investigation and research is dealing with that.
I don't know if many of you noticed, but the lack of petrol won't only complicate transport, but also production. We are in the Plastic Age, many articles usually made with metal or wood are now being done with modern plastics, and plastics are made with petrol... the sky is getting cloudy.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Thursday, December 14th, 2006, 08:19 AM
In terms of engines we know, as Dr. Ronald Richter put it about jets, the higher the temperature of the reheater (afterburner) the greater the thrust. But negatively entropic engines work otherwise. Have you ever heard of magnetic cooling? In this process, a magnet is put on a system of gas expansion-compression-expansion refrigerator units used for making liquid oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, etc. This is a spin-off of the Linde Process. Anyway, the magnet somehow functions as another step of the expansion-compression process in that it cools the gas mixture. Likewise, in the Coler demonstration machine, permanent magnets are used with are portals for aether energy. They are soft points in which more energy intake is possible than unmagnitized iron. They uptake energy at both poles. So where does this energy go? It is re-radiated at the point in the center of the magnet where positive alignment turns to negative alignment. In this one molecule think stretch of material (Bloch Wall), energy is re-radiated at 90 degrees to the poles. This is done at no temperature gain. At this very point on the magnet, coil wires pick up the energy, some of which is or is converted to electrical energy and a series of these magnets and coils, all wound a special way and connected in a special way, form the basis of the Coler device.

My point is that sometimes, in some engines, energy can be generated without heat. Schauberger makes this claim also, saying that temperature drops in his machines. Schappeller's engine may have also caused a temperature drop.

These machines all organize energy using a centripital vortex. A centripital vortex compresses energy/matter but does not heat it. On the contrary, it cools it. This same centripital vortex (actually a double, toridal vortex) is found not only on these devices but at the poles of the earth, guiding in charged particles (and probably other types of energy also) but also in a black hole.

Compression cooling was the basis for the Karl Nowak Austrian and German patents. This is really a long story but Nowak found ways to use this idea to create bombs, harden metal and to allegedly build engines.

Mazorquero
Thursday, December 14th, 2006, 06:31 PM
Very true, Doc. I have been talking about heat engines, and all the thermodynamics rarely apply to the rest of engines. In electrical engines, we use Maxwell laws and if we keep advancing at this rate, quantum physics.
Yes, I have heard about magnetic cooling, it's used to obtain liquid hydrogen and gases alike, which cannot be obtained with the commonly used Stirling cycle (which is a heat cycle, used inversely to abtain liquid nitrogen with hydrogen as coolant).
The process you describe in this device is similar to magnetic hysteresis, a process by which you magnetize and demagnetize a piece of plain carbon iron following a "loop" or cycle (that can be seen when plotting magnetic field vs. current). In general hysteresis produces heat, and that principle is used along with Foucault currents to heat very fast iron pieces that must be quenched.
What you mention about engines that don't heat up is interesting. In adiabatic process you can augment or diminish the temperature of a gas without the need of adding or taking out heat energy, but this is done in expansions, so cooling with compressions is strange if you look only at common thermodynamics, but the presence of a magnetic field can altere that behavior, I really don't know.
The case of entropy encloses a mistery too. As you said, life forms can diminish their entropy, but Clausius demonstrated (mathematically) that entropy only augments or keeps constant. Boltzmann said something similar, saying that if a system diminishes its entropy, that entropy is balanced with an increase of equal magnitude in the enviroment (the Universe), and it seems that if a system increses its entropy, the Universe doesn't diminish its own, because it's an infinite source of entropy. Of course, this is too abstract, I don't know of any device that can measure entropy directly; besides, we must consider that modern thermodynamics are indeed modern, the most of its advances were finished in XX cent., so it's quite logicall that many phenomena is not well understood. For example, steam machines appeared and worked before any thermodynamics laws, everything was done with intuition and practical knowledge, now we can calculate quite well an engine. A modern example: ion engines for satellites are bing studied all around the world, a professor I had was working on that, and she explained us that nobody still knows how to calculate an ion engine, everything is done with trial and error. I will investigate about the devices you mention, they caught my attention.
Here is a particular anecdote about one of the first attemps to have nuclear energy in a cheap way: After WWII many german scientists spreaded around many nations, some of them came to Argentina. One of them was called Richter, who was working in Germany on nuclear energy, and soon gained the affection of Juan Perón (who was the president in those days). He convinced Perón of the possibility of generating a nuclear fusion (like in the H-bomb) without the need of great amount of energy (in H-bombs that's achieved with a conventional nuclear bomb fixed to it). He settled in a lake in the Patagonia and started his experiments, one of them was exhaustively examined by regarded scientists who determined that it was a fake. The story remains misterious because in 1955 Perón was expulsed by a coup, and the scientific advances made were almost literally destroyed, on purpose. The interesting it that those investigations about controlled nuclear fusion are being held by scientists in Russia (with the Tokamak) and in Switzerland (in the CERN).

Dr. Solar Wolff
Friday, December 15th, 2006, 04:47 AM
Three point which I am going to write so I won't forget them:
1. Expanding engines.
2. Life as negatively enthropic.
3. Richter.

Thank you for your excellent post, Mazorquero. You certainly are a brilliant man. All I know is what I read but here goes.

1. Karl Nowak proposed the idea that the change from a liquid, rapidly to a gas, using cold liquids actually caused more expansion than say a gasoline engine can produce. He patented some of these. The way I read it, he is talking about injecting liquid helium into a "combustion chamber" where upon it instantly turns to a gas (at ambient temperatures), expands, drives a piston or other device, and does work. I am a little unclear if some of his ideas involve injecting liquid gas into a standard combustion chamber--like that of a car. I don't see how this would work since the change in temperatures surely would shatter the metal. Nevertheless, Nowak claims huge gains for his engines and people did/do take him seriously. Some say that his ideas are the basis for a legendary Nazi weapon, the molecular bomb. This bomb was a cold expanding bomb. The Germans did have a couple types of cold bombs but these were small and probably not the MB attributed to the ideas of Nowak.

2. Life as negatively enthropic. OK, I got this mostly from the writing of Viktor Schauberger. Entropy is a disorganizing principle, I think everybody agrees of this. If you build a brand new car and just park it in your garage, slowly but surely the car will start to fall apart unless you maintain it. First, this might just be on the microscopic level but gradually the tires will decay, rust will cover the car and in 1000 years, it will just be a pile of rust. This is enthropy. Life, according to Schauberger, is a type of energy. This energy is an organizing force. He usually talks of centripital forces but we observe not the energy but the signature of the energy upon matter. This life force begins when our lives begin, if we are talking about humans. It slowly organizes our bodies, cell by cell. OK, let's just talk about our brain as an example. Our brain grows before birth, continues to organize and grow by itself as we go through the teen age years. By about 22 it is as big and well organized as it is ever going to be. After that, we may add to it with memories or learning, but the brain itself declines. Now starts the enthropic stage. Our brain continues to decline. We forget things. Thoughts are slower as is our speech and movement. Finally, we die and experience a huge energy release--the energy we stored through the negative enthropic phase. So life, while not permanent, is a force of negative entropy.

3. Richter. One of my favorite subjects. I have the Paperclip file on Dr. Ronald Richter which was apparently declassified for me under a Freedom of Information Act request. After Peron's fall, Richter needed a job and was actively after the USA to hire him. Therefore, he gave them everything or most everything. Richter wrote almost flawless English and we now have his exact words and history going back to this first fusion experiments in Suhl, Germany in 1942. Richter used ultrasound to contain the fusion reaction. Now, this is called "sonofusion", a subject which can be googled. But Richter did this on a much larger scale and for a longer time. Both fast and slow neutrons were produced in his work. He invented his own instruments and measuring devices throughout his career. He injected lithium and boron into these reactions (as a hydrogen source.) Richter was no fraud.

Three teams of Americans came down to look at Richter's work. The first two teams were unprepared for Richter's level of knowledge and said so. Finally, even with our top men down there in 1958, it was decided that Richter was either "working in 1970" (one of the greatest understatements ever made in Physics) or that Richter was a fraud. Since Richter had told them basically how to do it and there was no need of fusion powerplants in the USA of 1958, they decided not to hire Richter but also not to let him go on the open market. Richter vanished.

Richter also made two other, even more important findings. Only one can I mention now and that is only because of your input and knowledge and out of respect for you, Mazorquero. Richter found a way to convert nuclear energy directly into electrical energy. He found this by accident as an outgrowth of his other work. Richter found that by moving a cloud of plasma through a magnetic field, electricty could be generated. This certainly has implications for UFO followers but there ought to be a way to make this work on a commercial basis. The other finding is something that I cannot share right now but it is great.

Richter had a daughter who would be about 50 now. She may have stayed in Argentina, I don't know. She certainly would have more knowlege of his work. I wish I could find her.

Mazorquero
Saturday, December 16th, 2006, 02:21 PM
Thanks very much for the comments, Wolff.
About the helium engine, it was ok that you used "" when naming the combustion chamber, because it might be a chamber, but one in which combustion cannot occur: combustion is a chemical reaction, it's a very fast oxidation (like when iron oxidizes) which liberates many energy in short time inthe forms of heat and expansion work in the gas burned and the surrounding one (the excess of oxygen always present). When a certain amount of energy is given (the electric spark in an Otto engine, for example, or the friction in a match) the fuel combines with oxygen by the interchange of electrons, because every atom tends to an equilibrium state in which they try to fill completely the exterior orbit of electrons. In oxidation, fuels gives electrons and oxygen takes those electrons and both have now the last orbit with the stable number (8 in the most of cases). That oxydation can be violent and fast or not, and can be exothermic (liberates heat) or endothermic (must receive heat). Combustion is violent, fast and exothermic.
Helium cannot have a combustion, because it's an inert gas (like neon, argon and others), meaning that the last orbit is already complete (in this case 2 electrons, it's an exception), thus it doesn't react with anything, it doesn't combine because it doesn't need, so we can't speak about combusting helium.
I suppose it can be compared with steam engines: you can't burn water, but you heat it to transform it in vapor. Vapor has a much lower density than liquid water, and that expansion is quite powerful, and we use that power to generate work. The combustion is external, that's, it doesn't make within the chamber, but it's done outside it and the heat is then transported to the chamber itself.
If such an engine can be made, the efficiency would be really great. Helium is still gaseous at temperatures in which nitrogen is liquid, so you need extremely low temperatures to liquify helium. If you put this liquid in a chamber, only a little rise in temperature will transform it into vapor (the helium gas we commonly know), and ambient temperature, even in Antartica, is absolutely enough. The expansion produced is strong as well to use it like in water steam machines. The advantage looking only at that process is fantastic, just recall the Carnot formula, T1 is much greater than T2, so the efficiency would be close to 1, the ideal case. But the smile disappears when we ask ourselves how to cool helium, a process that needs a lot of energy, so at first all the efficiency you gained is then lost, but maybe the Coler device, if it works as you said, could give a solution.

About Richter, thanks very much for the info, how painful is to know that my nation once had such a scientist and we let him go away. I hope the following helps you in your search:
http://www.paginasamarillas.com.ar/home_blancas.asp
It's an online telephonbook, almost an "official" one, but it's in Spanish. Just write "Richter" where says "nombre" or "apellido" and select one of the 23 provinces (plus City of Buenos Aires, the federal capital, which is different from province of Buenos Aires) in the list. While being here, he settled in an island in lake Nahuel Huapi, corresponding to the city Bariloche in the province of Río Negro. I searched in that province and all the Richter appear in Bariloche. It's remarcable as well, that one of the scientist who qualified his job as fake, Balseiro, is regarded here as a hero in a way. The leadering scientific institute of my country is the Institute Balseiro (an official statal institution), located in Bariloche! They are recognized as an important institution worldwide in nuclear energy, as well as the INVAP (it designed a reactor for Australia), also located in Bariloche.
They may know something, try this webs (I don't know if they have an English section):
Instituto Balseiro http://www.ib.edu.ar
INVAP http://www.invap.net or http://www.invap.com.ar
National Comission of Nuclear Energy http://www.cnea.gov.ar
Good luck!

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, December 17th, 2006, 06:25 AM
The helium does not combust in the Nowak system. In fact, helium is an inert gas and cannot combust although Bill Lyne has a free energy helium engine theory in which it is brunt using an electric discharge at 6000 degrees--but that is another story. The helium just expands as it changes from a liquid to a gas.

Another example of this is the nuclear rocket. Liquid hydrogen is simply run through a reactor and heated. As it is heated, it expands. It actually can expand faster this way than when burnt using liquid oxygen. So, an atomic rocket is very possible, using only liquid hydrogen. This would probably be used only in space but it was worked on by the American military as a cruise-like missile in which the reactor exploded when it reached the target. The code name for this project was Project Pluto.

The Nowak system either involved a especially designed engine or was built to withstand some real stress if an internal combustion engine was modified. This would involve using the explosion of the internal combustion engine only to heat the liquid helium instantly. I don't know the engineering details of the Nowak engine and am only guessing at this.

The fusion work of Richter was done on Heumel Island or some island with a similar name. I have the file at my other house. He needed an out of the way place because ultrasound is, well, ultrasound--rather loud.

Mercator
Sunday, December 17th, 2006, 06:44 AM
Huemul Island:

http://www.argentinaxplora.com/destinos/rnegro/bariloch/bariexca.htm

Huemul Project:

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

Dr. Solar Wolff
Sunday, December 17th, 2006, 07:05 AM
Huemul Island:

http://www.argentinaxplora.com/destinos/rnegro/bariloch/bariexca.htm

Huemul Project:

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

Nice pictures of Huemul Island, Mercator! The Wikipedia article is wrong about Richter and a little bird tells me this work, in his own words, will be published soon.

They won't say it but I will: Rainer Karlsch (a conventional historian) stole his material from researchers "Friedrich Georg" and Thomas Mehner. These two latter individuals drove the recent research into the German atomic projects during World War Two. Conventional historians were so lazy and incompentent that it took four or five published books by Georg and Mehner to wake them up.

Richter obtained fusion in 1942. He did this while literally living above the vast undergoung installations in the Jonas Valley (living in Suhl). These facilities are still not explored or even opened to this day.

The German atomic projects were many and varied. It is suspected that they invented whole other technologies to detonate nuclear weapons which had offshoots involving things we call impossible even today. There were many combinations of fission and fusion weapons discussed then. There were as many as six seperate atomic projects in Germany.

Orlon
Tuesday, January 2nd, 2007, 12:04 PM
Well, the machine looks just like a slightly more clever variation on the classical "electric engine runs generator" -theme. Regular physics would say there is no such thing as getting the efficiency of either device anywhere near 100%. But this report states the efficiency magically reaches above 100%, producing net energy.

I'd say the fraud is the company who want's people to buy that CD they're selling for 13 dollars. Why would they use a 1995-style homepage and sell a thirteen-dollar CD when they could use their knowledge to become multi-billionaires, If it would work?

Even if the brittish government did belive in this, those were bureaucrats, not physicists. The above statements still apply.

And why are you referring to age-old aether theories? They've been thoroughly discredited, have they not?

The seemingly negative enthropy of life could be explained very easy; we're hotter than the surroundings, and while simultaneously we "build" ourselves by refining amino acids into cells, we also produce simple molecules such as carbon dioxide and water from bigger organic ones such as fats, carbs and proteins. Nothing magic about it at all.

If this forum was dedicated solely to science, I'd just write "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof", and that would be it. But there seems to be more than a little "mysticism" present at this forum.

But If you do believe in this, do proceed and build this thing. All things stated above would happen. Money and power. In your hands. :thumbup

Dr. Solar Wolff
Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007, 08:00 AM
Well, the machine looks just like a slightly more clever variation on the classical "electric engine runs generator" -theme. Regular physics would say there is no such thing as getting the efficiency of either device anywhere near 100%. But this report states the efficiency magically reaches above 100%, producing net energy.
I'd say the fraud is the company who want's people to buy that CD they're selling for 13 dollars. Why would they use a 1995-style homepage and sell a thirteen-dollar CD when they could use their knowledge to become multi-billionaires, If it would work?
Even if the brittish government did belive in this, those were bureaucrats, not physicists. The above statements still apply.
And why are you referring to age-old aether theories? They've been thoroughly discredited, have they not?
The seemingly negative enthropy of life could be explained very easy; we're hotter than the surroundings, and while simultaneously we "build" ourselves by refining amino acids into cells, we also produce simple molecules such as carbon dioxide and water from bigger organic ones such as fats, carbs and proteins. Nothing magic about it at all.
If this forum was dedicated solely to science, I'd just write "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof", and that would be it. But there seems to be more than a little "mysticism" present at this forum.
But If you do believe in this, do proceed and build this thing. All things stated above would happen. Money and power. In your hands. :thumbup

Orlon, where have you been? Please visit Skadi more often. Please take another look at the two Color devices. Neither one are a "generator" in the sense of an electric, induction generator which uses moving parts. The simple Magnetapparat uses only permanent magents, wires, coils and plates. Yet, this is the device built for the British and the one which produced electrical energy in their presence. The working device, the Stromerzeuger, might confuse you with its name but it was really two units. One, the primary, a battery, wires, plates and and so on, induced an electric current in the secondary without contact and without moving parts. Not only that, but if you read it, the secondary's output exceeded the battery's input. Not only that, multiple secondaries could be fitted around the primary, each yeilding an over unity output.

It was this second device which Siemens put into production, according to the report, and with interested the OKM, the leadership of the German Navy. If you recall, the German Navy was the U-boat fleet in World War Two. Now, why would the German Navy spend money on a perpetual motion machine? Well, according to the report, the Stromerzeuger generated 6kv in its simple, one secondary, form (amps are not known). OK, so now set this up inside a U-boat, use multiple secondaries and hook this up to the batteries of the proposed Elekro-Boot projects. With these the OKM planned to use type XXI, XXIII and XXIV hulls, designs associated with the Walter hydrogen peroxide system, and convert them using extra batteries in the outer pressurized figure 8 hulls of these ships. No, it never happened. Neither did the Elekro-Boote, but it was on the drawing board in late 1944.

In 1982, at a free energy conference in Germany, a Magnetapparat was recondstucted. At the conference, it worked, producing mili-volt tension for some time.

Your response concerning negative enthropy does not suffice. Heat is not the measue of life that you are making it. Plants are the classic examples of negative enthropy, (life force), and they are at ambient temperature.

I am surprised that you didn't find the Achilles Heel of the Coler Device. It was tuning. Coler had to tune in each device by hand. He was not a scientist and had no idea of how this was really done. Evidently, the frequency or whatever it was that he was picking up was not constant. This was the big problem from the start and the problem which probably limited the use of the Coler device as a means of electrical energy for the Kriegsmarine.