How to explain Searl Effect generator using RS2?

Discussion concerning other (non-RS) systems of theory and the insights obtained from them, as applied to the developing RS2 theory.
Post Reply
Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

How to explain Searl Effect generator using RS2?

Post by Sun » Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:41 am

I think this would be a simple question for RS theroy. I search the forum and found bperet said,"The Searl effect is based on anti-gravity response, not really "free energy". Is that means that this machine is just a permanent-magnet machine? HOW "The Searl effect is based on anti-gravity response" ?

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1484
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Searl Effect

Post by bperet » Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:15 am

UVG0 wrote: I think this would be a simple question for RS theroy. I search the forum and found bperet said,"The Searl effect is based on anti-gravity response, not really "free energy". Is that means that this machine is just a permanent-magnet machine? HOW "The Searl effect is based on anti-gravity response" ?
It may be a simple question, but the answer is a little more complicated... first, I would recommend reading the section on Forces and Force Fields, which discusses how "forces", including electric and magnetic force, work in the Reciprocal System. I would also recommend reading the section on "Why do they Gravitate?" It is important to understand what gravity IS and therefore what anti-gravity IS, and how it can be produced.

The SEG (Searl Effect Generator) is a permanent magnet device, but with an unusual magnetic configuration. Conventional science considers magnetism to be a "force," in other words, they don't know what it is. In the RS, magnetism is a 2-dimensional, rotational VIBRATION, which means it has a frequency and structure. In the topic on Forces and Force Fields, I did diagrams showing how the repulsion of like magnetic poles was actually the force of the progression of the natural reference system (Hubble expansion), due to wave cancellation. The progression moves in the opposite direction of gravitation, so it appears as an "anti-gravity" effect.

Searl claims, and has demonstrated, that he was able to produce a standing "magnetic wave" in a permanent magnet setup, a regular oscillation of the poles. Can't be done if magnetism is just a "force," but when you consider it as a vibration, it makes more sense... easy to produce a standing wave when the force you are dealing with IS a wave. Searl said that it requires very tight tolerances in constructing the SEGs, which again makes sense... the physical dimensions would have to allow a standing wave to form, similar to the tuning of a quartz crystal, but in a magnetic domain.

He also makes extensive use of copper (as do most "free energy" devices), a diamagnetic material--which repels magnetism. What I find particularly interesting about his rotor setup is that it DOESN'T explode! People claim "fraud" when they see he is accelerating the rollers with a ring of electromagnets, but they are missing the entire point of the experiment. It isn't trying to show that the rollers move by themselves, but that they can be accelerated to very high velocities and not fly apart from centrifugal force. If you look at the videos on Searl's site, it is really quite impressive--12 rollers are magnetically stuck to a central cylinder, and each cylinder repels each other--like pole repulsion. Most of us have done this in science class in High School, but if you remember, if you get too many magnets around the central cylinder, one of them will flip over, and the whole bunch will then go into attraction and stick together in a big clump. Searl's magnets do not do this, regardless of how many he sticks on that ring. When accelerated, so the rollers start moving around the disk, they exhibit centripetal acceleration--they stick harder to the inner cylinder and are not thrown off, as one would expect, since the only thing holding them on is appears to be a fairly weak magnetic attraction. His system generates a "yin" force (towards the center) that increases with rotational velocity. I find that very interesting.

I'll have to review his latest work and see if I can find a configuration, using Reciprocal System concepts, that would reproduce the behavior. I did not find much in the way of technical data (frequency of the magnetic wave, field strengths, etc), so there is not a lot to base a model on. I would be curious to know if the magnetic field increases with rotational velocity, which would explain the stability. I'll post a follow-up when I have something.
Every dogma has its day...

Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

The reseaon why i post this

Post by Sun » Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:10 pm

The reseaon why i post this question is because it is a very applicable one. I think even Searl himself has not got the right theroy for his invention and only RS can buid up a theroy for it. Once this theroy is done, many machines based on this can be construced and the theory of RS2 will be applicable for making something bigger. However, i don't know how far have you guys gone. The application of RS2 would be the most exciting part for me. I have read the part of RS2 describing prana, and i believe this part would be the key for RS2 applying in medication.

There are two more questions:

1.Indicating by Ra materials, there are generally two types of free energy machines. One is using the magnetic energy(tech developed by Tesla) and the other is using crystal. According to Ra, water is a type of crystal. I heard from the 2009 disclosure conference that a guy develop a motor vehicle using water for power source. So i think it is possible to use water as crystal to tap energy. Have you ever think about a free energy machine using crystal as power source? Any explaination and possible design for this type of machine using RS2?

2. According to Ra, gravity result from the inward scalar motion is not correct. They said, "gravity may be seen as the pressing towards the inner light/love". What is the different between Ra and RS statement of gravity?

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1484
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

"Free" energy machines

Post by bperet » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:00 pm

Strange!My reply doesn't work.
Actually it does work, but just wasn't visible--for new users, comments go into an approval queue so I can try to keep spam off the board (and believe me, there is a LOT of it). I've updated you so you can post/reply without approval now. Let me know if it doesn't work.
The reseaon why i post this question is because it is a very applicable one. I think even Searl himself has not got the right theroy for his invention and only RS can buid up a theroy for it. Once this theroy is done, many machines based on this can be construced and the theory of RS2 will be applicable for making something bigger. However, i don't know how far have you guys gone. The application of RS2 would be the most exciting part for me. I have read the part of RS2 describing prana, and i believe this part would be the key for RS2 applying in medication.
I just read the technical section of Searl's web site, and it has a lot of big, scientific words but does not really say much. You are correct, they don't know because this effect is pretty much outside the domain of conventional science.
1.Indicating by Ra materials, there are generally two types of free energy machines. One is using the magnetic energy(tech developed by Tesla) and the other is using crystal. According to Ra, water is a type of crystal. I heard from the 2009 disclosure conference that a guy develop a motor vehicle using water for power source. So i think it is possible to use water as crystal to tap energy. Have you ever think about a free energy machine using crystal as power source? Any explaination and possible design for this type of machine using RS2?
All free energy machines are basically the same thing--tuned circuits, either in the light/electric (1d, crystal) or magnetic (2d) realms. And it is only "free" because you don't have to pay someone to deliver it--the Universe does that on its own. When you look at the larger picture of the Material-Cosmic sector interaction, you see that it isn't really "free" energy--it only appears that way to a science that is missing equations for half the Universe. If you added the missing bits in, they would not be "over-unity" devices, but "Unity Devices."

Do you have a link for that 2009 water-powered motor?

Water is only crystalline when in the solid state--frozen. And it does not make a good crystal, as it tends to capture gas when freezing, making bubbles (ice is seldom "crystal clear"). Water does have some unique properties, but only in the case of "living water"--the inanimate stuff does not do much. (See the works of Viktor Schauberger for more info).

(I actually built a crystal-based energy device from RS2 premises, several years ago. It was far too unstable to be of much use and had the tendency to explode without warning. Still need to learn more about the effect that other dimensions and densities have on this one before trying something like that again. Almost died from the effects of that little gadget.)
2. According to Ra, gravity result from the inward scalar motion is not correct. They said, "gravity may be seen as the pressing towards the inner light/love". What is the different between Ra and RS statement of gravity?
Not much; different words saying the same thing. Larson always referred to "force" as a "push" (pressing), because it was in the unobservable region of time and we can only see the effect this push had in space--namely, "time" pushed things around. So in the RS, gravity is just a 3-dimensional inward pressing. From my analysis of the Ra Material, Ra uses love and light as yin and yang--two generative principles that work together. Larson also uses these principles, except he calls them time (yin) and space (yang). Gravity is a SPEED, s/t, which is yang/yin, or in Ra's terms, light/love. Different ways to say the same thing, though Larson is far more detailed than Ra.
Every dogma has its day...

Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

Free energy machines

Post by Sun » Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:17 pm

Thank you for your explaination! It do enlighten me.

Do you have a link for that 2009 water-powered motor?

I just heard from the 2009 disclosure video, said by Dr. Steven Greer. He said the car was quickly took away by *** and no one know how it works. I don't know if it is truely exist, but i think most of the inforamtion from this organization is reliable. I can't find the video link now. May just be found in www.disclosureproject.org or just search youtube. I am gathering all reliable informations that can lead us to replicate a free energy machine. I don't need one stably work, but just one break the conventional science. Building a cystal-based energy device from RS2 is really a big step! Could you give me more detail through email about it?

I am looking forward for your post for searl.

Some of my friend have replicated the SEG, but not a complete one. According to their practice, the coil must be charged first, and you will get about 1:6 input/output ratio.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1484
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

SEG charging

Post by bperet » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:16 am

UVG0 wrote:
Building a cystal-based energy device from RS2 is really a big step! Could you give me more detail through email about it?
Yes, I will do that.
I am looking forward for your post for searl.
I started a separate topic on the SEG rollers and stators. The Russian test results on his device were most revealing, so I made a computer simulation of the magnetic field of the SEG, based on KVK Nehru's work on the solar core. The co-magnetic structure appears to duplicate the SEG magnetic arrangement. (See other topic for details)
Some of my friend have replicated the SEG, but not a complete one. According to their practice, the coil must be charged first, and you will get about 1:6 input/output ratio.
I would klike to know how they went about charging the SEG, if they could, as that seems to be the key. Also, for the magnet, did they use a solid piece of neodymium, or was it a powder? I am thinking that if they need to rearrange the atomic lattice for the effect (charging), there would need to be some degree of freedom that you could get from a powder/granule, and not in a solid.
Every dogma has its day...

Post Reply