Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[Reisender]

Hallo Leute,

wollte mal fragen ob die Technologie von David Hamel nachgebaut wurde? Irgendwie finde ich im Internet rein garnichts Aktuelles dazu!

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hammnu.htm

Gru?
Reisender

[Reisender]

Mal einfach mal in die Runde gefragt. Was denkt ihr was ein Magnetfeld ist? Wie es beschaffen ist? Woraus es besteht? Usw.? W?rde mich einfach mal interessieren was da f?r Vorstellungen existieren.

[Reisender]

hier sind paar youtubvideos zu diesem Effekt des Magnetgat oder wie sich das schimpft!

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=hkgyY47duCM&feature=related
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=GHN-Nr61IDI&feature=related
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=MUJ62NF9iYQ&feature=related

[AnandAadhar]

hier sind paar youtubvideos zu diesem Effekt des Magnetgat oder wie sich das schimpft!

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=hkgyY47duCM&feature=related
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=GHN-Nr61IDI&feature=related
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=MUJ62NF9iYQ&feature=related

Here are a few webpages about hamel's device:
http://www.world-famous.com/DavidHamelStuff/Hamel-Physics.html
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/thfrnrgen.htm
http://www.padrak.com/ine/SINCLAIRE1.html
http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/hameltech4.htm
http://www.icestuff.com/~energy21/hameltech5.htm

AnandAadhar

[AnandAadhar]

Mal einfach mal in die Runde gefragt. Was denkt ihr was ein Magnetfeld ist? Wie es beschaffen ist? Woraus es besteht? Usw.? W?rde mich einfach mal interessieren was da f?r Vorstellungen existieren.

Magnetism is the local ether of cyclic time. It manifests as radiant energy in the difference of electric potential of the higher and lower atmosphere. A magnetic field is space polarized by a magnet (like the iron core of the earth). Space consists of gravitions (positive and negative time combined as one before separate material manifestation into protons and electrons, proto-matter so to say, see; http://peswiki.com/index.php/Paper:A_New_Foundation_for_Physics,_by_Quantum_Aether_Dynamics_Institute#Relationship_of_Dimensions_to_Form). So a magnetic field consists of cycling gravitons which with momentum can be converted into usable electrical energy. Stubblefield e.g. managed to retreive electrical energy out of the earth's active magnetic field. Just a coil in the soil. That is all. That is the proof. Gravity is the universal ether of centripetal force (linear inward time). It manifests as the Casimir force (the force pressing two plates held at a microscopic distance together) . And dark energy or zeropoint energy is the primal ether of timespace or the expansion of the universe (linear outward going time) proven by the Hubble redshift. The latter ether is the dominant one traditionally considered absolute. The relative of the ether though (gravity combined with magnetism)  is what we seek to provide us with overunity energy. That is why the Hamel 'three cone' device is called a gravito magnetic device (GMD) by Pierre Sinclair (see: http://www.padrak.com/ine/SINCLAIRE1.html).  The Hamel device confines the workings of gravity in compressing that force in all three spacial dimensions in the frame of his djed-setup in such a way that the central magnetic equilibrium is impossible and the lateral deviation is repelled. The magnetic force can, driven by the primal ether, do nothing else but prove its cyclic nature then; if everything is correctly tuned that is. And that is the problem with Hamel. We have no video's of a working GMD seen yet, only stories of contacts of Hamel. Hamel was a believer of aliens contacting him through his television set and egyptian mythology. Jeanne Manning wrote a book about him (http://www.world-famous.com/DavidHamelStuff/Hamel-Products-Info.html). It is out of print alas. That makes research difficult. Was Hamel a crackpot or an extraterrestrially inspired medium? He was no writer nor a scientist. An intuitive person for sure. We have to reconstruct his generator ourselves to prove this theory of catching the force of the relative ether right.  J. Naudin indeed did good work in this. He even made models of Hamel's flying saucer working on the three-cone principle of anisotropic restlessness.  See further the links above.

[AnandAadhar]

A replication is tried and the principle is tested of the so-called GMD, the gravito-magnetic device or free energy generator. Hamel said he was inspired by aliens, he even tried to build a flying saucer with it. It was refuted as being a viable option by the Myth busters team. But since no material of that effort could be found on the net, we tried our own replication....It leads to the conclusion that from positioning the spinner in a cup or device like the GMD no spin is obtained. One illusion less.
The design is described in an artice of mr. Pierre Sinclair, a former associate of Hamel.
Article: http://www.padrak.com/ine/SINCLAIRE1.html
Site dedicated to the work of Hamel:
http://www.world-famous.com/DavidHamelStuff/Hamel-Physics.html
Computer model of Naudin:
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/thfrnrgen.htm
Free energy research pages Anand Aadhar:
http://theorderoftime.com/science/free_energy/index.html

[AnandAadhar]

O sorry, I forgot: the YouTube postings are:

http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=89Hu2yHid1w
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=MP4Y6nzaPRg

AA

[Steven Dufresne]

Hi Anand,
Nice work you've done and it's good to see some videos. I tried replicating this myself a few years ago. See the pages starting with:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/haml45gd/haml45gd.htm
Note the most important one:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/haml45gd/h45gdavd/h45gdavd.htm
where I detail the results of my visits with David Hamel.

The main principle for this 3 cone device is not spin though. In fact, it isn't supposed to spin at all. It's supposed to wobble. The best animation of this is on this page (although the wobble is exagerated, more below):
 http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hammnu.htm
You succeed in this a little at around 6:20 in your first video when you lower the top magnet. The Hamel spinner was intended by David to demonstrate what he called the butterfly effect or motion, which is the wobbling motion that the "spinning" magnet makes when you press down on it with the magnet in your hand if you don't press too hard. This is what he told me when he demonstrated it to me at his place during one visit. However, he also said that it was a demonstration of perpetual motion, which Jean-Louis Naudin showed it wasn't. The wobble and spin work only as long as you hold the repelling magnet in your hand. As soon as you fix the repelling magnet in place, the wobble and spin will not continue. It's the small movements of your hand that keep the magnet spinning, and wobbling if you don't press down too hard.

However, the 3 cone device, which David called a heater and which replicators call a 45GD (45 gallon drum device) or 3CD (3 cone device) is not supposed to spin, just wobble. It does look like your alignment is a little out. The middle cone is always tilted when the three cones are in place. This could be caused by the alignment of the base affecting the bottom cone affecting the middle cone. Or it could be the cones themselves. Hard to say from the video.

When I brought mine to show David (I lived a 2 hour drive away) he always pointed to the area between the magnets on the cone's rim and the fixed ring of magnets that repell them and said that the energy comes from here, the zero point (quoting from memory.) You might also need to make a more complete version before it'll work, but who knows. David's version that worked was more completely built: metal cones, contained in a metal 45 gallon drum. For it to "perpetually" wobble it may need to be more complete. David did say many times that the resulting air flow around the cones was also important. Also, the first thing David pointed out to me when I showed him my first version was that the spacing between the cone rim magnets and the ring of magnets that repell them was too big. He told me that his was only about 1/4" with about 1/16" of wobble. So your gap size may be to big. My first one (Mark 1) had about 1" gap but my second one (Mark 2) was about 7/16". Also, as you mention in your video, the top magnet that pushes down should be in repulsion, not attraction. It's supposed to push down to compress the cones a little so that they wobble. But I imagine your cones alignment will have to be perfect. Also, one time when David and I were trying to get my Mark 2 version running, he suggested that my oscillator (the common term for the base) was too rigid. It needs to be fairly loose to allow the bottom cone to move however it wants. Compare how much freedom the bottom tip of your middle cone has compared to the bottom tip of your bottom cone.

Pierre Sinclair's gavito magnetic device was an attempt to replicate David Hamel's device that flew away. Some details on that one are at:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/hamlshfs/hamlshfs.htm
The device you're trying to replicate did not fly away but instead imploded after being left to run of a while. It also made the air glow (plasma? ionization?)  which I suspect you may not see until you have metal cones and enclose it, possible in a metal drum.

I hope this helps.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org

[vince]

Hi Guys;

I also built a Hamel 3 cone device a few years ago after reading about it on several sites.  Mine did exactly what Anand's did in his video. I must have made a hundred adjustments but it would always stop.

Regards'
Vince

[AnandAadhar]

Hi Anand,
Nice work you've done and it's good to see some videos. I tried replicating this myself a few years ago. See the pages starting with:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/haml45gd/haml45gd.htm
Note the most important one:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/haml45gd/h45gdavd/h45gdavd.htm
where I detail the results of my visits with David Hamel.

The main principle for this 3 cone device is not spin though. In fact, it isn't supposed to spin at all. It's supposed to wobble. The best animation of this is on this page (although the wobble is exagerated, more below):
 http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hammnu.htm
You succeed in this a little at around 6:20 in your first video when you lower the top magnet. The Hamel spinner was intended by David to demonstrate what he called the butterfly effect or motion, which is the wobbling motion that the "spinning" magnet makes when you press down on it with the magnet in your hand if you don't press too hard. This is what he told me when he demonstrated it to me at his place during one visit. However, he also said that it was a demonstration of perpetual motion, which Jean-Louis Naudin showed it wasn't. The wobble and spin work only as long as you hold the repelling magnet in your hand. As soon as you fix the repelling magnet in place, the wobble and spin will not continue. It's the small movements of your hand that keep the magnet spinning, and wobbling if you don't press down too hard.

However, the 3 cone device, which David called a heater and which replicators call a 45GD (45 gallon drum device) or 3CD (3 cone device) is not supposed to spin, just wobble. It does look like your alignment is a little out. The middle cone is always tilted when the three cones are in place. This could be caused by the alignment of the base affecting the bottom cone affecting the middle cone. Or it could be the cones themselves. Hard to say from the video.

When I brought mine to show David (I lived a 2 hour drive away) he always pointed to the area between the magnets on the cone's rim and the fixed ring of magnets that repell them and said that the energy comes from here, the zero point (quoting from memory.) You might also need to make a more complete version before it'll work, but who knows. David's version that worked was more completely built: metal cones, contained in a metal 45 gallon drum. For it to "perpetually" wobble it may need to be more complete. David did say many times that the resulting air flow around the cones was also important. Also, the first thing David pointed out to me when I showed him my first version was that the spacing between the cone rim magnets and the ring of magnets that repell them was too big. He told me that his was only about 1/4" with about 1/16" of wobble. So your gap size may be to big. My first one (Mark 1) had about 1" gap but my second one (Mark 2) was about 7/16". Also, as you mention in your video, the top magnet that pushes down should be in repulsion, not attraction. It's supposed to push down to compress the cones a little so that they wobble. But I imagine your cones alignment will have to be perfect. Also, one time when David and I were trying to get my Mark 2 version running, he suggested that my oscillator (the common term for the base) was too rigid. It needs to be fairly loose to allow the bottom cone to move however it wants. Compare how much freedom the bottom tip of your middle cone has compared to the bottom tip of your bottom cone.

Pierre Sinclair's gavito magnetic device was an attempt to replicate David Hamel's device that flew away. Some details on that one are at:
 http://rimstar.org/sdprop/hamlshfs/hamlshfs.htm
The device you're trying to replicate did not fly away but instead imploded after being left to run of a while. It also made the air glow (plasma? ionization?)  which I suspect you may not see until you have metal cones and enclose it, possible in a metal drum.

I hope this helps.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org

The upper cup was sidewards under the force of the magnet above it. The smaller magnet did not show that. So the alignment was right but the force of the field couldn't keep the 3 in line.  Lowering the magnets makes it pend in one direction always. A wobble would be a back and forth motion of the top magnet, but the field in the middle would prevent it crossing the centre so that the only way is for it to spin, Or am I wrong? Naudin's replication-model shows a spin with the wobble. So you have seen a Hamel device working perpetually, or just for some time? A wobble caused by a little shock from the outside can take minutes to come to a rest, but the decline is quickly seen. Words are just words, we need a witness like you to be exact on your observations to be sure we have a real thing here. I have no idea how to picture the wobble going that strong that the thing develops anti-gravity... Just burning a little bulb or spinning a wheel with it would be enough for me. We need a replicable, mechanical proof of magnetic overunity.  Vince had the same problem: no alignment with our replications gives a permanent wobble. My compliments with your faithful research. Don't you have a video of your wobble?

AnandAadhar