Joel McCLAIN & Norman WOOTAN

Magnetic Magnetic Resonance Amplifier

[ KeelyNet Message Collection # 2 ]

MRA FIle # 1

Dan Davidson: US Patent # 5,568,005 ~ Acoustic-Magnetic Power Generator

Subject: Piezo Test

Hi Jerry:  You remember those piezo's that you got from Tanners'? I've been testing one of them, and have seen an "anomalous" effect, so maybe
some of the other experimenters will try. I put one of the piezos on the top of a CB antenna, and connected the antenna to a square wave generator.  I tuned the generator until the piezo started to "sing", and put a 'scope on it. At 7480 Hz, the peak sine wave output from the piezo is 8 volts at 37430 Hz. In other words, frequency is being multiplied by a factor of 5.00 times, and voltage is going from millivolts of radiated signal to eight volts peak to peak. More interesting is that when the piezo is resonated at 37430 Hz, the output goes up be 50 times to 400 volts.

If this can be duplicated, we may have a way to use piezos to convert earth's naturally occuring background radiation into useful energy.  ~ Joel

Subject: Ferromagnetic resonance

Hi Norm:  Since the Nieper ring exhibits anti-g characteristics, it seems to me that the free-running freq. should relate in some way to the resonant freq. of ferromagnets. That freq. has been listed as 170KHz or 180KHz, depending on whose file you read. I injected signals into the base of a Nieper ring xistor until the collector signal locked on at 174,800Hz and froze the display on the scope. So, IF my assumption is correct, the ferromagnetic resonant freq is 174.8KHz, as measured of the Simpson 710 counter.  ~  Joel

Subject: Feromagnetic Resonance

Joel:  Now that you have nailed down the freq as 174.8KHZ it is interesting that this verifies what I have been pounding on the desktop for years now the fact that Nikola Tesla's big coil out in Colorado Springs was tuned to around 170 KHZ. Coincidence, never: Tesla knew the Ferro Resonant freq very well. I will bring to you a 50 Watt RF Linear amp and my Wavetek function generator which has 8 different wave forms and will go up to 30 MegHZ. We will try to "levitate" some barium ferrite magnets or do a little "harmonizing" with them with some special coils which I would like to try. Just maybe the "Sparky Sweet" phenomenon is not that hard to do. ~  Norm

[Hans Colerís "Stromzeuger" & "Magnetstromapparat" = 180 KHz ]

Subject: Ferromagnetic Resonance

Joel:  I set up an experiment to verify what you had found as follows: I placed a piece of Neodymimum magnet material into one of my TET multi
resonance coils and got an output of free resonance of 174.925 KHZ. I then placed into the circuit in "parallel" one of the barium titanate
transducers with an alnico bar magnet through the center hole which immediately tripped the circuit into free resonance at a freq of 349.850 which is one octave higher. The scope locks on and the freq counter is very stable. The RF coming off the TET coil sure screws up the lower bands on the TV. I will bring out to you the while set-up later this weekend. Very interesting. ~  Norm

Subject: (R) Ferromagnetic Resonance

Hi Norm: Excellent squared! Here's the latest on the 'ring': Using the freq. counter to measure the major component of the Nieper ring output, as it is a complex waveform with harmonics, the output is 1.1MHz. The counter may be averaging somewhat, but the ring was reported to drop off from 1.3 MHz after warming up. This seems to be about par.  Been thinking that the resonance may be electromechanical as opposed to purely electrical... Since the constant in all versions of this circuit is the TO3 case xistor, perhaps there is a 'ringing' within the case cavity. Will have measure a TO3 and apply cavity resonance equation to determine this.

Subject: Ferromagnetic Resonance

Gerald:  Maybe you could provide some input to this puzzle. Joel and I  are building the Neiper Ring transistorized circuit which is reported
to loose 15% of it's weight when it enters free resonance. This project led Joel into the investigation of the resonance freq of ferromagnetism. Remember Tesla's coil was designed for somewhere around 170 KHZ. Corum calculated the values as close as could be determined from available info. After Joel did his test and got 174.8 KHZ, I set up a similar test but used what we refer to as a multifreq resonant coil which I must confess is my own "rube-goldberg" device. Basically it is a tetrahedron coil which has each of the 6 edges 12 inches in length with 26 turns of #30 silver polyeese covered wire. The coil is wound in a full tetrahedron shape with one continous wire with no breaks so that you have in the base plane of the geometric shape of a tetrahedron a current which goes in one direction and creates a magnetic plane with North pole above the plane and the South pole below the plane when current is sent into the coil in one direction and the poles reverse when the polarity is reversed. What is interesting is that the vertical legs of the tetrahedron contain 26 turns of wire with current going in both directions or a total of 52 turns. The input and output wires enter and exit the whole coil at the verticies of the TET. This coil will resonate with about any freq in the area and when amplified will pick up even the faintest magnetic disturbancies.  For example, I can attach my scope to the coil with no amplification and pick up the paterns of data from my printer while it is running in the next room.  When everything is absolutely quiet it will sit there and pick up a background signal around the 170KHZ freq which I always thought was caused by the earth's magnetic flux. By placing a Neodymimum magnet inside of the coil and injecting a signal from my Wavetek signal generator into it I looked for a freq which gave me the maximum gain on the scope which turned out to be 174.925 KHZ.  I next wanted to back-up the figure so I placed a round bar of alnico 5 magnet material about 1 inch long and 1/2 inch in diameter in one of the barium titanate transducers (which you were blowing up). When you ring these transducers they will go into free resonance. The alnico provided a reference freq and when placed on to of the Neodymimum magnet the circuit tripped into a powerful free resonant freq of 349.850 Khz which is one octave higher than the previous freq. This whole experiment is still not conclusive and needs attention from others like yourself and Dan Davidson. Bert's interest is "tweaked" along with several others like Bill Beaty. I'm sure Woody will "get off" on this one also. More later. Will appreciate input from all interested in this worthwhile experiment. ~  Norm

Subject: Ferromagnetic Resonance

When Joel started "poking" around with nailing down the natural "ferromagnetic" resonant frequency we were refining the Neiper Ring circuit which looses weight when it runs in free resonance. What Joel wanted to do was match the free running freq of the Neiper Ring to the natural resonant freq of the earths magnetic field, voila, gravity cancellation. With our numbers it may soon be possible to build a "Sparky Sweet" type of coil with a tickler running off freq by just enough to cause the full cancellation and boost of a permanent magnets field 120 times a second which will yield 60 HZ sine wave out of the power coil. If you all will go to the Nikola Tesla book "Complete Patents" and go to page 176 you will find Patent # 413,353 dated Oct. 22, 1889 in which Tesla designed and built a permanent magnetic device which would rectify or convert AC to DC to drive the existing street lights of New York which were DC arc lamps until the AC powered incandescent bulbs were installed. See, he provided AC power to the city before the lights could be converted or replaced. Being an ingenious fellow he simply came up with a simple rectifier long before the selenium types were even thought of. This principle is easy to understand for it is basically the familiar "buck-boost" where we cancel then boost the magnetic flux in "counter magnetic" fields. We have now two projects springing out of one. First being the original "enhancement" of the anti-gravity tendacies of the Neiper circuit and the fabrication of a "Sweet" type of ZPE generator utilizing the findings. We welcome all in "E" to join the hunt so to speak. There is room for all to learn from this.  ~  Norm

12/04/94 23:19
Subject: Easy Weight Loss

Norm brought over his Dec-O-gram precision scale, and we used it todetermine whether the Nieper ring would become "lighter", as was reported in the New Energy News. It does work... weight loss wasmeasured to be 350 milligrams, as opposed to the maximum loss of 500 milligrams that N.E.N had seen.  The weight loss occurs over a periodof about 15 to 20 minutes, also as reported. However, the weight gain after the circuit was deenergized took considerably longer. After about 20 mimutes, only 200 mg had been regained, at which point we disassembled the test setup for another test.  We will upload a file with the circuit description if anyone wants to try this.

12/05/94 10:27
Subject: Nieper Ring = Tetrahedron

First it had to be verified that the Nieper Ring worked as described by both Nieper and the N.E.N evaluation. Next, it has to be understood why this anomolous reaction occurs.  Questions: (1) Why use audio power transistors in a circuit that is going to "run" at 1.3MHz?  Transistors are designed around an "alpha cut-off frequency", which is five times the maximum expected frequency to be used.  For an audio xistor, that is 5 X 20KHz, or 100 KHz.  The xistors are over ten times out of their range. (2) Why use a fixed bias to drive the xistors into hard conduction with no input except capacitive coupling from a previous stage? Why use common emitter configuration, which is capable of the highest power gain, but with a collector load resistor value so low that power gain is negligible? (3)Why drive the xistors into a collector load value that is so low that both the xistors and the load resistors become hot?  Since the weight loss only occurs after about 15 minutes, does the accumulated heat play a part in this effect? (4) Why use three stages, coupled from output to input?  Does it make any difference how many stages are used? Is more better? (5) Why does the circuit free-oscillate at 1.3MHz, or oscillate at all for that matter?  Why is the collector signal a mixed bag of harmonics?  What does 1.3MHz have to do with gravity?

Answers (I think): (1)  Silicon atoms form a crystal lattice structure, and the crystals are tetrahedral in shape, with each of the four valence electrons forming a covalent bond with each of the four adjacent atoms. This is the key to understanding the Nieper Ring.  An audio transistor in forced conduction with no input signal is stressed by the biasing potential.  As heat builds at the junction, the lattice structure begins to resonate at its' own frequency, ie, that of a natural tetrahedron.  Using audio xistors is effectively a low-pass filter, keeping out high freq noise or ambient signals. (2) The Nieper Ring design produces junction heat, but within the design parameters of the xistors.  Potential and heat provide the stress which permit the tetrahedral resonance. (3) Accumulated heat over time allows the silicon to reach the level of resonance which is limited by the collector load resistor. (4) There is a natural symmetry to the circuit.  Viewed as a point-to-point diagram, the ring is a Delta-T, or tetrahedron.  Viewed as a conventional schematic, this is not apparent.  However, if you WIRE it point-to-point, you are building a tetrahedron of material which is tetrahedral in its' atomic structure. Three xistors form the base, and the EB and CB networks meet at the B+ point, which is the fourth corner of the tetrahedron. (5) The output "waveform" is a complex wave, whose major component is approx. 1.3 MHz as measured on an oscilloscope. However, using a frequency counter, the AGGREGATE frequency is 1.1 MHz, and using signal injection at the xistor bases, the waveform will peak at harmonics of the 1.1MHz aggregate. One of those harmonics is the ferromagnetic resonant frequency used by Nikola Tesla, and it is this harmonic which may be responsible for the weight reduction. The small level of this harmonic, at 1/6 of aggregate resonance, is nevertheless amplified in effect by a factor of 1000 because it is incorporated into a resonant tetrahedral lattice structure. The EFFECT is measured by the weight loss.

I see this circuit as a spinning pyramid, where the walls (electrons) are forced to spin in a tetrahedral pattern, creating a vortex at the natural resonance of a tetrahedral lattice. The walls appear to be stationary, but the material that forms the walls is moving, as if the walls were hollow and water were being pumped through the void.

There are many potential uses for this circuit... it is an excellent investigation tool, and with no further modification, is a natural gravity detector. It could also be used to test time = gravity, by placing a synchronized watch into the field, and observing changes that occur. I'm sure that there are many other uses, but those two come to mind. The Nieper Ring is essentially a passive device. Actively "pumping" the output via an external amplifier may result in even greater effect, provided that the input impedance of the external device is high enough not to disturb the naturally occuring resonance.  ~ Joel

Subject: Tetrahedral Coil

Gerald:  The inspiration behind the construction of my coil is really bizarre to say the least. Nick Holden (WACO- Buckey-Ball manufacturer)
and I met a lady that claims to have ridden on an alien space craft during which time she was told that the flight physics was based on
TETRAHEDRAL geometry. She was told that the tetrahedron was rotated "virtually" which extracted enery directly from the aether or space
vacuum. My design was based on her discription and incorporated a scalar vector cancellation in the vertical legs of the geometric figure. This electrical and magnetic field cancellation can be verified by the total absence of magnetic flux along the legs of the TET while under considerable power. There is a very powerful base plane magnetic field created which revolved at extreme RPM (virtual rotation). I have one version that Joel is doing some test on that is a full nested pair of TETs to model the earth or any other spherical object. Will keep you informed of test results. When the nested TET is run you get a North pole magnetic plane at the 19.5 degree north latitude line and a South pole magnetic plane at the 19.5 degree South latitude line similar the the earth magnetic fields and the energy upwhelling regions that have been described in various books.  ~  Norm

Subject: Ferromagnetic Resonance Transformer

Joel:  This morning before going to work I spent a little time and wound a 200 turn coil on the 3 inch long permanent magnet (alnico 8) and placed this coil inside of the larger coil (same as the coil I gave you). When this permanent magnet core coil is driven with my signal generator (.5 V output) at exactly 174.9 KHZ the output coil will light up a neon tube. If you get off this freq nothing will pass through the transformer for the permanent magnetic field cannot be overcome by the "feeble" input. Need some more investigation here. My intent is to drive the input coil at a freq that will cause a difference (beat) freq of 60 HZ between the input freq and the ferromagnetic natural resonance freq. More later.   ~  Norm
PS: with .5 V input I am getting out 60 V

12/08/94 13:19
Subject: Nested Tet, Cube and Phi

Built a double tetrahedron as a nested pair. In the process of doing this, I noticed that when rotated 45 degrees, the nested tet is a cube in which each square side is divided into four equilaterals. This provides an 8:1 ratio, or octave, which is at right angles to the octave formed by the sides. Reminded me of the "Law of Squares" book by Searle, and Keely's mention of using freq's at right angles for resonance. Seen from this angle, the double tet is both a Lissajous and a caduceus... but when rotated back "up", the double tet is "earth", as viewed from the perspective of the grid ley lines.

There's also an interesting Phi relationship, because the Phi overlap from one square to the next is 0.618, and that is 0.118 more than the half which it intersects, which in eight rotations produces one whole "virtual" rotation. This virtual ninth is, I think, interdimensional because it does not exist in 3-D, and may be the gateway to ether or ZPE when the nested tet is at resonance. Anyone who has already been down this road, feel free to jump in here... Jerry?

Subject: Tets, 4 Wave, 6 Path

Jerry:  Do you remember drawing a little diagram of a tet and a diagram of the wave flow 4 wave 6 path? I looked at this diagram and it is exactly what Joel is seeing in the nested tet. When I built my nested tet, before I tied off everything into a complete 3D "Star of David" configuration, also the same configuration as the "nested" tets form inside the earth I could rotate them within one another and see what Joel is referring to as the "definition of a cube". These are very interesting little figures to play and are very revealing when you can play in 3D space with them.  ~   Norm

Subject: Magnet as Battery

Using Gerald's analogy of visualizing a spring in compression and expansion at the same time, I'm trying to understand magnets. I think of magnets as batteries which we don't know how to "connect" to, yet.

Magnetizers electrically "slam" material with capacitive discharges. Material is energy is "solid" form. The "slam" compresses and expands the energy/material, resulting in an imbalance. The "outside" continues to try to compress while the "inside" is trying to expand. That may be why magnets fracture so easily, and why each chip, as in a hologram, retains all of the characteristics of the whole. A magnet is in a constant state of trying to collapse into itself, which is why it attracts ferrous materials which match the patterns of its own lattice structure.

The "domains" of a magnet are each holographic miniatures of the whole magnet, held together by the molecular structure of the magnetized material. When a domain flips, as in the VTA, it reverses the compression/expansion, releasing electrons from the material. Sweet has learned how to "connect the battery"... just reverse the process of magnetization slowly, and collect the electrons that are released via sympathetic vibration. Even if you could collect just the amount of energy that is contained in the expansion/compression, without any of the catalyst electrons, magnets would be excellent, rechargable power sources.

The problem is that the amount of power needed to "excite" the domain structures of most magnets exceeds the power out. That is why it is
important to find magnetic resonance as a method of "tripping" the domains into a controlled energy expansion. All domains, regardless of the type of magnet, respond to 175KHz, indicating that they all share the same lattice structure. This is a start, but it is not the "aggregate". Maybe acoustic vibration at the cavity resonance of a magnet would also "loosen" the domains, if it were in phase with the electrical resonance signal. Maybe the resonances have to be applied from within the magnet to reverse the externally applied force which created the original imbalance. A round, hollow magnet... like earth, would permit this.

Subject: Barium Ferrite Beat Freq.

Hi Norm: I've found a way to "tickle" the barium ferrite magnets... you can get any output freq you want as a result of the "beat" freq between 8KHz and 174.9KHz. A barium ferrite pair resonates audibly loudest at exactly 8KHz. I'm using your spool of magnet wire inside the gap between the halves to turn the magnet into a "speaker", and you can hear it "sing". The coil is connected to 8KHz from a sig gen.

Wrap a primary coil around one of the halves, and connect it to the other sig gen running at 174.9KHz. Wrap a secondary around the primary, and you will see a waveform that doubles in size at a rate that is equal to the variation of either of the sig gen's from their tuned freq. The increase in waveform is the b/f magnet expanding into the secondary as the excitation field "collapses" at the rate of the beat freq. You can double or half the 174.9 and see the same thing but at lower amplitude. Since the 174.9 and 8 are constants for these magnets, the more we can sensitize them, the easier to flip the domains.

We need to blast one pair with 8KHz at high power to loosen its tie a little, I think.  ~ Joel

Subject: Piezo + Magnet + Unity+

Hi Norm: Found a way to nearly triple the I/O ratio of the barium ferrite transformer. Use a piezo in series with the primary and tune the sig gen to three times the resonant freq of the magnet... I'm only using a single magnet from the pair, and the res freq is 10800 HZ. However, using the piezo as a coupling cap, and tuning the sig gen to 32400 HZ, the input power is 3.4mw, and the output power is 9.7 mw. The measurements are taken across Dale precision resistors. This isn't going to drive much of a load, but by applying more power than half a volt from a sig gen will, if the same power ratios apply at greater input levels. The piezo's lattice being connected to the magnet's lattice causes harmonic sympathetic vibrations and this is a way to avoid "tuning" the magnets, as "Sparky" did. Because the piezo is resonating, it is "coupling" the input + free electrons, sort of like a quartz lighter. Applying this to the magnet at the third octave of the magnet's resonance will keep the magnet in a state of agitation, which releases MORE free electrons. This plus the high impedance of the input, especially when you consider that it is a series resonant circuit (typically LOW impedance) allows the output power to exceed the input power.  ~ Joel

Subject: AC Battery

Hi Norm: This circuit is basically an AC battery, which is connected to an ordinary bridge rectifier to give DC out. It is a piezo in series with a coil connected to a sig gen.  The sig gen is putting out a measured half volt, but there is a volt apiece across the piezo and the coil as a result of the coil being wrapped around a barium ferrite magnet. According to Ohm, this is not possible, and it is ONLY possible because the piezo is being resonated at the third octave of the resonant freq of the barium ferrite. Let's crank this up and give Mr. Puthoff a call.  ~ Joel

Subject: The Rule of Nines

There is a "rule of nines", somewhere under the "Law of Squares", and it basically says that VIRTUAL or ETHERIC rotation occurs at PHI rates in resonant (all) matter. In an earlier message, I said that the nested tet is a cube/lissajous/caduceus, depending on where you are when you look at it. Also, in PHI, you have a VIRTUAL rotation of the cube after each octave, and there are three octaves (Front, Right, Left), and each octave contains resonance for each of the notes( Front, Right, Left) for a total of nine notes. As Keely said, and as we can see by looking at the tet, the forces are at RIGHT ANGLES relative to each other.

Using the tetrahedral lattice structure of silicon in a tetrahedral device such as the Nieper ring, the effect created is a reduction of the quadrupole forces of gravity.

Using the rule of nines in a device that combines lattice structures in series, and applying three octaves (nine harmonics) to the mass, you receive more power out than is applied to the device. This is because the lattices are virtually rotating 360 degrees for every cycle of input, and each cycle consists of eight tetrahedrons, which are apparent when you "square the circle, which is done with PHI. It's a nested relationship.

I now understand why the PHI relationship was once considered as part of a "sacred" geometry, and why the Fibonacci series, which is PHI, is a part of "magic squares". It is how things really work.  ~ Joel

Subject: Magnetic Resonance Amplifier

Today, to test the validity of the Magnetic Resonance Amplifier, or AC Battery, either name "works", Norman Wootan and I applied a signal
amplitude to the circuit which would "trip" the components into a higher level of output. The actual measurements, including power gains, will be included in a file to be uploaded with a schematic.

However, the circuit design is so simple that many people can build it from a written description. It only has two parts. The power gain is between 300-400%, and increases as the load is increased. The theory of operation can wait until the file is written. For now, if you want to build it, just connect a piezo in series with a primary coil that is wrapped around a barium ferrite magnet. Connect the secondary to a bridge rectifier, and the bridge to a DC load. Apply a signal level AC to the piezo, and adjust the frequency for the peak DC voltage.

You will find that the AC voltage across either the piezo or the primary is greater than the voltage from the signal generator. Primary current is virtually nil due to the piezo, and DC output power is several times the input power. Today, we measured 0.685W in, with 2.75W out. We used this to run a DC motor which consumed 2.5W, and to light a DC lamp very brightly. This is hard output DC. As we increased the potential from the sig gen, current dropped even lower, and output power increased, which improved the power gain ratio.

Norm and I plan to exhibit this at the next KeelyNet meeting. If you have any questions before the file is created, please address them to either me or to Norm. We worked together on this, and it took the symmetry of both of us to get it into operation. We think that it can make a difference.  ~ Joel

Subject: AC Battery

Jerry:  Joel and I began the documentation via Bert's video recorder which I borrowed last week to capture some UFO's we have had contact with. We now have a tape of the unit in operation with an excellent narrative done by Joel of the construction and the operational details. The more people who know of the details of the "breakthrough" the better off we all will be. The damn thing works and will only get better over-unity figures as we match impedances and capacitances of the tuned circuit. We have figured out several improvements already that will greatly multiply the already 4 to 1 output to input ratio.  Hal Puthoff put forth the challenge and the Vangard team came through.  This was a team effort and several folks definitely contributed. ~ Norm

Subject: Magnetic Resonance Amplifier

Jerry:  To improve the performance of the test rig Joel and I wound a new coil with about 600 turns in the primary and secondary which made the overall coil about the size of one of those "nerf" footballs. When we hooked it into the circuit we found that when the freq was readjusted to the different impedance of the new coil that we got a multiple of 25.7:1 voltage across the series pizzo and coil versus the input voltage. We were inputing 35 volts at about 22 KHZ and got 600 volts across the barium ferrite coil and 300 volts across the barium titanate transducer which was singing in free resonance. Since the coil and the pizzo are in series there is a total of 900 volts that we need to match up so we can tap this high potential. Neat I/O ratio, to say the least. There is a lot of work to be done yet but we do have an excellent start. The more people that build this circuit the better. ~

Subject: MRA

Hi Folks!  Not to jump the gun, but Joel and Norman have come up with something that just might be a working over-unity device. I suggest you download the file MRA.ZIP which contains both the .ASC and .GIF files describing how YOU CAN BUILD IT and test it yourself.  If you choose to do so, please report back with any success, failures or enhancements so that others might learn from it. This might be 'the one'!!  SEIZE THE DAY!...  ~  Jerry

Subject: MRA.ZIP

Bill:  Please put the MRA.ZIP on the Internet for Joel and I wish this to be distributed as widely as possible in the shortest time frame so we can start to get feed back from other builders of this "wild circuit". I have worked with Joel on the construction and testing and am here to tell you that it does work exactly as we discribe. I have one on my bench that is easily running a 13:1 I/O ratio and we haven't even started to sort out the improvements in the design that will come as others explore the possibilities. As Joel stated, the circuit fundamentally uses compound resonances in the quartz and in the barrium ferrite material. We are vibrating the crystaline lattice structure of both materials to yield electron output. Through the series electron
contribution of both the barium ferrite and the quartz over-unity gain is possible with a very small "tickling" ultra-sonic input which will be generated with a simple fixed oscillator and transistor driver. Thanks for your support. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA (Magnetic Resonance Amplifier)

Jeff:   As you see in the above message to Bill Beaty, we still have a long ways to go but wanted this circuit out to all so that we can get
"constructive" feed-back from fellow builders like yourself. Keep in mind that this is a compound resonant device and therefore is deceptive in it's simple appearance. You may change winding ratios many times before you get it right so that the "Rule of Nines" that Joel talks about is complied with. If you will go back to the KeelyNet files on Keely's experiments and the DANART1 file then you will get the "hang" of tripple resonances and how they cause the crystalline lattice of the magnet to trip into free oscillation. When you get your circuit running properly you will be able to hear the magnet "singing" all over your house. Depending on the mass you will get a sustained note anywhere from 8 KHZ up to 12 KHZ. This is a very interesting circuit because off the shelf permanent magnets can be used with "no conditioning" needed. Basically you are "ringing" the fundamental structure of the magnet at the molecular level and possible at the atomic level causing it to be an "etheric pump" yielding electron that are somehow being replinished from the Space Background as Harold Puthoff has described in his excellent work on ZPE tapping. Moray King will love this one. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA (Tech Bulletin)

Since Joel and I have created a lot of interest in the MRA device we will place everything on line so that no "stone is left unturned". Long ago I saw a sci-fi movie of a suitcase size device that you could plug any size AC load into it and it would power it with no problem. I dreamed of building such a device by imploying a block of natural quartz with a mechanical oscillator attached to all faces (Tesla oscillator) to force the quartz to yield free electrons. I envisioned the output (high voltage) to be stored in a capacitor bank (1 kilo joule) them the output going into an inverter circuit and stepdown transformer to take this piezo generated voltage down to a useful AC voltage. Now Joel and I have combined this effect to the resonating of the lattice structure of a magnet to sum the outputs of the piezo effect and the ferro-resonant effect to give an over-unity total at the bridge rectifier. Last night Bert Pool came over to gather up the needed supplies to build a prototype circuit to do independent evaluation.  After I had run the circuit through the paces noting the outputs and thoroughly discussing what we thought was going on here I turned off the meters, scopes and the signal generator and finally went to bed. Well I woke up a 2:00AM with a headache, went to get the tylenol and went into the room with the test rig on the bench. I turned on the frequency counter and found that the circuit was running in free oscillation with no input. Although no power was being produced the free running oscillations were filling my living space with a high freq ultrasonic squeal that as Joel has warned will give you a migraine
headache in short order. The free oscillation was around 44 KHZ with the freq counter ranging up and down (no lock on). I had to take the circuit apart to stop the ultrasonic ringing. As Joel has pointed out these titanium zirconate transducers, once set into resonance will continue to ring for a long period. Since there is possible some conditioning taking place within the crystaline structure of the material I believe that over a long conditioning period (burn in time) the whole circuit can be make sensitive to a combination of two frequencies that are necessary. The first freq involved is the input to drive the transducer which has to be 3 octaves down from the fundamental natural frequency of the ferro-magnetic resonant frequency. Although it has not been mentioned before in "A" public on this net, Joel and I were successful in isolating and identifying the fundamental Ferromagnetic Resonant Frequency as being around 174.9 KHZ. Doesn't it sound ironic that this freq should fall so close to what the Corums have determined that Tesla designed his big coil out in Colorado springs around? I have read several articles that speculated that the ferromagnetic freq or the earth natural magnetic field resonated around 180KHZ. With this 174.9 freq in mind we have applied the Joel McClain "Rule of Nines" to the circuit where we run the transducer at a freq that is a multiple of the fundamental 174.9 ferroresonant freq. His circuit is running at a fifth and mine is running at a third. Example: I input a sine wave signal at 2.28 V AC into the series resonant circuit at 59070 HZ and get a voltage developed across the transducer of 26.04V and a voltage across the coil of 24.02 with an output voltage from the bridge rectifier of 30.2 V DC. If every thing is running in an ideal phase relationship (transducer oscillations and ferro-coil oscillations) then the beat freq will partially sum the two voltages since they are in a series circuit and set up a circulating current in the primary which when the primary winding and the secondary windings have the proper impedance matching will extract the maximum amout of energy from the circulating current in the transformer into a healthy output at the bridge which is far OVER-UNITY, high I/O ratio. My circuit is showing a 13:1 ratio at this time and I have not even approached a good impedance match in the windings. A real sharp RF engineer could sort all the details out in short order. I don't profess to be an RF engineer but have a good background in electronics.

This is the reason for Joel and I going "PUBLIC DOMAIN" with the circuit so that some highly skilled folks out there can take this circuit and help develope it into something of practical use. We don't want PROFIT-motivated people to "rip" off the idea for self gain. We want any potential benefits of the circuit to remain free for the taking. More notes as we learn more. As Joel says, "we are like teenagers learning to drive dad's Olds". A little help from interested fellow researchers is welcome. ~ Norm

Subject: More power MRA

Joel:  Remember the "golden rule" when dealing with "Hyper dimensional" physics-reverse think everything and you will be corect most of the time. We need some new physics laws and rules to play by in this "new arena". I will be out your way after the traffic dies down from rush hour. You need a back-up supply of transducers plus I picked up some neat ferrite wound impedance matching transformers so we can play a little matching game with the coil and transducer and also to isolate the input oscillator from the series tank circuit. ~  Norm

Subject: MRA (Tech Bulletin)

I know that now that our circuit is distributed "World-wide" thanks to Bill Beaty, we will be getting a million questions from every corner.  The well-armed researcher will have done his or her homework and will have dug into the Keely-Net files and learned as much as possible from the numerous files on ENERGY and GRAVITY before asking questions. There are several very important publications and articles that you all should read to fully understand the fundamentals and principles of operation of the MRA device. First get TAPPING THE ZERO POINT by our dear friend MORAY KING. Second get and understand the series of books by one of the LEADING EDGE researchers on free energy TOM BEARDEN.
Third you need to go to the library and look up the series of excellent articles in PHYSICAL REVIEW by HAROLD PUTHOFF, BERNARD HAISCH and ALFONSO RUEDA. Fourth is a book by MARY and DEAN HARDY called PYRAMID ENERGY which lays out the "sacred geometry" which is rebuffed by modern physics and chemistry but through the underground research community is coming back strong and will re-write the physics and chemistry books of the future. Nikola Tesla said that the publication of the "Theory of Relativity" by Einstien was the greatest travesty that could have been commited against mankind and would set the world back 100 years. It did just that for all serious interest in the "energetic Aether" was disbanded by the scientific world. Only recently has people like our friend TOM BEARDEN gone back and resurected the work of MAXWELL who had it all figured out along with JOHN KEELY and NIKOLA TESLA. We are opening a new chapter in physics and chemistry so be prepared to to new methods of measurement, new laws and terms to define what I like to think of as "HYPERDIMENSIONAL PHYSICS". All of the answers are out there for this ground has been tread on before only to be buried and surpressed in many cases. It won't happen this time around for we desperately need tomorrows energy today. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA in Conventional Theory

The MRA is a series resonant LC circuit in which power gain is attainable as a result of the increase in effective impedance under certain operating conditions. When the series impedance increases,primary current is reduced. When the power available from the secondary coil either remains the same or increases as the primary circuit impedance increases, a power gain occurs.

This is not possible with a series resonant circuit made of conventional materials. Even unity power transfer is considered to be unattainable as a result of accumulated losses in the components, which are passive (reactive) devices. Materials and construction methods are chosen for these components based upon the type of application and frequency to be applied, with the goal of minimizing losses.

A typical capacitor with polyethylene dielectric has a dielectric constant of 2.3 times air. Air has a constant of 1.0, and is the basis for comparison. Titanium dioxide, however, has a dielectric constant maximum of 170, and a corresponding power factor of only 0.0006, comparable with polyethylene, so that the dissipation of primary current in the dielectric is extremely low. This is where the comparison ends, because the titanium composite "capacitor" is also a piezoelectric device as well as an excellent capacitor.

Heat adversely affects the power factor of most dielectric materials. Titanium zirconate, however, contains polar molecules which rotate as thermal pressure is applied. This rotation increases the dielectric constant if the frequency applied is equal to or lower than the resonant frequency of the dielectric. At series resonance, the rotation of polar molecules contributes to heat; as the dielectric constant increases, a corresponding release of free electrons occurs, as a direct result of the piezoelectric properties of the device.

In application, the MRA is tuned at resonance for maximum power transfer, then detuned slightly for maximum power gain. This relates directly to the use of thermal pressure at resonance, and the effect that this has on continued polar rotation and the release of donor electrons.

The coil, or primary of the MRA is a magnetic core which relative to the fixed capacitance of the piezo, is a tuned permeability device. This is often used in RF devices to attain a stable resonant frequency.  Magnetic materials are chosen based upon the operating characteristics of the intended application to reduce eddy currents in the operating range. In these applications, the resonant frequency of the magnet itself is avoided, as this would "beat" with the oscillating current.  However, in the MRA, this is the exact effect we want.

The barium ferrite magnet resonates audibly at frequencies which are harmonics of the series resonant frequency. The effect of this in a typical audio application is called harmonic distortion, and is not desirable, but once again, in the MRA, this is what we want to occur. There is energy in the harmonics, and this energy serves to both counter eddy losses as well as to oppose primary current flow, while contributing to circulating current within the resonant circuit.

The net effect of this, is that when the MRA is detuned, harmonics of the audible frequency "beat" with primary current, opposing its flow, while the increase in circulating current couples more power to the secondary, and therefore to the load. This is how the power gain is attained, basically by considering the naturally occuring harmonics as beneficial instead of as undesirable effects to be filtered out.

When the MRA is detuned, the effective impedance increases as seen by the source, while the power available to the load decreases in less
proportion. This is measurable by using resistive equivalent circuit testing. However, the detuning is load dependent, and slight adjustments are required if the load requirement is greater than the power band of a harmonic interaction. After retuning, the power will increase in quantum intervals as the circulating current is reinforced by the reaction of the permeable magnet core. This will be seen as slight incremental voltage increases across the load device.

Once the magnet is "ringing", it's frequency and therefore harmonics remain stable, as long as the series resonant range is not exceeded. Therefore, the detuning affects the piezo only, and the circulating current increase is a result of the phase relationship between the harmonic and the source. Voltage amplification is seen across the primary, measurable higher than the source voltage, and this is "seen" by the secondary. This is not the same thing as a power gain, because the power gain is a direct result of effective impedance.

It should also be noted that the term "virtual rotation" has been applied in describing the operation of the MRA. The comparison is made with a generator, in which relative motion occurs between a coil and magnet. Rather than use physical energy to rotate a mass, the MRA uses resonance to rotate the energy. This is seen in the polar rotation of the piezo dielectric as well as in the molecular energy occuring in the reactive component of the magnet, ie, the ringing. The lattice structures of the piezo and magnet are compatible for virtual rotation, and the materials complement each other

In the past, researchers have noted many effects which occur at aggregate resonance, which typically includes a range of three octaves. Anomalous energy gains were referred to as "aetheric". The aether was believed to exist outside of the three physical dimensions, and could be "tapped" for free energy at resonance. Aetheric energy is said to be limitless, but to vary locally with increases in earth magnetic fields at sunset and sunrise, like the tides of an infinite ocean. This effect is not thoroughly understood, but has been observed in the MRA, as increases in output in the early morning,
and decreases in the early evening. This is still being studied.

Experimentation will determine the optimum MRA design for a specific range of applications.

Subject: MRA

Bill:  Yes those transducers will work but they are physically smaller than the ones we are useing. I figure when this circuit is verified that the next step will be to go to a natural quartz milled wafer of the natural freq we desire to same as the crystals used in transmitters except a lot larger. If you have access to a Thomas Directory at work, please look up Branson who makes the ultrasonic welders so we can get a source manufacturer from them. Maybe someone on the Internet will know the manufacturers of these transducers. This circuit is a mindbender when you study it's characteristics. For example I started off this morning (after I let the circuit run all night to condition the magnet and piezo crystal) with a total over-unity power gain of 1.65:1 ratio.  After playing with the circuit all day taking measurements after each adjustment or change of operating parameters, arrived at a 150:1 I/O ratio. Here are the figures: Input 15.34 VAC @ 54.9 KHZ with .57 Ma which is .000874 Watts which has to be adjusted for power factor by
multiplying by .707. The output is: 16.75 VDC @ 78.8 Ma into a pure resistive load. This figures out to be greater than a 150:1 I/O ratio.  I guess you have figured out how excited everyone is over this "Gadget". Now unless OHMS law has been nulified or there is some "spook" phenomenon that Joel and I cannot find then we have the 1 watt challenge in the bag by a wide margin. More as we learn more.  ~ Norm

Subject: MRA (Tech Bulletin)

I know that there are quit a few folks out there running around digging up parts to build a MRA device to do independent testing. Let me share
with you some findings that will assist all in this approach. First disregard the measurements that I gave Bill Beaty yesterday in a message about power gain. I like Joel find myself back at "square one". It happens like this, when you have this circuit up on the "ragged edge" where the first harmonic seems to be phase "beating" or attenuating the input current and providing potential only to drive the first stage resonance in the transducer, you disconnect the load to do the only accurate total power consumption test which is "equivalent resistance" measurements so we can nail down the elusive power figure according to OHMS LAW. Well, when you unload the circuit under the optimum operating conditions the transducers will immediately trip into a very powerful mechanical oscillations around 2KHZ and self distruct in short order and at the same time put out a violent voltage that can soar above 1000 VAC which inturn will literally wipe out your driving amplifier and your frequency counter. Fortunately the scope is better protected on the front end. So what I am saying is that you begin all over conditioning a new set of driver transducers which even fresh out of the box will display over-unity output in the circuit. The people over at the manufacturing firm that makes these transducers are "smiling" and calling their stock broker to exercise some stock options in their product for I see a lot of you destroying a bunch of transducers in the process of testing and improving the circuit. Let me share with you some ideas. When I go back and read TOM BEARDENS works about potentializing a circuit without the attendant circuit that is normally involved we will have achieved the over-unity that we are seeking. After careful study of the MRA I can see how this device can be separated into two separate devices. First the piezo is a source of high freq. potential which at 3 octaves above drive the ferro-resonant primary coil at the natural resonant freq of the magnetic material. Now I believe I have figured out the secret behind the Swiss M-L
Converter known as the TESTAVISTATIKA or TESTATIKA for short. This device was developed in the group called METHERNITHA by Paul Baumann and it has been seen by our friend Stephan Marinov. This ZPE tapping can be accomplished through potential being derived from any source such as the electrostatic charge developed in the whinshurst type generator.  The secret is in the MAGNETIC RESONANCE AMPLIFIER. Ken Shoulders and R.A. Ford demonstrated that what we term as harmless energy (electrostatic charge) when stored in a large capacitor is real charge separation and can do some interesting things such as exploding water, wire and other interesting research projects. If we take advantage of
the mechanical oscillations of the transducer and operate it at a level of mechanical resonance (in free oscillation) that will optimize the voltage output (lets say 400 volts) which inturn we use to drive the ferro-resonant barium ferrite core coil then we can extract some serious power from the coil providing that we have done our homework and provided the optimum impedance matching and tuning of the circuit to maximize the final product. We are a long ways from our final goal of having a unit that we can flip a switch and the thing will run "stand alone". Joel and I have taken the first step by sharing with you our findings so let's work this thing out together as a "joint project". We will share all findings in these Tech Bulletins so everyone is on the same sheet of music. Now for some "spook" type anomalies that  occur around this circuit when it is running in the ZPE tapping mode which is where we purposely de-tune the circuit upward in freq so that we get the "beating" effect from the first harmonic. When you see this on the scope it will appear as the sine wave patern of the input being broken into little line segments by an invisible or transparent oscillation at a much higher freq than the primary driving signal which in the case of my circuit is around 56.8 KHZ. Even when I have CH 2 turned on with no signal (base line only) it also is broken into short line segments as if the electron beam is driven into cut off by this invisible signal. Any RF engineers out there seen this? Please explain same. I believe that all the phenomenon that is being observed by people such as Sweet, Aspden, Adams, Lambertson, Searl and Tom Bearden are all connected by a common thread. Let's "unravel it" ~ Norm

Subject: MRA and the Nieper Effect

Hi Norm:  As we suspected, there is a "Nieper effect" with the piezos when they are at mass aggregate resonance in the MRA circuit.  I've measured it many times this morning, and it is very consistent.  Here's the test:

First, warm up the MRA for about an hour. I'm using the sig gen as shown in the schematic that I left in a message for you yesterday,
with all of the same voltages and currents. Then take the piezo out of the circuit and set it aside for a few minutes.

Put the piezo on the scale and zero the scale with the "dot" side of the piezo up. Attach leads to the piezo so it is back in the circuit and let it run for a few minutes. Remove the leads and the piezo now weighs 200mg less, but it regains the weight within three minutes.

Do all of the above, but with the "dot" side down, and the piezo will gain 200 mg, and lose it in three minutes.

Because this test is at low power, I suspect that the effect may vary in degree with the application of greater or less power.


Subject: MRA

Well tonight Joel and I did some testing which we hoped would clearly define just what we were dealing with in the MRA circuit. Joel, in an
earlier message described it as "having a tiger by the tail", you ain't seen nuthing like this tiger. The only way I would attempt to describe this circuit is a "mini black hole" on your work bench. Electrical engineers and PHD's in electronic theory will go "ballistic" on this one I promise. After running the MRA at low power levels for several hours we turned off every thing on the work bench "everything". After attaching one lead of a Fluke 87 true RMS meter to the input of the MRA and holding the other lead in my hand we were getting a reading of 27 VAC at 60 HZ and the readings got stronger the further away from the energy field which had developed around the device. This circuit when set into resonance even without any "excitation" of any kind will pull in "ambient" energy in this case the 60HZ flux field present in the room. Would this be clasified as a "virtual energy collector".

Maybe Tesla was right about the possibility of a "cosmic ray or energy collector". Another interesting thing that we verified tonight was that the natural ferro-magnetic frequency is approximately 174.9 KHZ. While the MRA is operating with an input freq on Joels device (each magnet has it's own operating or resonant freq) of 32.4 KHZ the wave form can be seen as a segmented line which under careful study shows by the broken line segment count to be caused by a "phantom" oscillation from the ferro-magnetic material that blanks the electron gun at a freq of 174.9 KHZ.  We are using a good Techtronic 80 MHZ scope so this we find real interesting for this opens the door to tapping energy directly from the "earths magnetic field". Everyone says that weight loss is associated with any device that displays any over-unity tendacies. Well, that too has been verified. Joel will address this phenomenon in a later message but I am here to tell you it is more exciting as time goes on here. If I were to tell an electronics engineer that we have seen "negative numbers" on current draw when this circuit is running would this mean gain would be "infintiy"? Joel is going to have to explain this one for we decided to use a 12 VDC powered amplifier so we would have a pure DC input so we could pin down the input current draw. Well if you take the idleing current draw (amp unloaded) then tune the MRA for maximum gain and the current draw goes to a negative number then what? This will take some explaining. More as we learn more. ~  Norm
PS: This circuit is absolutely over-unity.

Subject: MRA Anomalies

Eight days ago, the MRA was invented. Almost immediately, it began to exhibit over-unity characteristics. However, there have also been a lot of "quirky" effects... each taken separately might have been test equipment error or technician error. However, these effects are forming familiar patterns now...familiar but not always predictable. The toll in dead and damaged test equipment so far is one panel mount DVM, one frequency counter, two audio amplifiers, and numerous 60 watt light bulbs.

Sometimes, when supplying the MRA from a 12 VDC powered audio amp, the battery current will decrease compared to the battery current to the amp with no load at all, and at the same time, amp output voltage will increase... Taken together, this indicates that the MRA is feeding energy back into the amp. Later, with no changes to the circuit, the MRA will behave like a normal load, and cause a small increase in battery current with a small decrease in amp output voltage.

The voltage and current waveforms look like dotted lines, where each dot and space segment is equal to 175 KHz, which Norm and I believe is the free running resonant frequency of ferrmagnetism. We have never seen this before, and for that matter, neither has anyone else that we've talked to about it. Even with nothing on Channel B of the 'scope, the display will exhibit the dotted line effect whenever the MRA is running and connected to Channel A.

Anything and everything in the field of the MRA is affected. Should the MRA's output load become accidently disconnected while the MRA is at resonance, an instantaneous and very powerful destructive surge will occur.

I THINK that the MRA, by resonating a magnet at mass aggregate frequency, is magnetically "linking" with everything in its field, and behaving like an "energy pump". We see this when we walk up to it and the output from the MRA goes up, even though the MRA is hooked up to a resistive load which is causing it to provide current. This also changes based upon the time of day relative to sunrise and set.

To test anything, you first must isolate it... by virtue of the design of the MRA, it cannot be isolated. It intrinsically links itself to everything with a coil or magnetic field, even to a quartz wristwatch if it is in the same room. As such, we get varying power gains, and the variations seem more to be a question of which test equipment is on the table at the time of the test.

Please bear in mind that this is a brand new circuit... As far as that goes, it's a whole new technology. Once the magnet has been resonated, and then disconnected from the rest of the circuit, it will continue to provide up to 25 VAC at 60 Hz using a human "antenna" to capture ambient energy in the room. Last night, Norm and I were measuring over-unity gains of 2X-3X, but we don't really know for sure if we were "pumping" the energy electromagnetically out of the test equipment, house wiring, earth's magnetic field, the ether, or some combination of the above.

We need some independent testing by individuals with awareness of the anomalies mentioned in this message. There is obviously a lot of power "in flux" which collapses into the MRA if the load is removed, so there will probably be more equipment lost. There is also a whole area of gravitic anomalies to investigate, because the piezo will weigh measurably less when it is in the MRA circuit, and regain the weight when it is disconnected.

The original MRA is being sent out for engineering review, from which we hope to learn more, but the more voices that are heard from, the better our chances of finding out what is really happening.  ~ Joel

Subject: MRA (Power Test)

Joel: I have been putting a lot of thought into the high power test of  the MRA device. Since you have determined that the circuit is creating what we call Mhos and usually this phenomenon is associated with vaccuum tubes in operation and going back to the work of T. Henry Moray with his "valve" then I am setting up this 250 watt tube power amp for the ultimate test. Since transistors seem to not be able to take the bucking effect of the "first harmonic" checking the input current into the circuit we should use the vaccuum tube for this final stage of signal injection into the MRA series resonant primary. The "finals" tubes then are basically in the series circuit and will survive the punishment brought on by the "hammering" effect of the first harmonic. These large output tubes will display more of your "Mhos" effect than simple transistors. I still believe (I keep dreaming about it) that the vacuum tube should play a part in the circuit as a "coheror" of the ZPE into the circuit. Certainly worth trying for we are at the point where we need to push the piezo's at their design power ratings of 50 watts at 150 Volts. There will be some serious voltages developed in the series resonant primary for we have already seen nearly 1000 Volts circulating with only 20 volts of primary input. A vacuum tube is the only animal that could survive the punishment in a high voltage circuit like this. Bob Paddock's indestructible transistors won't cut it in this harsh environment.
Thoughts and ideas. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA

Bill: Your complete MRA is on the way and should be there by Monday. I downloaded the Internet traffic and saw so much "negative energy" being
expended out there trying to discredit something that we offered up in the "Public Domain" for other researchers to take a serious look at.  The first counter statement that I will make is that Joel and I agreed that we will not sell or accept any re-imbursement of any kind for anything connected with the MRA device for the very reason sited in the message traffic. No, I will not sell off my small stock of transducers. I will give magnets and transducers only to serious researchers for the purpose of circuit Over-unity output verification. We are not seeking any profit from this device thus the reason for ofering it as "public domain".  If those out there are so narrow minded that they will not analyze the circuit for what it does, so be it.  They are beyond help. To those who question why we have not "self powered" the device, we are working on the voltage regulator, oscillator and power driver circuit that will make this possible. Everyone thinks this can be done overnight- "wrong"- things don't happen that fast.  Our intent was to get the fundamentals out for all to see and experiment with. The most important document in the MRA project is the RULE9.ASC file which explains the fundamental theory behind the MRA principle. I will be putting out a paper shortly explaining what is going on in the Griggs and Perkins Hydrosonic Pump for it is directly tied in to the MRA in principle of operation and ZPE tapping effects.  More on that later.

As to the critics out there saying that measurements of input power are defective.  This is what we currently have at our disposal on our work
benches between Joel and myself:  2 ea. General Radio Precision Decade Resistor Boxes, 3 ea. Techtronic 465 Dual Trace Scopes, 2 ea. Fluke 87
true RMS meters, 1 ea. P6042 Current Probe, 2 ea P6021 Current Probes, 1 Wavetek 164 Sig Gen, 1 ea BK Precision E310B Sig Gen, 1 ea. HP 200 CD Sig Gen, 1 HP 5383 Freq Counter, 2 ea Simpson Freq Counters, 1ea. Wavetek DM 27X7 meter & freq counter, and a whole bunch of the old analog Simpson and Tripplet meters that have been cast aside with the coming of the digital world.  I realize that we do not have the sophisticated equipment that you would find in an industrial or university lab but it gives us a good idea as to what is fact or fiction. We have the circuit out being tested by those that do have the latest state-of-the-art equipment so time will tell all.  Be patient is all I have to say for now. In time the truth will be known to all. Norm

Subject: Mo' on Mhos

Hi Bob: When the MRA was designed, the intent was to create and above unity device based upon earth itself...its magnetic fields and frequencies. We've since seen that it is directionally sensitive to earth magnetic fields, and that it "responds" to sunrise and sunset.  For all practical purposes, the MRA at resonance is like a funnel with a vacuum device attached to the narrow end, collecting energy which becomes more condensed as it travels into the funnel, where it is trapped in the windings of the transformer by the collapsing magnetic fields.

This then represents an excess potential, which we see when the signal input voltage is higher under load of the MRA than it is under noload
conditions. We also see this when we can reduce the entire AC power to the signal source below no-load, while at the same time producing
usable power from the MRA.

According to scalar theory, the excess potential is a quantum voltage potential which reacts according to known non-linear optical (NLO)
laws of physics. Because the Coulomb gauge transverse potential (CTP) exists in all of space time (also standard physics), small amounts of
excess potential occur naturally in all semiconductors. This interferes with applied EM potential, and causes "noise", which is normally filtered out. Thus, semiconductors are natural scalar interferometers which translate low level amounts of excess potential.

When two or more semiconductors are connected, directly or indirectly in a conductive path, a hyperspatial link is formed and the translated
excess potential will bounce back and forth between them within this link, which can produce laser beams. Or, the energy may reach the level sufficient to destroy one or more devices, or to destroy the semiconductors in the test equipment attached to the circuit. This is fully documented in the Lawandy experiment at Brown University and described in the March 31, 1994 issue of Nature Magazine. A "ping pong" effect occurs with semiconductors which have "self-targeted" each other, creating spurious bursts of normal EM energy. Credit for all of the above information to Tom Bearden, who kindly provided it after years of study and research.

Now we have two "theories" to describe one effect (likely there will be many more) so we have to find one that works, in terms of being consistent and reproducible. It is, I believe, both. The "earth" theory is the "outer" or normal EM description, since we are dealing with EM to drive a motor load. The Bearden theory is the "inner" description, and provides mathematical exactness to the process. We used the "outer" theory to find the lattice structures, resonant octave ranges and LC relationship of the MRA. That still leaves us with the unseen mechanism by which excess potential is realized in the circuit. That is where Bearden's "inner channel" theory fills the void in understanding with clarity and precision.

It is really neither Mhos nor negative resistance as I understand it, but the translation of low level CTP energies into usable EM. The aspect of the MRA which is unique is that it traps this potential and puts it to work driving a load instead of building up and creating a NLO laser effect. I believe that the energies, as soon as they are translated into EM, are "caught" by the magnet and pulled into the resonant circuit, where they are measured as excess potential. I hope that this message ends up on the I-Net, as it will provide the references within conventional, accepted physics that can be studied in order to visualize the functioning of the MRA.  ~ Joel

Subject: mmmmm.... could be!

Went back and read the WBSMEMO.ASC file again... memory ain't what it used to be, and never was. I hadn't thought of the MRA within the
context of that file, but you are right on the mark with your comparison. The biggest hurdle to understanding the MRA is in seeing it as an new device via existing technology. It is a different technology, actually a very, very old technology using new components. However, because the technology isn't in the "books" yet, it is viewed (at best) as a "new" technology.

The existing "rules" don't apply... but the old, really old rules do. For example, when Heaviside bastardized Maxwell's Theories (you will NOT find the Heaviside interpretation in ANY of Maxwell's published works), Heaviside stripped out all of the references to the ether, which he said was "mystical and should be murdered from the theory", and so he murdered the ether... except that it just wouldn't die!

Maxwell opened the door to P-channel quantum potentials, and Heaviside slammed it shut. Heaviside wanted to provide simple "laws" so that the electricians of that day could vector power and measure current in workable systems. Heaviside never went to college, did not know calculus, and was lost in the true implications of Maxwell's theory.  It's time we moved up to the reality of ALL of Maxwell's theory, not just the kindergarten version.

Anyway, I got side tracked... back to your question. Without having seen the WBS device, it's hard to say for sure, but the effects seem similar. The INTENT of the MRA was to design a device compatible with naturally occuring energies, specifically ferroresonance as it applies to earth's electromagnetic fields. However, in DOING this, especially with optically sensitive materials, we enabled the MRA to re-open Maxwell's door. What we caused was a link to form which translated  etheric energy into ordinary EM in a closed loop resonant circuit. This link is referred to as the "P-channel", because it manifests as excess potential.

This effect has been experienced in semiconductor circuits for many years, and is normally destructive to the devices, so resistive and filtering components are added to effectively "close" the channel. This isn't necessarily bad, because until circuits can be designed to USE the excess potentials, we don't want them going into resonance and burning out. As seen by the Neiper/Seike Ring (the schematic that is on KeelyNet is wrong, btw), you also experience gravitic effects when you allow tetrahedral lattices to self-resonate.

Considering that the MRA at resonance is virtually stopping the spin of particles (like a strobe synchronized to a timing mark), it is very likely that a more efficient MRA could cancel the quadrupole effect of gravity.  There are other ways of doing this, such as the Biefield-Brown method of high potential or the Searl method of folding energy onto itself in resonant plasma layers, and possibly the technology of anti-g (for a practical space ship) would utilize some or all of the above. However, we'll never get "there" from "here" by using the Heaviside "laws".  ~ Joel

Subject: Lockheed

Howdy Norm,

Got a call from a gentleman at Lockheed in Ft. Worth.  Lots of info from this guy...they are doing something similar to the MRA using the
same piezo material, but have only got 140% gain so far.  He said that the Russians and Germans are doing the same thing with the same
material, and that our piezos are the "apex of electrets".  They are going to buy some at Tanner's and try to match our gain.

He thoroughly understands the MRA, and offered his congratulations to us for developing and sharing it.  He also mentioned that the
virtual rotation is the real definition.  He asked about some guy in Mississippi who is using neo-d, and who is "rotating", but agreed
with me that the neo-d lacks the ferrite core to turn the excess potential into load current, so this guy will barely exceed unity.

Anyhow, it was sure nice to hear that others are doing the same thing and admitting to over unity.


01/14/95 10:49
Subject: PHI and the MRA

Hi Bill: The last message wasn't as clear as I would have liked with regard to PHI.  I once worked out the harmonic and octave relationships as PHI (and PI, since PI = PHI squared, times 6/5...thus PHI squared = PI...also, 1 + 1/PHI = PHI, which is also known as the Fibonacci Series).

The file PHI&RES.ASC has some of this information, and because the "notes" harmonize perfectly and the octaves double exactly, this conforms to "standard" musical scales as are used today. Using the Fibonacci series as a starting place for note frequencies is not an arbitrary decision.

Today, we see PHI as a methematical constant, ie, 1.618, for use in plane geometry. To the ancient Egyptians, it was math but had a much deeper implication... It was the symbol of rebirth throughout eternity just as the Fibonacci series "perfects" at higher number intervals. Also, because the use of PHI in art is very "harmonious" to view, PHI coordinates (nested tets) were used by Michelangelo in the dome of the Sistine Chapel, as well as by Veronese, Raphael, da Vinci, and was even used by the architect Le Corbusier in the design of the United Nations building.

In retrospect, I think that this must be a perfect validation of the resonance based chart of the elements as created by Walter Russell, although he certainly doesn't need any validation from me.  The fact is, music is math and geometry, and geometry is the yardstick for three dimensional existance.  It's all one nested relationship, and the singular constant is PHI.  If you want to create resonance and balanced harmonics in octave groups, you must use PHI. Because we tend to separate "music" from "science", we don't HEAR nature, and we trust our intellect to create unnatural yardsticks.  Fact is, when computers were invented, and IBM needed programmers, they hired musicians to train for the positions.

In an electronic circuit, semiconductors are made of silicon or germanium, both of which are tet lattice structures, and both of which will occasionally break into free oscillation, rich in PHI-based harmonics...that is how the Nieper ring works, because once the material has three octaves of resonance, the particle spin is virtually a timing mark under a strobe... And the effect of gravity is suspended.

Three octaves are necessary in 3-space because the each of the octaves "fills" one dimension. The octaves interact with each other to make
harmonics at 90 degrees of phase separation, effectively "filling" a 3-space object. This is mass aggregate resonance, and it allows you to couple biwave vectorless energy into a circuit. It also allows you to overcome temporal effects as well as gravitic effects. That is why I said that when you nest two tets, you have the keys to everything.

The MRA uses materials which are cube latticed, and a cube IS a nested tet sitting on its "flat side". So, when you trap the harmonics on one side of a phase reversed series resonant circuit, you develop a potential which is higher than the no-load voltage of the device which is supplying the circuit. That's half of ZPE. The other half is having ferrite in the resonating core to provide electrons to match with the excess potential to create power to a load. And that's the MRA.

Part of the resentment to this information is simply due to the fact that all of this was known to and possibly discovered by very ancient peoples... and we are lagging behind them today in our comprehension of science as nature, by the division of music and science, etc. Well, all I really wanted to do was to provide correlations to help tie in the octave relationships with the lattice geometry, and I hope that this information helps. You can see how well it is received by most people, but you can also measure the excess potential on your own MRA so you'll have to decide for yourself. Enjoy.

Subject: Hal's Test Report

Hi Norm: I got a fax from Hal, and he states that the MRA is only 50% of unity. He put resistance in series with the primary, over 11 ohms, and measured the voltage drop across it to determine input current. In effect, he used the only method which would drive the MRA below unity. I had already told him about this before he did it, so I don't know why he did it. I called Tom to get his slant on it, and he suggested that I immediately write back to Hal and point this out, and to keep a dialog going with Hal. I sent Hal a fax, which is below this message to you. It's going to be up to us to provide the self-sustaining mode of operation, and refute Hal's test report. I think that Hal is being straight with us, and that he believes his test results. Let's be very cool about this... eventually, the truth will be known. We know, and for now, that will have to be enough. ~ Joel

 FAX Page 1 of 1
To: Hal Puthoff ~ cc: Scott Little ~ From:  Joel McClain
Subject: Review of MRA Test Measurements

First of all, thank you both for the time and effort which you gave to the test of this device. It is very gratifying to us that your measurements did not differ with those which we had reported.

I think, however, that we need to continue dialogue with regard to the method of determining input power to the MRA, specifically with regard to the measurement of primary current. In our testing, we had found that adding resistance in series with the primary had the effect of increasing primary source current. I had mentioned this to you in one of our telephone conversations, and was hoping that you might shed some light onto this apparent violation of classical theory.

We had found that primary current, as measured inline with a meter, is greater with a resistor in series with the primary than it is with only the meter inline. Using Thevenin's Theorem as a basis for using the equivalent resistive circuit, we believe that the primary current from the source is much lower than your tests indicate.

Adding resistance in series with the primary does, as you indicate, cause the MRA to behave as an ordinary series resonant circuit. You have verified that which we stipulated. We also noted that we don't know how to determine power when source potential exceeds noload. We attempted, but were unable to determine this.

The use of a series resistor is not debatable in a classical EM  circuit. However, classical EM theory excludes the possibility of outputs above unity, and adding resistance has already been shown to eliminate the over unity effect of the MRA. We hope that you will consider further tests which do not add resistance to the primary.

Again Hal and Scott, our sincere thanks to you both. Best regards  ~ Joel McClain

Subject: MRA Evaluation by IAS

Late yesterday, I received a fax from Hal Puthoff and Scott Little at the Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin. Hal confirmed the measurements which we had documented for both load and no-load operation of the MRA. However, different conclusions were reached with regard to interpretation of the measurements which do not support over-unity gain.

While we are still in dialogue with Hal and Scott with regard to the interpretation of the measurements, I felt it best to share this information with all interested KeelyNetters, along with a sincere "thank you" to Hal and Scott for their kind and generous assistance in the test of the MRA.

As is often the case, especially with ZPE devices, correct data can lead to incorrect conclusions... this may be the case with the MRA as well, in terms of Norm's and my testing. Looking back, I'm very glad that we shared our data with everyone, as this may help others as a "case in point". Alternately, however, we have requested that Hal and Scott try testing the MRA without adding series resistors in the primary circuit. We think that the addition of resistors might have the effect of blocking subharmonics, which would cause an increase in primary source current. When components are added, it is no longer the same circuit, ie, it is no longer the MRA, in our opinion.

We will be continuing our work with the MRA, as the most difficult measurement for us to verify is that of primary current. We hope to perform the ZPE "litmus test" with an oscillator to test the ability of the MRA to self-sustain. As with all tests, we will share the test results.

My personal thanks to all of you as well, especially Jerry and Bill,  for helping to share this and all previous information. ~ Joel

Subject: MRA Testing

Jerry: Read carefully what transpired in the Hal Puthoff test of the  MRA. I now see what you tried to tell us about Hal Puthoff. OK! Go ahead and say it "I told you so in the very beginning".  We live and learn.  The very thing that we pointed out to Hal that would drive the MRA below unity during testing is to apply a resistor in series with the primary, what did he do, placed a resistor in series and made the MRA into an ordinary series resonant transformer which is below unity and then based his report of findings on this very point which we had already told him was not a valid test for it modified the MRA so that it could not possibly be an over-unity device. He just doesn't get it. We are proceeding full speed and I have a special MRA running at 7.5 Watts output. I am faced with the same problem that you have in that I still need that oscillator and front end driver to make it
"stand-alone". In time, In time. ~ Norm

Subject: More testing, Igor!!

Hi Norm: I had a most illuminating conversation with Hal today. I've asked him to keep the MRA for as long as he feels that it has anything to offer him as a device for testing. At this point, he may be about done with it, as it appears not to be above unity. The key to this is not in the reduction of current, which occurs as we have seen, but in the cosine of the phase angle, which changes as the circuit is detuned. Thus it is possible to have a vastly reduced current in combination with a measurable increase in terminal voltage and still have a relative increase in input power. Reactance, which alters the phase angle, becomes more prominent as the MRA is detuned. Now, I THINK that this is minimal as long as we are within the bandwidth of
the Universal Resonance Chart, but I could be wrong.

If this is what is happening, and Hal's test provides data which indicates that this is the case, then the phase angle changes should be directly measurable. I'm not completely convinced, and won't be until we have quantified this. The other indications which we have seen, such as the reduction in output current from the driver xistor of the amp, and the net reduction in AC current to the amp, and the tests with the grain-of-wheat lamps, and other tests, lead me to believe that there is something more going on here.

I mentioned that we are going ahead with the plan to build an oscillator to test the MRA in self-sustaining mode, and that the oscillator must be inductively coupled to the MRA. I've asked Hal to test the MRA using inductive coupling via an isolation xfmr and to omit the series resistor. This would eliminate the local value of impedance, ie the resistor, which is replacing the distributed resistances in the tuned circuit. The inductive coupling will provide the same E&I lead-lag relationships which we have in our own tests.

 I hope that everyone is aware that I have the utmost respect for and confidence in Hal and his staff. Sometimes typed messages are subject
to wrong interpretation, and I really DO NOT want that to be the case here. I genuinely respect them and the efforts which they have given
in the test of the MRA. I understand the conclusions which they have reached, and am gratified that they have verified the accuracy of our measurements. Hopefully, this will put to rest all of the doubts concerning the accuracy of our measurements, frequency range of test equipment, etc. We differ only in the interpretation of those measurements as related to input power. I would hope that any inventor of a device of this type would have the advantage of a review by Hal Puthoff. Regardless of the outcome of the review, it is an honor.

As I told Hal, to paraphrase Yogi Berra, "we agree differently"... and that is all. The burden of proof is, as it should be, on the inventors. So we'll prove it; it works or it doesn't... and we'll quantify it either way, and share the results.  C'ya. ~ Joel

Subject: MRATEST1 Response

Norm:  In regard to your question as to our response to the MRATEST1  Report I will go on record with the following comments. First there is
a strange "paradox" here that thus far has eluded even the best instrumentation in attempts to explain this circuit. Letís say before going any futher that I as does Joel personally appreciate trhe efforts of Hal and Scott in their analysis of the MRA device and look forward to working with them in the future in futher testing when we can nail down what is really going on in the circuit. This project is not going to just die out. I personally have 3 ea. "Super MRA devices" on my bench which do some rather interesting things which defy all explanation by conventional "EM" theory. I will stand by my statement that there is a phenomenon here that has eluded all attempts to explain the circuit even with the most sophisticated "digital equipment". Case in point: MRA that I call "big coil 1"; Input is 80.2 VAC @ 798 Hz across a "grain of wheat" bulb (glows very dim) with an output of 52.7 VDC into a load of 2 ea. (parallel) 48V panel lamps drawing 3.42 Watts at a current of 61.5MA. Will some "electronics engineer" out there tell me how a tiny grain of wheat bulb with 80.2VAC applied across it in series with the MRA circuit pass enough current to drive the observed load of 3.42 Watts??? Any and all explantions will be accepted and considered. Wouldn't you agree that something real strange is going on here? To show you that this "DOG" is not going to lay down and die is evidenced by my latest MRA that I constructed last night which does the following: Input, 53.5VAC @ 33,600HZ with an output of 120.2VDC into a resistive load of a standard light bulb rated 120V 13.5 Watts burning very brightly. Input current? Well let's put it this way, I placed a small miniature Radio Shack lamp rated at 6V @ .025A in series with the MRA input and the tiny little lamp was burning very bright while sustaining the output load. Keep in mind that we are dissipating power in the form of heat and light in the series resistive load in the input side of the circuit therefore the question arrises as to what is the effective voltage and current across the piezo and primary coil of the MRA circuit. Does conventional "bridge" or series resistance calculations apply? If so then will you figure it out and get back to me as to your explanation. I told you it wouldn't be easy. ~ Norm

Subject: Cosines

Hi Norm: It's been a while since I vectored a circuit, but the thought kept bothering me that the maximum value for the cosine of theta is 1.0, which is based upon a zero degree phase difference in voltage and current... or pure DC. The least value for the cosine of theta is zero, which represents 90 degrees of phase separation. The value most ommonly used is 0.707, which is the cosine (and the sine) of 45 degrees, or AC across a resistive circuit.

Now, a series resonant circuit is different, because it has a 180 degree phase difference between the inductor and the capacitor at resonance. However, that difference exists BETWEEN the inductor and the capacitor, and the source sees a resistor because the Xl and Xc cancel each other, just like a Tesla coil. A resistor across a source of AC represents a 45 degree difference, or a power factor of 0.707 times the product of the voltage and current.

When you tune a series resonant circuit slightly off resonance, the source will once again begin to see reactances, and the phase angle  will shift. While we don't know exactly where it is, we know that it has to be somewhere between zero and ninety degrees, so that the power input is equal to voltage times current, times some value between one and zero. Even if it is one, the MRA is well over unity while in the "max gain" mode.

Reactances limit current but do not dissipate power, with the exception of leakages and distributed resistances. However, a pure resistor will certainly dissipate power, while adding nothing to the circuit.  See what I mean?

Now, in reviewing the data which we received, the input power at the max power mode is given at 3.168 watts, based upon V squared/R equiv, but no power factor is applied. Since the series resonant circuit, at peak resonance, is a resistor to the source, the power factor should be 0.707, and the input power should therefore be 2.24 watts, slightly below the 2.473 watts of DC output power.

In other words, the primary current of 150.42 ma is equal to the V-in MRA of 21.06 divided by the effective resistance of 140 ohms. When you multiply them together, you get 3.168 watts, but unless it is DC power, which it isn't, you have to multiply it by a value less than one, and in a resistive circuit, that is 0.707, so the power input for comparison with the DC power output is less by 233 mw.

The comparison, however, is made using the avg V-in*I-in, which is 4.566, which says that the sine waves, which are not pure sine waves, have a greater amount of power than if they were DC! Hello?

We don't have the equipment to measure average values of waveforms, but when a circuit goes from resistive to reactive, current and therefore power go down, ESPECIALLY in a series resonant circuit. And, pure sine waves have more inherent power than distorted waves. Measuring distorted waveforms as average is how that other guy, I can't remember his name, THOUGHT he was over unity, but was wrong. You know, the "firefly" circuit.

Now, looking at the power comparison in the max gain mode, you have 23.84 VAC divided by 1900 ohms of equivalent resistance, or 12.5473
ma. This correlates to the V-squared/R-equiv value of 0.299 as 23.84 times .00125473 exactly as shown. Since we don't know the phase angle in max gain, we'll just leave it at 0.299 watts for now, and eat the power factor. Regardless, we have 1.604 DC watts on the output.

Now, the avg V-in*I-in is given at 3.265, which means that the average current has gone from 217 ma to 137 ma, or over ten times the current
which we estimate based upon equiv resistance. By comparison, the current as determined by the avg V-in*I-in in the max power mode is 217 ma, or about 67 ma above the value based upon 140 ohms of equiv resistance... so the current is decreasing (from 217 to 137 ma) as per the test data, but is still too high for the MRA to achieve unity. ... OK... Now let's look at our test results by comparison.

I've measured the actual impedance of the grain-of-wheat lamps at 20.77 ohms at the resonant freq of the MRA. If the current were 137 ma, the lamp would be dropping 2.85 VAC. Put another way, that would make the effective impedance of the rest of the primary equal to the ratio of this drop to terminal voltage times the 20.77 ohms. 23.84/2.85 = 8.36, times 20.77 = 174 ohms, and therefore the current is 137 ma.

Of the 20.77 ohms impedance of the lamp, five ohms is resistance. Now, the inductive reactance will consume no power, but the five ohms sure will! That is why it lights up, as the resistive element of the coil (the filament) draws current and gets hot. So, if the current really is 137 ma, the power consumed by the lamp is almost 100 mw. That's a VERY BRIGHT grain of wheat lamp at its max rating, not the dim lamp that you are seeing. Measure the drop across your lamp, and divide it by five, and you will have the true primary current. Multiply this by the terminal input voltage, times 0.707, and you will have input power.  Even still, the resistance of the lamp is consuming power, so you can determine that power, deduct it from the total, and then get rid of the lamp. Just multiply the current by the drop across the lamp, and multiply that by .707, and subtract it from the previous input power amount, then get rid of the lamp.

There's no point in having ANY resistance that you don't need in a reactive circuit.

I'm sure someone will analyze the data and recognize the obvious error of not applying the power factor to the max gain measurement. However, the other part, the average V-in*V-in [V-out ?], cannot be determined because it came from data which was only available when the report was written. However, since we know the input voltage, the assumption is that current is very much higher... and yet the wheat lamps tell us otherwise... Measurably, if you use the 5 ohms of resistance.

I am satisfied that we are right. Now we have to prove it. ~ Joel

Subject: Correction to last message

Hi Norm: I accidently left out a part in the previous message, and it is very important! In using the grain of wheat lamp to determine primary current, FIRST you have to find the amount of the voltage drop that is resistive only. That is the ratio of five ohms to 20.77 ohms of impedance, or 0.24. Multiply the voltage drop across the lamp by 0.24 to get the resistive voltage drop. Then divide that amount by five to determine the current. You can use that current as the series current for input power.  ~ Joel

Subject: MRA

Bill: I hope you have been following the most recent messages between Joel and I and posting them to Internet for things are going to get real interesting from here on. Oh! before I forget it there are two gentlemen out there on Inernet that have their heads "screwed on correctly" in Ray Tomes and Ed Harada. If you will have Ed Harada leave his address I will make sure he gets a magnet and pizzo to build his very own MRA since he has won the "cigar" for his "astute" observation as to the phase angle actually in the MRA circuit between the piezzo and the saturated magnetic core coil of the primary. If in fact the phase angle was as he stated the possibility of then we have  "worst case stated" the I/O ratio. Excellent observation on his part. Please contact him so I can get his mailing address. ~  Norm

Subject: MRA Testing Results

David:  We have conclusive proof that this MRA is over-unity and we are at present building the oscillator and necessary driver circuit to make it stand alone. Don't believe everything you read regardless of who originates it. Believe me, this thing is over-unity and we are going to prove it once and for all. Just hide and watch. As before all progress will be reported in full so stay tuned. You won't see any white surrender flags flying over my or Joelís lab bench.  More as we make progress. Keep the faith and thanks for the recomendations. We have already covered most of them but others on the net can profit by your contribution. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA Testing

David: you were correct to assume that we had thought out the testing proceedure and yes (to answer your question) we knew exactly what the
outcome of the test would be by adding a "lump" resistance to the circuit. It kills the over-unity effect "dead as hell". All three of the testing parties were told that this would happen. Now if you would please go back to the starting point and read the whole thing over then you will not come back and suggest placing a "lump" resistance value anywhere in the input circuit to derive a current value. It just cannot be done this way for it completely alters the MRA into as Hal stated "an ordinary series resonant transformer circuit". Put you thinking cap on for there has to be a method of determining input current and not "close the P channel". What would you say if I told you that Joel and I fine tuned a MRA last night and had the voltage and current wave forms exactly 180 degrees out of phase at the input of the MRA? See there is something real peculiar here for between the piezo and the coil the phase angle was 90 degrees. Comments?? Norm

Subject: Alpha and Omega

Hello David: You are most kind in your offers and that is truly appreciated. The basis for our beliefs concerning the use of a resistor for testing the MRA... There are, of course, distributed resistances in any circuit. If there weren't, every circuit would be at unity.

The effect of directly coupling poled devices with tetrahedral lattice structures is that the devices will break into resonance when an external potential is applied. This is why the Nieper ring, which led us to the MRA, resonates a rich blend of harmonics at over ten times the alpha cutoff frequency of the transistors. Transistors are made of silicon or germanium, both of which have tetrahedral lattice structures. The key to the resonance is in the PHI relationship within the lattices. Please read the file PHI&RES.ASC for the background work on this.

PHI and the Fibonacci series is how nature works. Even plants grow according to the Fibonacci series. A plant will grow a leaf, then two more, then three more, then five more, then eight more, etc. These relationships are imbedded in the fabric of all existance.

Many cases of transistor circuits going over unity have been reported and the result is normally destructive to the transistors. How many times have you heard of this as "spurious noise"? Engineers add... guess what... RESISTORS to eliminate this "noise". Since the devices aren't designed to handle the extra power, they HAVE to do that. If you want examples of this, let me know. Sometimes the transistors will shoot out lasers, as seen by Lawandy, and reported in "Nature".

The MRA also uses poled devices (magnet and piezo) with tet lattices and applies an external potential. However, we apply the potential at resonance to "kick start" the effect, and let it build up for an hour to get the most harmonics. In so doing, we are taking advantage of the "hidden" potentials which exist across ALL standing potentials in the form of biwave pairs, according to Maxwell, et al.

The biwave pairs are frequency matched to the MRA harmonics to add POTENTIAL... which then is "seen" by the flux of the magnetic ferrite
core to add electrons (up to the saturation point) for a net increase in power. However, this power will be consumed by a cumulative value of resistance, and it will appear that the power is coming from the source! Now, we've been able to add a "resistance" in the form of a lamp, which has an effective impedance of 20 ohms, only 5 ohms of which is resistive, and this lessens the effect, but does not kill it as a pure resistance will do.

Subject: Transcension and the ether

Transcendental numbers are, as most people know, indeterminate. The  decimal fractions will continue infinitely without repeating. Another way of saying that is to say that these ratios cannot be contained in 3-space. In the file PHI&RES.ASC, work was begun to show how these ratios, specifically PI and PHI, relate to natural geometric vibration as perceived in harmonics and octaves of music. Later, these same ratios were used in an application of resonant geometry in the MRA, and most recently as seen in Stewart Harris's TMI device.

I keep asking myself, "where is this all leading?" We know this is really very, very old knowledge, because it was APPLIED by people long ago. In their analogy, the basic elements of earth, air, fire and water were contained in the first four Platonic solids, all of which are PHI based. The fifth Platonic solid, the dodecahedron, was the representation of ether. PHI and resonance are inextricably linked to ALL of reality, both inner and extra dimensionally. Ether (the dodecahedron) was THE MOST SACRED of the geometries. However, as a Platonic solid, it can be contained within both the cube and the circle... implying that the ether is within. Maxwell agreed with this.

The dimensions outside of 3-space are actually within as seen by the Platonic solids. The atomic lattice structures of cube elements are already "tuned" to the ether. The cube is the nested tetrahadron. The lattice structure of silicon is a tetrahedron. Transistors can break into free oscillation, and the etheric energy causes them to produce energy above unity, because the PHI (transcendental) ratio is within.

However, the cube, which contains the dodecahedron, can also be contained within the sphere, and when two spheres intersect into each other at the center, the result is the vesica pisces, also a PHI ratio and within which (at the neutral center) the natural vortical spin of all energy occurs. Particle spin of atoms is the result of this relationship. It is etheric energy.

We as people are linked to these geometric relationships from conception, and we are transcendental beings. That is why the Incunabula type of dimensional shift is an innate capability, but the process is learned through the understanding of sacred geometry, and applying it in relation to our dodecahedral component. All of the answers are in the geometry... from the 13 wavelengths of light which will cure any illness, to free energy, to any possibility.

I suggest that those who have tunable musical instruments might want to retune them to the PHI based transcendental frequencies, and use the musical vibrations to tune their own vibrations to the ether. Using only the whole notes, as practiced by the ancient Greeks, is supposed to be particularly balancing. It is one thing to be aware of the PHI and resonance links to extra (inner) dimensionality. As was done long ago, however, we can now begin to apply them, which is why are here.

We've spent a long time either ignoring, denying and defying nature, and we can see the resulting decay of our species and our habitat. We really need to become aware and then apply balancing principles now.


Glenda: Joel and I have worked out a full sustaining method of making the TMI not only run itself continously but generate power in the process and if you so desire take "flight" just like the Searl Disk. Last night I went out to Joel's and we had a long visit during which we worked outr a lot of the details as to how the device actually worked and how it related to the Searle rollers. After I got back home I ran several test on the magnet runner for I was interested in the relationship between the fixed track portions and the rotating magnetic runner or roller. The interesting phenomenon here is that the runner has to be rotating or the device will not provide the necessary thrust to continue to move. One very interesting point that Stewart mentioned
was that he used the "tinker toy" wheels to slow down the roller. Well what I did was increase the spin rate of the roller or runner by the Phi rate in relation to the fixed magnetic track and found that the intersecting vesica pisces vortex patterns were multiplied to the extent that this thing has incredible thrust and does not need the broken segments in the track as per the original plans. The track can be a continous vortical or helixal magnetic flow with the runner magnetic vortex intersecting at 90 degrees to provide 3D nested visica pieces vortices. Very interesting little device which as Joel properly put it, "This dog will WARP". A very true statement for what you will have created is a very simplified version of John Searle's SEG. For you non-indoctrinated out there that means Searl Effect Generator. This thing properly constructed will not only run itself, but generate plenty of excess power in the process.  The biggest problem you are faced is that if you ever lose the load on it you will have the same problem that John Searl had, in that your home powering generator will simply accelerate to the critical velocity of the rollers and simply fly away leaving a hole in your roof. All kind of possibilities here.  Thanks for sharing this little device with the world.  Everyone will have fun with this one. ~ Norm

Subject: Another MRA

Sam Faile, who writes for New Energy News up in Cincinatti, sent me a document which is very interesting for it is from an individual who wishes to remain anonymous at this time but wanted to make a contribution. Basically this man has another take off on the MRA.

HISTORY: (1993) Circuit was originally intended to produce series of time decrement pulses for anti-gravity experiment (concept of an expanding E-M wave form). Never was taken beyond breadboard level. Other projects took precedence. Had intended on feeding expanded pulse sequence into various trancducers to look for unusual effects.

Description: A positive sawtooth wave of about 24 V P-P is generated by a simple N-channel JFET oscillator. This signal is coupled through a
capacitor to a 555 timer chip which is configured as a voltage controlled oscillator. The output of the 555 then consists of a +12V pulse train, wherein each pulse is of a duration period of twice as long as the pulse before it. The pulse train is contained within an envelope about 10-15 us in duration. When this pulse sequence was fed into a ferrite core inductor, instantly a tremendous voltage rise occured! A nearly pure sine wave of about 130 V P-P was measured across the inductor. It is unknown if any substancial power was developing in the inductor, however a neon lamp across the unit lit very brightly without diminishing the magnatude of the sine wave. No attempts were made to try to couple this energy into a secondary circuit for I-V
analysis. (Could be done with a secondary winding added over the primary of the inductor). Objective: This effect may or may not embody any unusual or new principles. I found two aspects to be unusual: (A) The production of a sine wave across the inductor with 130 V P-P magnitude; (B) The fact that this voltage does not blow out 555 chip or the op-amp.

Applying the decrement pulse train to an iron core coil, or an air core coil or a quartz piezo transducer did not produce any unusual effects. This information is being released in light of the developments by N. Wootan and J. McClain and others. If barium ferrites or other ferrites are found to posses the ability to store energy, or "ring", then maybe the actions of my aforementioned device add up. Hopefully, any who are currently working with barium ferrite might find value in this circuit. Best of luck. ~ G.A., Wichita

Subject: MRA Tech Bulletin

Well, just for grins I built a "super MRA" which is in the form of a right cylindrical magnet section with large flanges top and bottom made of plexiglass so I could wind a very long wire primary and secondary coil so as to be able to play some turns ratio games without having to take the unit apart and rewind each time I needed to change ratios. I did this by winding 18,000 feet of wire on the magnetic core with taps brought out about every 1000 feet of winding. This way you can play some interesting games not only with impedance matching but also with wire lengths in the windings for resonant tuning as we do in Tesla Coils. Any one interested in building the MRA and fine tuning it to peak out the performance should consider this approach for it provided me some rather impressive data. Now there is no doubt about over-unity for I have been able to back off to practically nothing the input power to the unit and maintain a healthy output. I am seeing the input potential from my source amplifier being trippled from an idle available source voltage of 48 VAC goimg up tp 160 VAC with the MRA tuned to max gain. You can place a grain of wheat bulb in the primary of the circuit and it will not even light at all while driving a 120 V 3Watt standard bulb across the bridge rectifier. Real interesting what happens when
you approach a near perfect impedance and resonant match in the windings. This is something that we wanted to do in time. That is the point all should consider, that is all this takes valuable time and it will be done by not only Joel and I but by others out there who are serious researchers such as Hans Becker and others. ~ Norm

Subject: MRA Test Results

I have been rather quiet on the subject of the MRA test that was conducted for I have let Joel handle the responses since he is more diplomatic the I. Well I have a few comments for all who are interested to really ponder. First, let us consider the true nature of the piezoelectric element in the MRA. This is probably the most "NON LINEAR" device that man or nature has ever constructed. Everyone knows just how NON-linear they are especially when I can hit the piezo with a simple pulse of 57 V and get a return of over 1000 V as a response from this little device. Now let us look at the peculiar little MRA coil. First we start with a totally "saturated" magnetic core with a primary coil and a secondary coil wound directly onto the magnet. We are "ringing" the crystaline lattice structure of the BaFeSi material that composes the magnet therefore this component is also "TOTALLY NONLINEAR". What do you get when you couple two "TOTALLY NON LINEAR" devices together into a series resonant circuit where we are driving one element 3 octaves above the other and producing 9 harmonics and purposely detuning the circuit to cause one of the harmonics to beat
against the incoming current from the signal source to cause the MRA to achieve over-unity??? Well if you haven't figgured it out yet you have a circuit that does things that are "NOT IN ANY TEXT BOOK PRINTED". Joel and I have spent countless hours looking at results of simple experiments conducted with the MRA that simply defy all EM theory or logic. Now "please" consider what I have said about how "NONLINEAR" this whole device is and go down to the last line in the file MRACLAR.ASC and read the recomendation that we should read "Principles of Linear Networks" by Friedland, Wing & Ash, McGraw-Hill, 1961. I highly respect Hal Puthoff and his theoretical abilities but in the case of the MRA, I'm sorry the "light has not come on". This circuit is over-unity and we are still proceeding with the driver circuit to make it obvious to all who wish to see and "believe". ~ Norm

Subject: MRA Testing

This question goes out to Tom Bearden and Walter Rosenthal who are on the same "sheet of music" as to the testing of the MRA. I have gone
back and degested all of the available info on the Maxwell approach to the MRA device and Tom is right on in his analysis that you simply
cannot use a "FLATLAND EM" (classic EM theory) approach to this circuit. If you go back and study Maxwell's model in quaternions you
begin to appreciate the "higher topology" possibilities and see the Whittaker bi-wave pair coupling in the circuit. I see the same current wave form that has puzzled Walter in his analysis of the input to the MRA. When you fine tune the MRA to a maximum gain where the current wave form is a complex wave on the scope with a leading and lagging sine wave form aproximately 45 degrees apart with a complete "fill" of rich harmonics of various magnitudes then you are getting a picture of what is really happening in the input. Is this complete fill in of the complex current wave form an indication of "time forward and time reverse" biwave EM pair coupling taking place before our eyes. Walter has photographed this phenomenon and states that he has never seen anything like this before in conventional EM analysis. I along with Joel have studied this current wave display and have concluded that it is the key to the MRA over-unity display. Only when you have this complex current wave form does the MRA display the over-unity traits. This is the prime area that has to be resolved to better understand what is really happening in this circuit. Norm

Subject: MRA confirmation

Just thought I'd share a note with all on a test report from Greg
Hodowanek, who built his own MRA and is getting ten times unity.
Greg is using a silver mica 680 pf capacitor instead of a piezo at low
signal level input (piezos sink voltage) and a Radio Shack BaFe magnet
with a part number of 64-1877. Greg's test results were sent to
Hal Fox at New Energy News, and to others. Many of you are familiar
with Greg's work and files here on KeelyNet for gravity wave detector
circuits. Hope others also do the same as Greg has done, and also
share their results.  ~ Joel

Subject: Bootstrap designing

Hi Chris: Greg's report is four pages long, including the cosmological study. He states that his Rhysmonic Theory describes the power gain of the MRA. Based upon the experimental results and conclusions, I think that he very well understands the aetheric 'interface' with 3-space. His gravity detectors are working proof (I have built one) of the soundness of his theories.

He measured the same source current reduction which Norm and I have documented, with the same (but higher) power gain at the load. He used a signal generator which is only capable of 4mw max output, which the MRA drove down to only 1.85mw. At the output he measured 18.5 mw. With the components that he used, the max power frequency was 90KHz, and the max gain frequency was 100 KHz. Interesting that he increased the freq for max gain, as this causes the circuit to increase its inductive reactance and to decrease its capacitive reactance. This increases core saturation, enabling more free electrons to couple with the excess potential provided by the piezo effect in the series resonant circuit, and thus providing output power above unity to the load.

Greg used two different transformers and got similar results. The first was a small potted xfmr with a ferrite (not magnetic) core, and it was marked 5.0 mh and 5:1 ratio. The second was an ordinary 125 VAC to 25 VAC xfmr into which he inserted two of the R.S. magnets. In both cases, he achieved above unity results. Since he used the parts which he had 'on hand', by understanding the theory, I suggest that you could likely do the same and get similar results.

I think that the transformer which has a non-magnetic core is acting more like a magneto than a virtual rotation generator, as the core is reacting to the alternating cycles of input where the voltages are 180 degrees out of phase but the currents are equal and in phase. In other words, the magneto effect is creating a magnetic "bubble" which "moves" 180 degrees with each cycle, but never dissipates because the resonance of the circuit "breathes" it virtually "in" and "out". The alternating polarity of the "bubble" blocks primary current, as it is a sphere of influence which opposes the source sphere.

The source sphere is essentially counterrotating, and as long as the circuit remains in balance (resonance), each alternate half cycle has an aetheric counterpart which finds a "home" in the output load. Somewhere in between a weak magnet with a lot of ferrite and ferrite which has not been magnetized, but which magnetizes and "flips" at resonant half-cycle intervals, we will find the optimum core, and it may vary by design as per load requirement. I don't want to get too wordy here, but the main idea is to use what you have, which is what Norm and I did, and is also what Hans B. and Greg H. have done, and all have been successful. Have fun! ~ Joel

Subject: "McLain & Wootan"

You know you've left your mark on the "Free Energy" world when you rate a footnote in one of T. E. Bearden's articles:

In the just out Explore! magazine, Vol 6, #1 appears: "Vacuum Engines and Priore's Methodology: The True Science of Energy - Medicine Part I of II" by T. E. Bearden.

Under the heading of "Vacuum Engines: Ordering and Utilizing the Vacuum Virtual Particle Flux:"

"This VACUUM ENGINE now does the work and furnishes all the working energy.  We just have to pay to set up the GATING MECHANISM AND THE TEMPLATE in the beginning, and continue to play a little bit to sustain them. Literally we have created a stupendous ENERGY AMPLIFIER. [19]"

19:  "As example of such an actual amplifier was Floyd Sweet's vacuum triode - [Long dissertation about Sweet which ends with ->] Unfortunately nothing can be done with the device - e.g., because of formidable legal entanglements due to the conflicting agreements Sweet made with different financial backers. However, McLain & Wooten has produced a repicable, tested over unity device & full construction details have been rebuilt on Internet." [Rebuilt? Odd use of the word.]

Some thing else that has been discussed here recently under the heading: "Mind, 3-Space, Hyperspace, Mind Flow, and The Flow of Time:"

"Normally, so QM tells us, the observation process destroys time, so that all "observables" are spatial only. So the completion of each observable change in a living mass system momentarily destroys the only connection that the mass had with associated mind! It vanished in the so-called "collapse of the wave function." [26,27,28]

28:  "Since the entire area is highly nonlinear, then nonlinear oscillator theory applies. Gravitation lattices may therefore be activated harmonically or subharmonically. This means that "optical band" results can be initiated by analogous subharmonic input - e.g., microwaves or even sound waves. G-lattices work like music; one recognizes a C-chord regardless of the octave. In similar manner, vacuum engines (G-lattices) may be shifted by any number of octaves, with initiation of results then being delayed in the responding physical systems, and prescribed by nonlinear oscillator theory."

The article describes other, hum, "Interesting" effects of this type of Engineering, that personally I would want to avoid. Always good and bad in every thing... You can contact Explore! at EXPLORE Publishing P.O. Box 1508.  MT. Vernon, WA 98273. (360) 424-6025. Part II is due out in April.

Subject: Repeat of Hodowanec's Test

Brother Norm (we've adopted each other) came over tonight with a very small MRA, so that we could try the test previously done by Greg Hodowanec. The transformer consists of two of the rectangular R.S. BaFe magnets with primary and secondary wrapped around them.

First, we tried using an ordinary electrolytic capacitor for the piezo, and that didn't work...couldn't even get unity out of it. Then we put a tried-and-true piezo in the circuit, and commenced to tune it. It peaked at 33.4 KHz, so we tuned it up to 40 KHz, at which all current ceased to flow. We tuned it do 34.1 KHz, at which point we had 73 microamps of primary current at 11.8 VAC, or about 0.86 milliwatts.

The output measured 6.2 milliamps at 1.915 VDC, for 11.87 milliwatts. This power difference was also obvious in the LED brightness, as
described by Greg. The gain computes out to 13.8 times input. Greg found 10 times input, using a planar capacitor instead of a piezo. Norm and I used the old reliable HP-200cd sig gen for input.

The key, as always, is in the tuning for max gain. It's necessary to increase the frequency, as Greg described, and as Norm has been doing all along, to make the circuit primarily inductive. I goofed in some of the early tests by DEcreasing the frequency, and I hope that didn't cause too much confusion.

I think that it's important to mention the need for co-inventors on projects like this, as illustrated above, it's so very easy to make a dumb mistake that doesn't otherwise get corrected. Without both of us, there would be no MRA. The total is always greater than the sum.

We both have had the same vision and shared the load as each of us was best able to do. That's why we be bro's now. Keely may have
been able to do it solo, and Tesla too for that matter, but the rest of us always work better when we work together. ~ Joel

Subject: MRA

Jerry: Re: your notes on the MRA as to being over-unity and the availability of the parts we are useing. I was in Tanner Electronics last week and he offered me the last 50 piezzo's he had. They are still available but no one is asking for them. I put out the info on the magnets we are useing (IBM 3380E hard drives, drive model 391X). I have personally, at my expense shipped out 30 of these magnets to interested parties. Joel and I are working on the elusive standalone demo but this is not as easy as it may sound to you. The anomolous characteristics of this device has taken out 3 of my audio amps and 2 more scopes plus two frequency counters eventhough I have taken great care in trying to isolate this equipment best I know how. If there were nothing to this circuit then we would not see all this anomolous behavior that cannot be explained by conventional theory. When we attempt to build a self-sustaining oscillator, it suffers the same fate that the test equipment experiences. I'm so frustrated that I am about to turn to a simple Tesla air core tuned Tesla coil with spark gap to get away from transistors which are "self targeted" by the bi-wave coupling (scalars)
reflected in the primary. This circuit is "destructive to solid state devices". If you haven't been there like Joel and I then you don't have a clue as to what is happeneing in the circuit. It looks so simple, two components in series resonance. Simple, no, for they are the two most "non-linear" devices we could have come up with. The totally saturated barium ferrite core transformer is just reverse of conventional transformer theory where we drive the core towards saturation. In the MRA we are driving the core out of saturation at a 3 octave down freq from the piezzo. The piezzo is also a very "nonlinear" device and when you  couple the two components together in a series resonant circuit you have a lot of "wild cards" that you don't even know about. The text books do not cover this device therefore we are "plowing new ground". Hal Puthoff and Scott Little saw this and had to fall back on conventional theroy to try to resolve the anomolous behavior of the circuit. Joel and I elect instead to try to resolve the "anomalies" of the MRA and not just apply conventional theory and sweep it under the rug. This circuit is not going to just "go away", I promise. We are doing all we can with our meager budget and time available. As to duplicatability (big word), why can't others do as Greg Hodawanec did and build a MRA with off the shelf (Radio Shack) magnets and capacitor with LED's used to demonstrate the circuit behavior. Joel and I have done the Hodawanec test and it works. This takes about 30 minutes of time and about $5 worth of parts along with a sig gen to provide the excitation. Simple enough, but try to get
someone to build one instead of sitting back and waiting for the proof to come from others who are really trying. WE ARE TRYING TO GET AN

Subject: MRA

The most recent discussion as to whether the MRA is truly over-unity was to be expected.  The biggest problem here is understanding what is going on in the circuit. Tom Bearden explained the whole theory of the MRA with the Whittaker bi-wave electron pair coupling in the primary of the circuit which produces "scalar" potential that are reflected back into the signal source. These potentials being "scalar" cannot be attenuated or blocked for as we have already seen with the "Frolov" single line transmission experiment. The accumulation of this "virtual potential" in a transistor or solid state circuit literally destroys all.  Between Joel and I we have all the "proof of this phenomenon in "dead, expensive equipment".  I bought a nice (second one) audio amp from Radio Shack, brought it home and hooked up on of my advanced prototype MRA's driving 25 watt T8 flourscent load, turned it on at very low signal output and immediately blew up the amp. Radio shack repaired it after replacing the power transformer, the output transformer, the full wave bridge, and all the final output transistors. Yes, it blew the line fuse but this all took about 10 seconds of operation of the amp. The "E" section of this net was set up by Jerry so as to give us a forum for a small group of like-minded researchers to resolve problems and discover new energies. Let's work together on this problem and not point fingers as to not comming up with "conclusive" evidence as in the case of the MRA. Joel and I don't have all the answers. Frankly we are in a quandry as to how to solve the perplexing problem. If we can't rely on solid state compoments because of the "scalar potential" problem, then we may have to fall back on some old non-solid state solutions. I even picked up some fiber optic material for possible doing some optical isolation between equipment and MRA under test. If any one out there in "E" has ideas, let's hear them. ~ Norm

Subject: Tune above resonance

Hi Rick, and thank you for your timely message. I think that it may clear up a lot of questions that others have as well. We are using the piezo both as a capacitor and as a piezo. As a capacitor, it completes the series resonant circuit. A series resonant circuit develops potentials across the capacitor and the coil at Q times the source voltage, and at resonance the voltages are 180 degrees out of phase.  The currents, however, remain in phase.

If you tune below resonance, the circuit becomes net capacitive, and if you tune above resonance, the circuit is net inductive. Xl=2PIFL. Increasing the frequency into a net inductive region creates a virtually lossless circuit, where current can be calculated within 1% without even considering resistance. At peak resonance, where Xc=Xl, the circuit is pure resistance.

At the upper resonant range, the lossless circuit can transfer power to an output, and yes the load is reflected into the primary, so it is necessary to retune when the load changes outside the frequency range and causes the source current to increase. However, the Q of the circuit is equal to the Q of the coil alone in this mode.

So far, standard textbook theory. Using a barium titanate piezo and a barium ferrite magnet at their resonant frequencies creates a ringing of harmonics which couples additional energy to the circuit. This can be both heard audibly and seen on the scope display. It is the same ringing which can occur in transistors and cause them to burn out as a result of excessive energy, except that these components will not burn out. We couple the energy to the load. Some folks call this 'harmonic distortion' or 'spurious oscillation', but we call it useful energy.

When this happens, the piezo and magnet become phase conjugate mirrors (PCM), and instantaneously couple potentials, which are then matched to electrons from the stressed piezo as well as from the saturated ferrite core. Interestingly, when the piezo is removed from the circuit, it will continue to regenerate finger-zapping charges for quite some time, as you discover when you pick them up. However, when the instantaneous potentials "mate" with electrons, power results.

The core, after being deenergized, will also ring on and off from time to time unless you put it in a freezer. Now, having a Hodowanec MRA here and in test, I have found that the barium is not necessary, at least in very low power designs. The power gain is both measurable and visible in the LEDs on both the input and the output. There is enough piezo quality in the silver mica capacitor to provide the electron coupling for energy stored in the coil, while returning very little to the source.  Because the circuit is very low loss, the energy is coupled via a secondary to the load for a net gain.

I know the relationship of capacitors in series and in parallel, and the effect that has on frequency. However, we have found that only one piezo per MRA will work at a time, because no two of them are exactly the same. The capacitance wouldn't matter that much, but the electron coupling has to be precisely phased.

Thanks again, and take care.  ~ Joel

Your Support Maintains this Service -- and Your Survival ...


The Rex Research Civilization Kit

... It's Your Best Bet & Investment in Sustainable Humanity on Earth ...
Everything @ on a Data DVD !