Dr. Ronald Richter developed this as far back as 1942. The shadow government/corporatism/banking cartel elites suppress ALL forms of free/clean energy. Nikola Telsa re-discovered free energy back in the early 1900's. We are all living in a forced illusion of ignorance unfortunately. We could have free energy,anti gravity, all disease eradicating technology, if it wasn't for the fact that this world is run by evil people with endless power. Thomas E. Bearden is another pioneer in free energy.
@Aaronator01 Yes, it already has. Look up Frank Znidarsic and his "Speed of transistion". For example..Einsteins photo-electric equation is E=hf. h being Planck's constant. Using Frank Znidarsic's theories I can solve for E without Planck's constant(h) or i can even solve FOR Planck's constant. Here is an example. For energy (without planck's constant) E=e^2/2(2EoVt/f) e=elementary charge of a electron, Eo=permittivity of free space, and Vt=10943846m/s just incase you feel like doing the math
The reason this is being kept quiet for the time being is because research needs to be done by the government to see if it's possible for terrorists to make a hydrogen bomb from this. So it's all *hush-hush* for the time being.
Who knows, research in this area could inevitably merge two areas of science completely separated by our lack of understanding. Like electricity and magnetism... and then later the atomic weak force. Is the strong force next to be unified in this apparent set? Could the same set of equations form a "bridge" between the quantum world and the macro world? Who knows! Thats why it needs funding!
So we are left with one of two options... Either this energy is caused by over-unity (which cripples the entire foundation of modern science, not to mention makes no sense) or there is some other, under-laying principle at work here that does not "totally" involve the normal chemical processes as expected. We are then left with some foreign nuclear reaction that should be studied to unlock it's secrets... Isn't that the point of experimental science? Find the unknown, solve for X? I think so.
...That is, Observational evidence contradicted the standard model of physics. Regardless, a model is a model; it encompasses the most basic, fundamental laws of a system that cannot be broken. If these laws are broken the model becomes fragmented with a new scientific phenomena hailing another piece to the puzzle of everything. This is in the same fashion as the quantum theory, and as absurd as it seems to the old model, there isn't a scientist today that would question it reasonably.
I honestly do get what the problem is in the scientific community. This has evidence that can be reproduced (A low success chance is completely irrelevant, in fact, it just shows us how little we understand about the reaction process) these produce observations not explainable by the current standard model. Historically things like this have happened before, and the bottom line is that it is of the highest importance in the scientific community. Quantum theory was produced in the same fashon.
shut up
BringItDownForBuddha 4 days ago
Dr. Ronald Richter developed this as far back as 1942. The shadow government/corporatism/banking cartel elites suppress ALL forms of free/clean energy. Nikola Telsa re-discovered free energy back in the early 1900's. We are all living in a forced illusion of ignorance unfortunately. We could have free energy,anti gravity, all disease eradicating technology, if it wasn't for the fact that this world is run by evil people with endless power. Thomas E. Bearden is another pioneer in free energy.
teargardens 8 months ago
@Aaronator01 Yes, it already has. Look up Frank Znidarsic and his "Speed of transistion". For example..Einsteins photo-electric equation is E=hf. h being Planck's constant. Using Frank Znidarsic's theories I can solve for E without Planck's constant(h) or i can even solve FOR Planck's constant. Here is an example. For energy (without planck's constant) E=e^2/2(2EoVt/f) e=elementary charge of a electron, Eo=permittivity of free space, and Vt=10943846m/s just incase you feel like doing the math
ilikeycoloralot 9 months ago
@hazzard77 what the hell are you on about, its clearly not hush hush is it if its out in the public domain
nirvanadudeuk 1 year ago
Dumb as hell "there is no mathematical formulae".
YES THERE IS Frank Znidarsics work explain this in a classical mathematical manner.
ConsumedByDrums 1 year ago
The reason this is being kept quiet for the time being is because research needs to be done by the government to see if it's possible for terrorists to make a hydrogen bomb from this. So it's all *hush-hush* for the time being.
hazzard77 1 year ago
Who knows, research in this area could inevitably merge two areas of science completely separated by our lack of understanding. Like electricity and magnetism... and then later the atomic weak force. Is the strong force next to be unified in this apparent set? Could the same set of equations form a "bridge" between the quantum world and the macro world? Who knows! Thats why it needs funding!
Aaronator01 2 years ago
So we are left with one of two options... Either this energy is caused by over-unity (which cripples the entire foundation of modern science, not to mention makes no sense) or there is some other, under-laying principle at work here that does not "totally" involve the normal chemical processes as expected. We are then left with some foreign nuclear reaction that should be studied to unlock it's secrets... Isn't that the point of experimental science? Find the unknown, solve for X? I think so.
Aaronator01 2 years ago
...That is, Observational evidence contradicted the standard model of physics. Regardless, a model is a model; it encompasses the most basic, fundamental laws of a system that cannot be broken. If these laws are broken the model becomes fragmented with a new scientific phenomena hailing another piece to the puzzle of everything. This is in the same fashion as the quantum theory, and as absurd as it seems to the old model, there isn't a scientist today that would question it reasonably.
Aaronator01 2 years ago
I honestly do get what the problem is in the scientific community. This has evidence that can be reproduced (A low success chance is completely irrelevant, in fact, it just shows us how little we understand about the reaction process) these produce observations not explainable by the current standard model. Historically things like this have happened before, and the bottom line is that it is of the highest importance in the scientific community. Quantum theory was produced in the same fashon.
Aaronator01 2 years ago