Norman Wootan & Joel McClain: Magnetic Resonance
Amplifier (MRA) KeelyNet Messages (#2)

![](0logo.gif)  
**[rexresearch.com](../index.htm)**

---

 **Joel
McCLAIN & Norman WOOTAN**

**Magnetic Magnetic Resonance Amplifier**

**[ KeelyNet Message Collection # 2 ]**

---

**[MRA FIle # 1](1mra.htm)**  **[Dan Davidson: US Patent # 5,568,005 ~
Acoustic-Magnetic Power Generator](5568005.htm)**

---

10/09/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: JERRY DECKER   
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

---

12/03/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

12/03/94   
From : NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: JOEL MCCLAIN   
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 Colers "Stromzeuger" & "Magnetstromapparat" = 180
KHz ]

---

12/03/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~  To: JOEL MCCLAIN   
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

---

12/03/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~  To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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.

---

12/03/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~  To: GERALD O'DOCHARTY   
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

---

12/04/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: ALL   
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   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~  To: ALL   
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

---

12/05/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN   ~  To: GERALD O'DOCHARTY   
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

---

12/05/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: JOEL MCCLAIN   
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   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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?

---

12/09/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: JERRY DECKER   
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

---

12/09/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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.

---

12/09/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

12/11/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

12/11/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

12/11/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/11/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/11/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: JERRY DECKER   
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

---

12/12/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: JERRY DECKER   
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. ~   
Norm

---

12/12/94   
From: JERRY DECKER  ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/13/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: BILL BEATY   
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

---

12/13/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: JEFF PANICI   
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

---

12/14/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/14/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: JOEL MCCLAIN   
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

---

12/15/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/17/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN  ~ To: ALL   
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   
electrically.

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.

---

12/17/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: BILL BEATY   
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

---

12/18/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/20/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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.

Joel

---

12/21/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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.

---

12/21/94   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

12/29/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: JOEL MCCLAIN   
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

---

12/31/94   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: BILL BEATY   
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

---

01/03/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: BOB PADDOCK   
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

---

01/06/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: JOHN PETERS   
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

---

01/11/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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.

Joel

---

01/14/95 10:49   
From : JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To : BILL BEATY   
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 stopped...like 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.

---

01/23/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

01/24/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

01/25/95   
From: NORMAN ~ To: JERRY DECKER (SYSOP)   
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

---

01/25/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

01/26/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: NORMAN COMPARINI   
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. Lets 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

---

01/26/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

01/26/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: NORMAN WOOTAN   
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

---

01/26/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: BILL BEATY   
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

---

01/27/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: DAVID WYLAND   
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 Joels 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

---

01/27/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: DAVID WYLAND   
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

---

01/28/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: DAVID WYLAND   
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.

---

01/31/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: ALL   
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.

---

02/01/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: GLENDA STOCKS   
Subject: TMIDEVIC

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

---

02/03/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: ALL   
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

---

02/04/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

02/08/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

02/09/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN  ~ To: ALL   
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

---

02/22/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

03/02/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: CHRIS FLAMIG   
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

---

03/05/95   
From: BOB PADDOCK ~ To: ALL   
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.

---

03/06/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

03/12/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN To: JERRY DECKER (SYSOP)   
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   
OSCILLATOR THAT IS SUITABLE TO RUN THE MRA "standalone". Norm

---

03/12/95   
From: NORMAN WOOTAN ~ To: ALL   
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

---

03/14/95   
From: JOEL MCCLAIN ~ To: RICK WOOD   
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

---