A Research Organization
that Develops & Distributes
Practical Energy-Saving
Methods & Devices

Available in HTML @: www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2002/2002_10.php  
  WHAT'S NEW Issue Feature: Gravity Power Fuel Saver news Free Energy Comments Brown's Gas news Reader Comments Coming Up   Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead -  
WHAT'S NEW (top)

  • The 'Leader of the Pack' Brown's Gas Meeting in Penticton, BC was absolutely full and attendees had lots of fun. WELCOME ABOARD for those people that have become WaterTorch Distributors.   • We have a new Brown's Gas Brochure and the Brown's Gas Video 3 'See Water Burn' is impressing people around the world. It is available in NTSC and PAL formats   • The HyCO 2A installation video ' Get More MPG' is finally finished and will be shipping out this week. My sincerest and humble apologies to all the people who ordered and have been waiting. It was MY fault, not the people working with me. They needed time with me to get it done and I had precious little to give. My thanks to all who have been patient as we got it done.   The HyCO 2A video was the result of a vote that was taken during one of the Eagle-Research Chats. Tenaj asked what you would like us to produce next, she schedualed it and we got it done. Thank you for your input, we want to provide what you need to actually apply our technologies.   • We are now starting our third production run of ER1200 WaterTorches. The torches that are out in the marketplace are performing well, all around the world. We based this design on practical research that we've done since 1995, and have the safest, most practical, efficient and lowest priced (cost per production capability) Brown's Gas electrolyzers on the planet!   • The last Eagle-Research Chat information is at: http://www.eagle-research.com/chat/chat.php We'll be talking about electric vehicles on the next chat. =====================================================

Issue Feature: GRAVITY POWER (top)
  I have not gotten back to my Gravity Power research as I had planned, so I'll give you a few tidbits to think about and (hopefully) get my Gravity Wheel built sometime this next spring.   My 'mechanical IQ' is literally off the scale used to test me (don't be too impressed, I lack in other areas). I literally have the ability to visualize an apparatus, build and move it in my head, like a 3D modeling program. This ability only fails when I'm ignorant of factors that affect the performance of the apparatus, factors that my training, research and experimentation clear up as I progress from concept to working model.   Over the years I've found a lot of 'gravity power' ideas. I've done enough research in gravity and FE machines in general to 'see' reasons why all those machines won't work. Still, some of the concepts had merit, when combined with other ideas. My mechanical ability allowed me to sift through volumes of information, fitting concepts together, like a jigsaw puzzle, till I conceive machines that I can't (intellectually) prove won't work. The next step is to experiment, seeing if the concepts work in real life like they do in my mind. If so, I proceed to a (hopefully) working model. If not, then I know more for evaluating previous and subsequent concepts.   So far I've conceived of three possible ways to use gravity as a power source, with varying degrees of practicality.   First is the 'conveyor' that pumps it's own water by virtue of hydraulics and vacuum; having a net excess of torque. This theory and apparatus is described in my 'Gravity Power' pocketpal. I have worked out the math and distributed the pamphlet for review. So far, no one has found fault with the math or concept. I did experiments to prove out my machine concept and they worked as I anticipated, there would be excess torque. I have not built this device because I think the Gravity Wheel is more practical.   Second is the concept detailed in a previous newsletter: www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2001/2001_10.php   Whereby we use Brown' Gas techniques to convert water to a gas to rise on one side of the system (powering a turbine); then convert the BG back to water (recovering a significant portion of the energy required to convert the water to BG) and then allowing the resulting water to drop (via gravity) through a conventional turbine back into the electrolyzer, to be turned into BG again. This concept requires the device to be hundreds or thousands of feet high, not very practical for areas that don't have high mountains and/or deep water. I have only done preliminary math on this concept. It will work in theory.   Third is the gravity wheel. In the early 1990's I started experiments with balancing weights and levers, to 'prove' out concepts that I had. Note: In Jeane Manning's 'The Coming Energy Revolution' you'll see a picture of me in front of one of my 'balancing' experiments.   I had/have a concept that it would be possible to build an apparatus that would have equal weight on both sides, but more torque on one side, thus resulting in movement and net power output. The concept is to move weights horizontally (in on one side and out on the other) to achieve torque. I also wanted the weight movements to be inherent in the device, not done by outside energy input. Moving weights horizontally requires very little energy and mostly involves calculation of resistance and inertia.   My experiments proved that my original ideas to accomplish this were 'negative' in that my understanding of 'balances' and scales was inaccurate. The concept itself still seemed intact, but how to accomplish it?   Years later, as I looked over some 'gravity wheel' designs (from a pamphlet I go from Lindsay's Books) and recognizing why they wouldn't work, I saw a means to 'swing' weights from an inner radius (on one side of the machine) to an outer radius on the other side of the machine. I thought this was the answer till I realized I still had the 'problem' I found with the 'balancing' experiments; the weights would swing too far and would 'balance'.   As months went by and I occasionally took out this idea and worked it over, I got the idea to make 'holder rods' that would prevent the weights from swinging too far and (incidentally) actually INCREASE the torque effect. Once I had worked out the geometry needed, I built a wheel with one single weight and measured the torque every 15 degrees. I used three different measuring techniques and consistently found excess torque.   Further research on gravity wheels turned up the 'myth' of the Bessler Wheel, built hundreds of years ago. Analysis of all the information I could find on this wheel convinces me that I had reinvented this particular gravity wheel. BTW, all the pictures of internals of Gravity Wheels I've seen to date do NOT match my geometry. Have fun with these links to Bessler Wheel information: http://www.besslerwheel.com http://www.padrak.com/ine/BESSLER.php http://www.free-energy.co.uk http://www.keelynet.com/energy/bessler.htm http://www.cybrtown.com/~mike/ http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/astro1/jan/default.htm   I talked about my Gravity Wheel in a previous newsletter: www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2000/2000_12.php   I am anxious to build my wheel. I already have acquired all the components. What I don't have is the time. To all those that requested drawings, I will send them, I'm just not sure when.   The Brown's Gas project is currently taking all my time. This is a 'side effect' of being a one man operation, doing everything myself. In this innovation, literally no one else has my aptitude, knowledge, experience and expertise. On the other hand, the advantage of being a 'one man show' is that I can rapidly develop practical innovations.   Luckily, I am blessed with help from my multitalented wife. We found each other on the Internet in 1997. Since then, in addition to providing much joy in my heart, she has (and is still in the process of) revamping our businesses so that people are trained to do things that were taking our time. Of course, this is a balance with income, so with more money eventually comes more time for me to get back to research.   Hint: If you want our projects to get finished, buy our current literature and products. You'll enjoy the product as you finance future research.   -------------------------------  
Copied from Free Energy egroup posts:

  Objects have inertia that is directly proportional to their mass. The principle of equivalence states that effects of gravity and inertia are the same (See Einstein's famous thought experiment about the elevator). Objects with more mass require a greater force to accelerate them because they have more inertia. Inertia can be considered to be the opposition a mass has to a change in velocity. Since the force of gravity is greater for more massive objects and this exactly balances the increased inertia, all objects will fall at the same rate.   You are thinking of gravity as a force. It isn't a force. I don't pretend to understand what gravity is, or why or how it works. But whatever it is, it shows up as a force between two masses that is proportional to the product of their masses.   That's Observed Fact About The Universe number one.   When you apply a force to a mass, that mass starts to move. The acceleration it experiences is inversely proportional to the mass of the moving object.   That's Observed Fact About The Universe number two.   Put those two Facts together, and you find that any object dropped in a gravitational field will be seen to accelerate at the same rate as any other dropped object. The masses cancel out. Double the mass and you double the force -- but you also halve the acceleration per unit force -- the result: acceleration stays the same.   ----------------   I do not know much about this one...   GURBAKHSH SINGH MANN (INVENTOR) S.C.O.-277,Sector-35/D, CHANDIGARH,(INDIA). Ph-(0172)660263. E-mail : <gurbakhsh_mann@yahoo.com> Date: Sat Sep 15, 2001 5:53am Subject: MANN GLOBAL ENERGY SOLUTIONS   http://www.pugmarks.com/biz/gsmann/   The three machines invented by me on dates mentioned against each 1. MANN GRAVITY MACHINE (M.G.M.)- 29/10/1997 2. MANN BUOYANCY MACHINE (M.B.M.)- 29/10/1997 3. MANN GRAVITY -CUM-BUOYANCY MACHINE -03/05/2001 --------------------------- =====================================================

  I've done two HyCO 2A installations to make the video. One on a Carbureted and one on a Fuel Injected vehicle. I haven't actually done an installation for years, having been busy on many other projects. I wrote the books so that people could install their own HyCO 2A systems. I used the HyCO 2A Manual and it's update (as they exist now) to do the installations. I'm pleased to note that the instructions seem to be complete.   People have been installing HyCO 2A systems for over 10 years. The application techniques have come a long way since then, thanks to the feedback our customers have given. Thank you to all of you who did it, figuring it out from my poor writing :)) I am currently rewriting the HyCO 2A Manual, incorporating the update information into it. At the moment, the Update is included free with the Manual and it's costing us extra money to print.   The HyCO 2A has proven to be an excellent pollution reduction system; which incidentally gets great mileage gains because it helps the engine burn the fuel in the cylinders instead of in the exhaust.   • Next Stage Of Fuel Saver Technology On The Honda   I did not complete the next stage yet. I have been entirely consumed by the ER1200 WaterTorch manufacturing project. I should have people trained in the manufacturing and be back to my research by the end of the year.
See archived newsletters for previous stages.



Dear Readers,

I've included a portion from the latest newsletter from http://www.altenergy.org they so a pretty good job of keeping up with events going on in the free energy world. Find out more about the below articles: http://www.altenergy.org/news/newsletter84/newsletter84.php (not active)   Search AEI's publication archives at: www.altenergy.org/News/news.php  
THE GOOD, THE BAD & PATENT LAW Inventors often spend years of their life and huge amounts of money to get an invention patented, only to finally give up in resignation and disgust at the barriers that an efficient bureaucracy can put in the way of anything new. Small wonder that some inventors bitterly decide that mankind is really not yet ready for their invention, and that many a good invention, instead of being used to the benefit of all, dies with the inventor.   Patent laws, although made with good intent, have proven to be inadequate to provide acceptable protection for the inventor. For one thing, the laws are too complicated and the procedures for examining an invention and granting a patent too arbitrary. Read about some of the difficulties associated with patent law, recently posted by Josef Hasslberger, an independent writer, researcher and philosopher.  
BLAST FROM THE PAST Tom Valone, president of the Integrity Research Institute, has scheduled a two-day new energy conference for November 9 & 10, 2002, in Washington, D.C.   Among the prominent new energy researchers and scientists expected to attend are David Hamilton, Stephen Greer, and Gene Mallove. Hamilton, Greer and Mallove gave excellent presentations at the legendary First International Conference on Future Energy, held in Maryland in 1999. The Alternative Energy Institute co-sponsored the conference and produced a review of the speakers and topics, including photographs. Check out the COFE symposium on the AEI website and then book your reservations with Tom at the Integrity Research Institute.  
AEI ALLY SPOTLIGHT: AETHMOGEN TECHNOLOGIES: NEW ENERGY SCIENTISTS New Zealander Dr. Robert Adams of Aethmogen Technologies has recently published several papers that reveal vital information and discoveries following many years of intensive work in the realm of a new dimension in magnetism.   In the articles, Dr. Adams covers magnetism as it relates to the Adams Aether Technologies as well as how his Adams Global Power Technology relates to Tesla Radiant Energy. The Adams technologies involve reverse engineering and impulsive techniques, which evolved from the combination of experience gained from empirical knowledge, intuition and vision.  
  GREENLIGHT AWARD: PUBLIC CITIZEN The Public Citizen‚s Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program works to protect citizens and the environment from the dangers posed by nuclear power and seeks policies that will lead to safe, affordable and environmentally sustainable energy. They also advocate creation of an agricultural and food distribution system that guarantees safe, wholesome food and are working to protect the world‚s fragile water resources.  


  Dear readers, here is some correspondence from the 'free energy' egroup:   --------------------------   >>--- In free_energy@y..., George Wiseman <wiseman@e...> wrote: >>We work hard to dispel the Myth that BG can power vehicles.   >One major missing fact is missing from Bob Parks story. >How many joules of electricity does it take to electrolysise the water.   This is exactly right. This is where people have gotten 'taken' in the past, because they didn't understand the relationships between how much power it takes to make BG compared to how much usable power you can get out of it. We get such questions a lot. We work hard to dispel the Myth that BG can power vehicles. It is true that internal combustion engines run extremely well on a diet of pure BG (which is explosive used this way). However, with the most efficient technology I know, the amount of power required to produce the BG is still several times more than the power the engine can produce while operating on BG.   Our retail machines operate at about 3 watt-hours per liter of Brown's Gas STP. This has been independently tested by a renowned research lab in Toronto. This is measuring the TOTAL power drawn from the wall and contains all power supply inefficiencies. This is considerably more efficient than the obsolete technology promoted by Dennis Lee, which (according to my tests) runs close to 6 watt-hours per liter of BG.   NOTE:   Brown's Gas can be used to increase the efficiency of combustion of carbon based fuels. This has been well proven with many studies, many of them by NASA. A tiny amount of BG, created by the engine's alternator can improve combustion efficiency so significantly that the power used is more than made up for by the power gained. Typically this gain was somewhere about 5%, not enough to get excited over. With our innovations, people can expect 10% gains; this is enough to be interesting. This technology can increase the efficiency of external combustion too.   >Right. Converting electrical energy to mechanical energy by >electrolyzing water and then feeding the resulting hydrogen to an >internal combustion engine is always going to be inefficient because >of the heat conversion step. Electric motors do the job far more >simply, and at very high efficiency.   Exactly. Further, although Brown's Gas can be used to create a very pure vacuum, mechanical vacuum pumps (driven by electric motors) do so several times more efficiently. So I add 'potential' applications that simply use vacuum, like food dehydration, to the 'impractical' list.   >So, while we're dispelling myths about "Brown's Gas", how about >dispelling the persistent myth that it consists of monatomic hydrogen >and monatomic oxygen? Even when pure, monatomic hydrogen and oxygen >are both *far* too reactive to be stable at anything approaching >standard temperatures and pressures, much less when mixed with each >other.   I'd love to prove or dispel this myth. So far, tests have been inconclusive. Gas spectrometer does show bumps at 1 and 16, indicating monatomic hydrogen and oxygen. We also find a substantial bump at 18, (indicating water moisture) in a gas that was dried. So far, the only thing I can say with certainty is that we are producing about 30% more gas volume than we should, assuming diatomic hydrogen and oxygen according to Faraday equations. 1 liter of water (from our electrolyzers) will make about 1200 liters of BG STP. Since we cannot explain this consistent anomaly, we are examining any theory we come across, without prejudice, till we can actually find out what's going on. I suspect it won't take too much longer, maybe a year or so.   Brown's Gas has been used commercially since the early 1960's, mostly in the jewelry industry as micro-torches. We are the first to make a large commercially viable machine, highly efficient and user-friendly at a reasonable cost. So this is the first time there has been a serious reason for testing to find out gas characteristics. In the meantime, what is actually happening doesn't really matter. What matters is that it is practical for our customers, doing what it is advertised to do.   >I am not a part of the conspiracy suppressing free >energy. I hate seeing this pipe dream sold to people >who spend the rest of their lives chasing ghosts of >someone who had free energy. I can give you stories >of people greatly injured by chasing this pipe dream.   Brown's Gas gets a lot of negative publicity because it is being promoted by entities that do not fully disclose it's disadvantages with the advantages, generally promoting Myths. We are doing our best to find the places that Brown's Gas is clearly a superior option to existing market choices, then provide the knowledge and equipment for people to take advantage of those opportunities. There are many astonishing applications that are NOT Myths and are being proven by independent testing.   >One other minor point about Brown's gas. If it really >implodes. Why doesn't it stop the piston suck to the >top of the compression stroke and stop.   That is a semi-Myth. BG is implosive only in very specific, nearly impossible to achieve situations. Consider it explosive. After an explosion, in a sealed container, there will be a net vacuum as the oxygen and hydrogen convert to water, reducing volume by about 1800 times. There has been proposed an 'atmospheric' engine, where BG makes a vacuum in the cylinder and atmospheric pressure pushes the piston up to the head. While this would 'function', it isn't practical, because the power needed to create the BG is many times more than the power you'd get out of the 'implosion' engine.   NOTE:   A BG flame burns with what I call a 'net' implosion, creating a very long thin flame as it makes a 'tunnel' in the air. The flame is exploding, then imploding, on a continuous basis, creating a net vacuum that draws in nearby smoke.   >So-called "Brown's gas" is nothing more than a stoichiometric >H2-O2 mixture.   That is our position at this time, until we have proof otherwise. However, testing has shown that the available energy in the gas is higher than using bottled H2:O2. Again, an anomaly we have not figured out but a boon for our customers.   > It's not even a particularly good for welding, as >acetylene yields much more energy per unit from the breaking of its >triple bond.   This comparison is apples and oranges. True, acetylene yields (if I remember correctly) about 20 times more heat, (mostly in radiant energy) per volume of gas. However, in our testing, Brown's Gas flame has several advantages over any other carbon-based torch fuel. Some examples below:   On a BTU to BTU basis, BG heats materials faster and hotter than acetylene. BG seems to heat the material 'directly' instead of wasting large amounts of radiant heat.   BG exhaust is pure water (usually steam), totally nonpolluting and environmentally compatible.   BG does not burn oxygen from atmosphere (taking operator oxygen) and can burn in blind holes or vacuums.   BG is created 'on-demand' so no storage of torch gas bottles is needed. And, except for cutting thick iron, no oxygen bottles are needed either. Cutting thin materials can be done with just the flame, no 'preheat' oxygen needed.   BG can be created at a fraction of the cost of all bottled torch gasses. It's only costs are water and electricity.   BG can cut iron faster than acetylene, using about 30% less oxygen.   Except for iron, BG welds far faster and easier than any other torch gas. However, when it comes right down to it, no torch gas (including BG) can compete against electric welding techniques. People don't weld with torches if they have arc.   BG is a superior TORCH gas, that's why we call our machines 'WaterTorches'. Our competition calls their machines Water Welders, which I think causes people to assume application at which BG cannot compete. As a TORCH fuel, BG cuts, solders, preheats, brazes, flame drills, flame polishes, plasma spray, etc. far faster, cleaner, easier and less expensively than ANY other torch fuel.   So the statement (above) that BG isn't particularly good for welding is true, in my opinion, but not because of the energy available by breaking atomic bonds (compared to acetylene). Except for iron, BG actually welds materials (like copper, aluminum, cast iron, quartz, etc.) faster (with the same sized torch tips) than acetylene.   Note: BG can't make good welds in iron because it tends to oxidize the weld. This disadvantage is actually an advantage because few people actually weld iron with any torch fuel (they use arc); people use torch fuels to CUT iron, where the oxidation effect of BG causes it to cut iron faster than any other torch gas.   So, BG is extremely marketable, once we were able to substantially reduce the price of the machines. In addition to the use as a torch fuel, many other practical applications are now being developed, all because it is now affordable.   > So what makes it different for "Brown's Gas" vs. regular electrolysis?   Brown's Gas electrolysis is usually more efficient than traditional electrolysis because the BG electrolyzers are designed NOT to separate the hydrogen and oxygen. When you separate the gasses, the very apparatus required to do so causes additional resistance in the machine, which lowers efficiency.   Our electrolyzers use a modified form of an electrolyzer design called 'bipolar', where each plate actually produces both hydrogen AND oxygen, while acting as cell separators. This technique (combined with Capacitive Amperage Limiting technology) allows us to make quiet, simple, low cost, smaller, lightweight, extremely efficient high voltage and low amperage electrolyzers.   > How many watt hours of energy can be recovered >from a liter of "Brown's Gas"?   That depends on the means of energy recovery and (at this time) is entirely standard. Assume using a stoichiometric 2H2:O2 mixture.  


READER COMMENTS (top)   >Mr. Wiseman - > >Thanks for your very informative manuals. A few paragraphs in the bubbler >revision manual caught my eye where you describe double mileage just by >venting the >pickup's dual tanks with 1/2" lines up to the air cleaner. I've removed >the tank on my test car and would like to know where and how you plumbed >into the tank. Thanks >a lot for your time.   That was done on a fuel injected vehicle. Using a simple water heated heat exchanger, I heated the fuel that was being returned to the fuel tank and then took the resulting vapors into the air cleaner.   I put the vapor-out hoses in the fuel tank filler tube (you want the vapor -out to be as high as possible to prevent fuel being pulled up), then I put in a liquid-vapor separator, then a backfire filter. In some applications I needed a fuel pump (signaled with a float switch) to pump the fuel out of the liquid-vapor separator. Finally, you need an electronic air-fuel controller to cut back on the fuel used by the regular fuel system when vapors are available.   This simple technique often doubled my mileage. While I don't have a book specifically on this, the technology to do it exists in my books.   --------------------   >George this looks very similar to your devices... So I thought I would >send it your way for a look see by you. >THANKS for all of you efforts That I never see.... but know that you do ! >Marv http://www.utexas.edu/admin/opa/news/01newsreleases/nr_200101/nr_pollution010108.php (link has gone ) 


COMING UP (top)     December/2002 will feature Electric Vehicles *********************************************************************


PROVEN RESULTS ON FILE FAIR MARKETING DISCLAIMER TESTIMONIAL DISCLAIMER Eagle-Research advocates fair marketing practices in all endevours.  Therefore, in support of government efforts to protect the common good, we have created these icons (left).   Statements on this page may be subject to any or all of these self-policing icons.   Click on the icons for detailed information.
Do you really need a car?
Think Different
Spider Search
Powered Search 
Get Firefox 2 Get Adobe Reader