you pointed that out, and yes, the intention recommended is iron doped
into aluminum wire. You
are quite correct about the inconsistency, and you are also correct in
concluding that the recommendation is for alloy wire made of 2% iron
doped into aluminum.
spite of best intentions, sometimes such unwitting errors do creep in,
and get through the review, and I appreciate it being pointed out so
it can be corrected.
shows that all my pencils still need erasers, and always will!
Inconsistencies (?) in "xxxprinciples_of_overunity" and
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 13:54:07
Webmaster - if that is not T. Bearden, please see that the information
reaches him - I've searched the Cheniere website a little bit and was
unable to find a more direct email address than this.
In the paper "On the Principles of Permissible Overunity EM Power
Systems " in the paragraph beginning 'So we have a "usable
412-volt potential". ... where instead of copper conductors
we are using conductors made of copper doped with 2% pure iron, as a
special alloy...', reference is made to the alloy being "copper
doped with 2% pure iron". The accompanying figure 23,
however, makes two references to Fe-doped Al wire, and one reference
to Fe-doped copper conductors. Since notes on jnaudin's site
about MEG also refer to Fe-doped aluminum conductors, I'm assuming
that is what is actually being referred to, but didn't know if you may
wish to correct the one reference in the paper, and one in the figure
to match, or, if copper is the correct actual item, to correct the two
references in the figure.
I'd also appreciate a brief reply just to indicate that this has
reached an appropriate person to apply or pass on the info, or to
indicate I need to find a different destination address.