The World Balance Through Free Energy Project

Dr. Timothy A. Binder

Sourced from Fulcrum Magazine Volume 3 No. 2 – The Journal of the University of Science and Philosophy

Readers of Fulcrum are already familiar with the past demonstrations of transmutation that Ron Kovac, Toby Grotz and myself have achieved and here is a brief summary of that work: Working with one possible geometrical shape of the magnetic fields that Walter Russell
described in A New Concept of the Universe, we were able to apparently demonstrate the transmutation of water vapor into fluorine and nitrogen as reported in Fulcrum, Vol. 1, #2. In further unreported experiments, we succeeded in transmuting nitrogen into hydrogen and several other elements.

These experiments differed from what Russell described in that we were using vacuum tubes and vapor as opposed to tubes with “a few millimeters of water” in them. We reasoned that Russell must have had incredibly strong tubes to be able to withstand the tremendous pressures that water heated to red hot temperatures would produce and that the same phenomena could be produced under vacuum and in a plasma state with lower pressures.

Russell heated the tubes, thrust them into the magnetic field arrangement to cool down and from the evidence of lab results achieved transmutation of water into nitrogen. Russell stated that he achieved the transmutation of water into seventeen different results where, “in every case the resultant gases differed”. By these means, he was able to vary the amounts of transmuted hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen.

Russell stated that by shifting the field arrangement and/or the polarity strengths he was able to prolate or oblate the oxygen nucleus into nitrogen or hydrogen and vice versa. We found by shifting the shapes of the magnetic fields with our “transmutator” after heating our gas samples in the emission photospectrometer by running an electric current through the plasma and then allowing the heated gas to cool down in our magnetic field arrangement, we were able to demonstrate transmutations as identified by photo emission spectroscopy.

In June and July of 1994 with the funds that had been donated to the Russell Science Research by Barbara Edwards and Frances Allison, Ron Kovac was able to assemble and bring on-line a computerized mass spectrometer (CMS – also called a residual gas analyzer). This device gives the most widely accepted irrefutable evidence for the transmutation experiments that we are doing.

In July of 1994 after Ron had assembled the CMS we embarked upon a simple series of experiments designed to show the transmutation of nitrogen gas plasma into hydrogen gas. We were working with a different arrangement than used previously to shape the magnetic fields.
We knew that to go from nitrogen to hydrogen required a jump down from the fourth to the third octave, and that this would likely mean a tremendous pressure change would be necessary and/or demonstrated.

As the experiments were being conducted, we had continuous monitoring of what was occurring in the CMS by printed readout as well as a video recording of the sequence. What Ron later observed on study of the data was truly amazing. In our first run, we had transmuted the nitrogen gas plasma (14N) into helium4 (4He) and lithium5 (5Li) in the amounts of 3.75% and 2.5%, respectively, from the parent nitrogen gas. The transmutation had occurred not when we expected it to, namely after being heated and then allowed to cool down in the field, but simply as the plasma was sitting in the field before any heating.

This was later repeated with the same results using the CMS and leaving the field arrangements unchanged. This gives us more data to work with to establish the exact conditions necessary to transmute any element into any other element. We will get more as we are able to do more experiments and observe what different field conditions and temperatures produce. Ron’s paper as printed in this issue describes the experiments we have done in terms of cold fusion and in terms of Karl Gauss’s geometry. I will now comment on his descriptions and show
the relationship between Gauss’s and Russell’s geometries as I understand them.

First, let’s notice that the creation of lithium5 from nitrogen was remarkable from two aspects; number one it was a transmutation of nitrogen into lithium which by conventional science is impossible; the number two point is that 5Li is proclaimed by standard literature and science to be non-existent. Before our July experiments, this particular atomic structure and mass of lithium (5Li) was one of the missing links in the nucleonic tables; its existence had been predicted but never demonstrated.

Transmutation of 14N to 5Li, a heretofore unseen and unknown isotope of lithium, is significant for this research team in that there is no way the experimenters could have seeded or contaminated their results. The results are indisputable and can be easily reproduced in any
sophisticated laboratory.

Let’s also notice that the viewpoint in Ron’s article was craftily chosen and put in the language of cold fusion terminology in an attempt to circumvent resistance to the view and language of transmutation; and because cold fusion is where attention is focused in new energy research. Thus, he begins his article saying that “the cold fusion process that gave these results uses only plasma of N2 and magnetic shaping”. He immediately puts the reference box for the article in the cold fusion arena rather than transmutation. He assumes that a cold fusion process occurs as we created 4He which are the “common ashes of cold fusion”.

Ron cites the many different methods and materials that have been used to demonstrate cold fusion in several very prominent research facilities since Fleischman and Pons did their first cold fusion experiments in 1989 in Utah. He then makes the profound point throughout his article that all of these many different processes are all functioning because of a common fundamental feature: namely the “geometry of space bending”.

In Russell’s words, all there is to the material universe is motion in two basic directions: into and away from a system center. These basic archetypes of motion create different gyroscopic forms or variations on a vortex creating variations on nature’s two basic forms, the cube and the sphere, male and female, respectively.

What Ron is pointing out is that all the various cold fusion processes are in their own fashion working by engineering the bending of space or the formation of vortexual motion focusing heat and light in the center of the system and radiating that intense tightly wound up motion back out as energy (heat of cold fusion) or mass of elemental transmutation via the vortex equatorial plane. This latter manifestation is identical to our sun or any solar system generating heat and baby planets out of itself by way of the equatorial plane. See pp. 223-230 of The Universal One for Russell’s description of this universal phenomenon.

In Ron’s toroid knot analogy, he says that energy is expressed by unraveling the knot back out the central (polar) axis and matter is expressed by leaving the knot system at 90° or right angles to the central axis.

This appears to me to be dissimilar to Russell’s cosmogony in that energy and mass increase by way of the polar central axis in centripetal direction and they both decrease by way of the equatorial axis through centrifugal motion. Russell says the knot is wound up by the north-south charging poles and unwinds via the east-west discharging equatorial poles. He does not allow the knot to unwind in the same axis that it winds up in. He says that the direction of winding when it reverses is now not the central axis anymore, but the equatorial axis that is at 90° to the central axis. When this unwinding process reaches its end at cube wave field boundaries it then reverses direction and potential and becomes a polar central winding up axis. Russell says that matter and energy turn inside-out and outside in.

If we understand Ron’s unraveling of the knot through the central axis to mean what I have stated as Russell’s cosmogony, only then are they congruent. This is why in Russell’s diagrams of wave motion he shows both pairs of spirals winding and unwinding within each other, which Ron has shown on page 28 of his article in a similar way where he has a pseudosphere and catenoid superimposed on each other. Here, I interpret the pseudosphere to be the wind up spiral motion and the catenoid the unwinding spiral motion with the toroid knot representing the mass formation and the spirals of pseudosphere-catenoid geometry representing the space that is becoming matter or matter that is becoming space.

Ron makes the salient point that none of the materials that the various researchers have used are essential. The only essential is what Ron is calling “the bending of space geometry”. The “bending of space geometry” is a vortex motion controlled by electric potential fields that
science calls magnetic and electric fields that curve low potential motion in a centripetal direction to form density and high potential and curve high potential motion in a centrifugal direction to form tenuity and low potential. This process is a focusing and unfocusing of light-
motion. When seen in this light, all the various successful cold fusion experiments can be understood to function on this basis. All the unsuccessful experiments, or those that start and then heretofore inexplicably stop, are now understood in terms of the successful or not successful bending of space geometry or vortex formation. For example, if the surface of a metal used in the experiment is not conditioned properly to maximize the holes in it that guide the vortex, there will be no reaction; or if the intense heat generated in the hole by the vortex melts the metal and fuses the hole shut and so on to fusing all shut, then the reaction will stop. The point is to create a vortex and control it.

With our quartz plasma tube and electrodes at each end and externally focused magnetic fields, we were able to generate this geometry of space bending or vortex formation in such a way that we changed the vortex motion of nitrogen (14N) to the vortex motion of 5Li and 4He. The final quantitative analysis (performed by measuring and comparing the relative peak heights on the CMS charts) of the first processing showed 2.5% 5Li, 3.75% 4He and the remaining 93.75% as untransformed nitrogen. When we reprocessed the same tube, the percentage of 5Li went to 6.5%. This was done with little temperature change, and if temperatures were modified, we might have vastly increased the amounts of transmuted lithium and helium.

Ron says that what we had done was a cold fusion process, although we did not measure any excess heat released, even though it may have occurred. At least part of his basis for claiming that it was cold fusion was because of the common hall mark of cold fusion in the appearance of 4He. It is worth mentioning that many different transmutations have been observed in cold fusion experiments even though transmutation was not the purpose of the experiment, much as we observed the creation of 5Li in an unexpected way from our experiment. Our future experiments need to quantify any excess heat production (or even possible cooling), pressure changes, mass balances, and beta, alpha and neutron particle emission as vortex motion quantity and quality are changed in direction and degree.

If we did achieve the observed results through a fusion process as conventionally understood, we should be able to show the reactant pathways. For example, 100% 14N + magnetic fields f 93.75% 14N + 3.75% 4He + 2.5% 5Li by what mechanics and geometrical transformation?

Since all we had was nitrogen gas and magnetic field shaping and ended up with two additional elements, we cannot really call it a cold fusion process as there were not two elements that could be fused to form a new one as in conventional thinking. Rather, we had one state of motion identified as nitrogen that was changed to some amount of two new states of motion. The vortex known as nitrogen was subject to an external magnetic field vortex (what Russell calls an electric field) that changed some of the nitrogen vortexes to other shaped vortexes or from a gyroscope spinning in the plane of nitrogen to those spinning in the planes of 5Li and 4He.

Ron explains the cold fusion and transmutation processes in terms of Karl Gauss’s pseudospherecatenoid geometry determining the bending of space to form what Ron then calls toroid knots. Let’s again look at these ideas and geometries and see further how Russell described all of them in his cosmogony.

To me the pseudosphere appears to correspond to the centripetally winding up male preponderance integrating vortex, and the catenoid corresponds to the centrifugally unwinding female preponderance disintegrating vortex. The toroid knot corresponds to the more or less
spherical form at the center of mass formation, the atomic nucleus of modern science that Russell describes as varying forms of prolating and oblating spheres, the true sphere being a special case known as carbon. The prolating spheres are formed from rings winding up by being thrust inward centripetally to eventually close a hole at the center to form a sphere at the carbon element wave amplitude position standing upright gyroscopic plane position. Oblating spheres are formed as rings are centrifugally projected outward from the system center, forming gradually bigger holes in the former spheres center, as the gyroscope spins slower and lies down through the third, second and first locking point potential positions.

In Russell’s cosmogony, the two centripetal vortices spin in the same direction if you look at each base to assess the spin direction. In this way, they pull or are thrust into each other or create a high potential gravity center with heat. The centrifugal spirals that exit at 90° to this high potential-heat center spin in the same direction as their parent spirals, one going one way and its pair the other way if you consider their spin direction from their mutual base or the same way if you look at the spin from their apexes.

Fulcrum editor Chester Hatstat has suggested another analogy to explain this motion that further clarifies the toroid knot analogy. He says why not think of the two centripetal vortices as joining apex to apex and heated at that point which will make them more malleable and subject to expansion. If you blow into both or either base end of the vortex spirals, the common heated center will expand in a balloon like, toroid, or spheroid fashion. Why not indeed? This is what happens at the center of the vortex. The center of the cyclone is where things are hot and malleable and cannot stay compressed into form and thus expand centrifugally outward to cool. Ron gives us an interesting and useful gravity mechanics in the form of two hoses in an aquarium pumping water out. These two hoses each represent atomic mass systems. The faster the pump works the more mass it will demonstrate. Two such pumps in proximity tend to attract each other if their mutual charging vortexes align. If we go on and notice that instead of aligning charging (sucking or vacuum) vortexes, we align their discharging (pushing or pressure) vortexes, which is where the other end of the hoses are discharging under thrusting pressure rather than intake, vacuum or charging vacuum, they will mutually repel. This is an application of Bernoulli’s theorem about water pressure in a pipe used as more than an analogy to describe gravity mechanics as it is a real model of gravity mechanics. See my answers to questions article about gravity mechanics and Bernoulli’s theorem for a description of this model. Anything that demonstrates attraction and repulsion demonstrates gravity by the whole of the Russell Cosmogony.

In this way we can see how gravity as a whole process as exhibited in a universal systems model called the vortex demonstrates an inward thrust (or pull depending on point of view) and an outward thrust (or again a pull depending on point of view). Attraction and repulsion between two entities are thus seen to be dependent in part on vortex alignment. Other factors influencing attraction and repulsion include all other seventeen dimensions described in The Universal One. The dimension corresponding to what I am describing as vortex alignment appears to me to be plane of rotation. It is Russell’s view that understanding this alignment of vortex gyroscopic planes of motion is crucial to successful demonstration of transmutations and is an essential mechanical explanation for the underlying modus operandi as he stated in A New Concept Of The Universe on pages 90, 91, & 129.

Ron describes toroid knot formation in an easily understandable way for us by the analogy of winding up a rubber band to form knots in the center. This rubber band winding is the space bending of motion in the geometry of the pseudosphere that Karl Gauss described to form mass and is the same centripetally directed motion to the gravity center of a system and mass formation that Russell described as the appearance of matter in variations of spherical-cubical forms with the true sphere and true cube as special cases.

Ron goes on to describe that this tightly wound toroid (centripetally bound and compressed) mass can then either unwind back through its axis (as it turns inside-out) as energy production (heat, electricity and/or light), or it can unwind equatorially as a catenoid spiral in secondary
mass formation to form various elements. Thus we see mass-energy transformations occurring again as in Russell’s descriptions of motion to and from wave field cube wall boundaries to and from mass spherical center boundaries.

As motion is progressively wound up along the centripetally directed polar axis, we witness increasing density and potential for mass transformations in the form of heat and light. As motion reverses to centrifugality and is spun out in decreasing speed from wave field-mass
centers, we witness matter frozen into form and the ever decreasing potential for mass transformations in the form of heat and light as the mass is released into lower potential and lower potential fields as heat and light along the path of its journey.

Mass transformation are a result of the accumulation and redistribution of mass-energy, or they result from a change in the condition of motion to or away from a system center or change of direction of motion. Any mass as it is centrifugally directed to lower pressure zones expresses and radiates electromagnetic (EM) energy becoming cooler, dimmer and of lower voltage as it expands centrifugally outward from its system center and vice-versa. An atomic system (any system) leaks or sputters out various amounts of EM energy as it converts wound up potential into these expressions of energy-motion. The centripetal winding increases the potential of and for electric pressure, light and heat prior to, during and after the atom jumps to the next locking point position, and vice-versa as it jumps to the next lower locking point position. It would appear that the same process occurs as motion-matter jumps up or down an octave just as it does jumping up or down from one locking point to the next within the same octave. The time element in going from octave to octave as well as pressures, etc. would be significantly greater than from one locking point to another in the same octave. All expressions of motion exhibit endo- or exothermic
EM energies.

The various charts in Ron’s article show the actual measurements done by the CMS of the experiments. There is a standard specs of the nitrogen gas and then the specs showing the appearance of 4He & 5Li. The top CMS chart on page 22 shows there was no contamination of
the nitrogen with lithium or with helium before subjecting it to the magnetic field vortex shaping experiments.

All the research that we have done to date has validated Walter Russell’s basic concepts. The University is actively seeking more funding to continue this vital research. With sufficient funding to put Ron, Toby, and other scientists I have in mind to work on this research and
development full time, we should be able to produce new non polluting and sustainable energy sources and materials and help provide the physical basis for a peaceful civilization. The attention that should be focused on the Russell cosmogony as a result of continued physical
demonstration of the cosmogony in new energy sources, materials and products would also focus more attention on the spiritual nature of the Russell cosmogony and guide us to transforming all of our institutions towards balance, sustainability and peace.

Faithfully yours,
Dr. Timothy A Binder