File spoon-archives//orgonomy.archive/orgonomy_1996/96-12-13.171, message 16



Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 21:43:42 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Marrett-- orgone motor - Correa-nov14


 
 

Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 09:11:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: quinney-AT-inforamp.net
Date: 	Sat, 16 Nov 1996 12:22:32 -0500
To: vortex-l-AT-eskimo.com
From: Quinney <quinney-AT-inforamp.net>
Subject: Re: Correas Reactor..a Reichian background?
Resent-Message-ID: <"vK6r5.0.Ro6.1NVZo"-AT-mail>
Resent-From: vortex-l-AT-eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l-AT-eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l-AT-eskimo.com> archive/latest/2182
X-Loop: vortex-l-AT-eskimo.com
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request-AT-eskimo.com

Here is the letter that Doug Meritt sent to me that he had unsuccessfully
posted to Vortex ... C.Q.

X-From_: marett-AT-terraport.net Sat Nov 16 10:10 EST 1996
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:02:48 -0500
X-Sender: marett-AT-mail.terraport.net (Unverified)
To: quinney-AT-inforamp.net
From: marett-AT-terraport.net (Douglas M. Marett)
Subject: Correa Reactor
Content-Length: 10707

Nov. 14th, 1996

I would like to address the comments of Mike Carrell below, which refer to
an article
on my web site called "The Orgone Motor Mystery Solved". My web site is at
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2514 . 


     I saw the PAGD effect first in 1992-1993 and recognized it as the same
phenomenon as that seen in Reich's VACOR tube video from 1950, which is
regularily shown at the Wilhelm Reich museum. In April, 1994, when Correas
PCT applications were first laid open, and I began replicating his
experiments, it became clear that what he was calling PAGD was identical to
the pulse phenomenon seen in the Reich video. And I must stress identical -
any observer performing Correas experiment and then examining the Reich's
film would clearly see this. I am not attempting to claim that I saw the
PAGD before Reich or Correa; its obvious that I saw it last. However, what I
am merely pointing out is that the phenomenon are identical. I do not need
to speculate whether Paulo and Alex got the idea from Reich - I was there, I
helped with some of the initial experiments, and most importantly, Paulo
told me that this was the case. I am not attempting to belittle the Correas
work - I think that it may very well be an excellent piece of scientific
work. The point of my article was really to spell out that the Correas
discovered these things while attempting to replicate Reich's experiments,
and although they have certainly gone well beyond Reich,  Reich deserves a
written  mention,  at least somewhere. Paulo and I had several conversations
in the past about people deriving inventions from the work of Reich and not
giving him credit, and how bad that was. That is why this situation is so
ironic.

    I invite anyone interested to look at the similarities between the
article by Wilhelm
Reich, entitled "The Orgone Charged Vacuum Tubes(1948)" in The Oranur
Experiment, available from the Wilhelm Reich Museum, P.O. Box 687, Rangeley,
Maine, 04970,  and the Correa patents. To list a few similarities, please
see below:

1) In the Correas U.S. Patent # 5,502,354, Fig.3 and 4 are virtually
identical to
Fig. 7 from the above mentioned Reich article.

2) Also from U.S. patent #5,502,354, the Correas use curved electrodes in
Fig. 5B
This is identical to the electrode construction of tubes on display at the
museum.

3) Reich felt that log2 numbers were very important, such as for pendulum
lengths, etc., and incorporated this into his tube design, using plates
which were 4 x 16 cm in size (64 cm2 and in one case 4 x32cm, or 128 cm2).
A 64cm2 tube is shown in figure 7 of the Reich article.The Correas have
taken these exact plate dimensions and reproduced them in their experiments-
see table 2, U.S. patent 5,502,354.

4) The Processing of vacua protocol on page 9 of U.S. patent #5,502,354 is
very similar to the protocol used by Reich, P.251 in "The Orgone Charged
Vacuum Tubes".

5) The claims of U.S. Patent #5,502,354 read on the prior art as found in
Reich's article. The only difference is that the Correas have added a
scientific explanation in
the claims. The end result is the same, since both Reich's tubes and those
of Correas 
sustain PAGD emissions. However, patent law does not oblige the inventor to
disclose references which could be of this nature. It is up to the examiner
or a complainant to raise the issue, and once raised, if legitimate, can be
grounds for re-examination of the patent. Thus from a legal standpoint, it
is entirely in the Correa's interest to keep quite about Reich, hoping that
this reference would not surface. 

>Marett built a tube similar in configuration to ones used by Reich and Correa
>and observed discharges, including the conical discahrge columns, similar to
>those seen in the Correa reactors. Marett says "However, it is not known
>whether circuits using this unique tube design would generate excess
>energy".
>The circuit Marett shows as his Fig 6 has a capacitor connected
>***directly*** across the tube, makiing it a classic glow-discharge
>relaxation oscillator. Readers of my articles on the Correa invention in IE
>should be aware that a) it does not operate as a relaxation oscillator and b)
>a shunt capacitor or energy collection circuit is not necessary to obtain the
>energy bursts. 

 In my experiments with replicating Reich's VACOR work, I found that
it was possible to see the so called "PAGD" type pulses without the use of 
any deliberate addition of a parallel capacitor to the tube. However, with
most of my experiments, I did not have rechargable battery packs and thus
had to used H.V. supplies which always have some form of regulating
capacitor in parallel. However, if this capacitance is low enough and the
impedance of the supply is low enough, a glow discharge tube will not
oscillate as you describe.
In several experiments (videotaped) I deliberately used parallel capacitors
of high value to produce pulsations in glow discharge tubes, and the running
of motors as control experiments. This was done with arc discharges, vacuum
arc discharges and glow discharges. However, in the higher vacuum range, it
becomes increasingly more difficult to produce glow discharges by these
means, ie in the 1E-1 to 1E-2 range. If relaxation oscillations occur in
this region, they become very weak and indiscenable from the glow. 
    Correa's PAGD phenomenon allegedly can operate without a parallel
capacitance. However, if and when this occurs, the pulses are very rapid and
of low joule energy per pulse. In my experiments with small or no parallel
capacitors in Correa's device, the efficiency is very poor and of little
consequence. If you examine Correa's patent application # 5,449,989, fig. 8, 
you will see that he has in fact C3,C4 and C5 in parallel with the tube.
Also, in figure 11, the motor run circuit has C3,C4 and C5 in parallel with
the tube.
In fact, this circuit is very similar to the one of mine which you have
mentioned, except my tube is in series. In either case, transient current
flow only passes through the motor when capacitors C3-C5 discharge through
the tube. This is somewhat similar to Correa's Fig.9. He uses very large
capacitors, C3 and C5, which  must charge before and pulse can occur. The
high joule energy of C3 and C5 pass through the tube, and the output is
rectified.This discharges C3 and C5, and the next pulse will not occur until
these capacitors have recharged and the voltage across the tube again reaches 
the threshold voltage. This can be demonstrated easily by having voltage
meters in the circuit, which I regularly did. The utility of this is that
very high joule energy is allowed to pass across the tube, and the recovered
energy is logarithmically related to the amount of this current flow. Thus
you can't explain  my experiments, about which you know very little, as a
relaxation oscillator, without applying the same arguement to Correa's. In
reality, the key element is the tube, its vacuum level, gas filling, and
architecture, which determine whether the pulses will be self-extinguishing.
Also, in my experiment, I used a tube of unusual architecture and gas
filling, which I feel was creating its own self-extinguishing pulses. This
tube design was considerably different from Correa's. I really put this in
the article only to show that it is possible to arrive at these kinds of
experimental  arrangements by replicating the work of Reich.

>Marett goes on to say that he began replicating the Correa's work the week
>after the application was laid open, and says he saw discharge forms similar
>to those seen in pictures in the Reich museum. I have seen them also in a
>discharge chamber built by Jeff Fink, but they do not produce excess energy.
>It is only after Marett saw the Correa application that he introduced the
>"low impedance" source. He blurs this; it is essential to have a driving
>source which is internally rugged and stable, ***and*** the correct current
>limiter, which my be only a few hundred ohms with the rather large >electrode
>areas. Marett claims to have produced excess energy in the manner of the
>Correas, ***after*** reading their application. 

The above paragraph is somewhat incoherent, but I will attempt to address it
below. 
    Reich would have had to have a relatively low impedance power supply,
otherwise he would not have seen PAGD pulses, especially at the high vacuums
he was operating at. Reich either was unaware of the importance of this, or
just didn't mention it. Now that I have performed the Correa experiments, I
can tell you that it is not that important to have a low impedance supply,
since the capacitors C3 andC5 will charge just the same.
However, the pulse rate will depend on the current supply, and thus if you
want fast pulsing, you need a high current, low impedance supply. Otherwise,
it will pulse maybe once a minute. However, that pulse could still produce
free energy. What is important is how many joules are stored on C3 and C5
prior to firing. 
Secondly, I never claimed to have produced free energy before the Correa's
experiment was performed. You are merely repeating what I said.

>In conversation with me, Correa has referred to the existence of Reich's
>work. It may be true that Marett brought Reich's work to Correa's attention.
>It may be true that there are similar configurations in structure. None of
>these are of the essence of the Correa's discovery, which is an ***operating
>mode*** which evokes the very powerful energy bursts. There is no >evidence
>that Reich saw *these*, or Marett, before he saw the Correa patent
>applications.

I never brought Reich's work to the existance of Correa. Correa and I were
both interested in the work on Reich when we first met, and continued to be
so during our entire relationship of 14 years. 
The Correa's have most certainly gone far beyond the work of Reich, and have
developed a unique device based on what appears to have been a monumental
research effort.  Reich never claimed to have discovered free energy in PAGD
type pulses, and neither have I.

     I think that there is shame on the Correas only because Reich was a major
inspiration to there work, and yet has received no written mention. The
Correa's have been quite complimentary to other inpirations, such as the
work of Aspden. Obviously, the work of several individuals helped the
Correa's along the way, most of whom have been referenced in their patents.
These include even minor influences, such as Tanberg and Pappas. However,
Reich is conspicuously absent. This was a deliberate omission on the part of
the Correas, considering their history of replicating Reich's work, and thus
the reason for my comments. 

Doug Marett M.Sc.









     --- from list orgonomy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005