Inventor Robert Adams appears to have broken the gravity barrier, with his advanced Adams Electric Motor Generator operating in a high state of resonance and apparently tapping gravitational energy.

"During the later months of 1992, I derived what I considered to be an equation for possibly the ultimate in rotary motor generator design. The purpose of this exercise, was to ascertain whether further unconventional design features of the machine parameters, using this equation, proved certain theories which I had previously discussed with Mr. Bruce Cathie, an internationally recognized New Zealand researcher in this field. (Cathie is the 'father' of grid harmonics)

Upon applying the 'equation' to the machine parameters and testing it, there was no doubt the machine was running in a higher state of resonance than previously obtained.

It had been arranged beforehand between myself and Mr. Cathie that, should the results of this test be of some substance, Mr. Cathie would travel from Auckland to Whakatane specifically to check the machine parameters with his 'harmonic equations'. These results confirmed the theory which we had previously discussed and planned to implement.

The results of these first trial tests have been SUPERCEDED, with the new figures obtained being found beyond anything that is known of in the present- day field of free energy research. There is every possibility that these latest figures, also, will be surpassed in the near future.

The equations and how they are applied are hidden within certain parameters, and, to this end, it could be said that to reach the ultimate in rotary overunity devices is not possible without the correct application to all
parameters of the machine using the 'Adams Pulse Method' and the Adams-Cathie equations.

The above methods and results give us a valuable lead in the realm of solid-state gravitational energy research. The equations and methods of application in design procedures, however, remain, at this stage, secret. The efficiency figures possible from the device are such that they simply cannot be published.

I wish readers to refer further to the following discussions on Wilhelm Muller and Dr. Rolf Schaffranke, the general content of which relates to my discovery of the mysteries of magnetism some twenty-four years ago."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Reference to an article authored by Tom Valentine, California based freelance journalist, in regard to claims by Wilhelm Muller and his magnet manufacturers.

I must take Muller and his magnet manufacturers to task on their statement that "magnets can do a tremendous amount of work" - this is not so. In an over-unity rotary machine, the magnets are 'assisting' to run the machine, but they are not generating the extra energy beyond the reaching of 100% efficiency. The magnets are not doing actual work, as such, beyond that point.

It is likely Muller's machine is operating, according to the efficiency figure Muller quoted, somewhere on the near lower end of a positive resonance curve. From the generally known information on his device, this would be the likely area in which it is operating. If this is so, then the chances of greater efficiency are slim, particularly on account of it appearing to be operating in a positive mode. For the rotor magnets to operate as a gate to harness gravitational energy beyond unity, it must be in a negatively resonant mode and not operating in a closed magnetic circuit system.

Bruce Cathie and I spent an entire day together in January 1993 going over his harmonic equations in regard to my advanced machine, and confirmed that it was running in an advanced state of resonance, harnessing gravitational energy and demonstrating evidence of the magnets forming a 'gate' to harness one half-
cycle of the gravitational pulse, but doing no actual work over and above the 100%.

In regard to another claim by Muller that he had to use powerful neodymium magnets, this also is contrary to our findings. It matters not whether you use standard off-the-shelf 'alnico' magnets or powerful magnets, the results are no different. It is not necessary to use powerful magnets to prove if a machine can be constructed with over unity capability. This fact has been shown repeatedly with the Adams machines, using small and weak magnets.

The inference also that Nikola Tesla might have required today's advanced magnetic materials to achieve over unity results, is also totally wrong. The only difference between using ordinary magnets like 'alnico' and, for instance, 'samarium cobalt', is that you get greater energy output from the stronger magnets by way of their ability to detect and amplify this energy on a greater scale; and, therefore, upon utilizing the Adams pulsing system, you can have a device using any ordinary magnets capable of not only 100% efficiency, but also of being tuned into operating as a gate in detecting and delivering gravitational energy.

As for the establishment's texts stating that "magnets do NO real work", the establishment, for once, is correct. It is, however, interesting to note that this is a very 'convenient' fact for the establishment to expound upon - there could be an underlying inference here that magnets are useless for machines designed to achieve beyond unity results.

Permanent magnets and their place in science today need to be more fully understood."

"Reference to an article written by Dr. Schaffranke in THE MANUAL OF FREE ENERGY DEVICES AND SYSTEMS, VOLUME TWO, published by D.A. Kelly, in which on page 7, paragraphs 7 and 12, Dr. Schaffranke erroneously maintains it is NECESSARY to use super magnets to tap gravitational energy.

I found that my original 1970 open magnetic circuit motor generator is superior to my 1976 closed magnetic circuit model in regard to the results of obtaining and maintaining a correct harmonic vacuum oscillation and so tapping gravitational energy during one half-cycle of the gravitational pulse wave.

People who make such claims regarding the use of super magnets, obviously have little or no experience in the realms of rotary free-energy devices using permanent magnets. Over twenty years ago, I proved that even tiny weak magnets bought off the shelf and incorporated into my machines yielded efficiency into the hundreds of per cent over unity.

A permanent magnet is an entity unto itself. It is no different in any way whatsoever from its brothers made of different materials; it is still a permanent magnet irrespective of its gauss rating.

These claims are tantamount to saying that you can get more than 2.2 volts out of a lead acid cell simply by increasing its ampere hour rating, or conversely, you use a ten horsepower motor to run a machine that only requires one horsepower.

I reiterate - the sooner science rejects conventionalism, the better for humankind.

If indeed magnets were doing a tremendous amount of work, they certainly would not last long in any machine. There are secrets and mysteries surrounding magnets and collapsing field energies, and only after exhaustive studies of these two phenomena in practice, do these mysteries unravel themselves and emerge in their glory, and, correctly applied through the use of the required mathematics, pave the way to tapping gravitational energy in astronomical quantity.

For high-power rotary machines, however, super magnets are the obvious choice, for reasons of higher power capabilities, reduced weight and volume. When installed in an 'Adams' machine, these super magnets enable the opening up of clearances between rotor and stator without appreciable loss due to the high
overall efficiency of this machine.

If indeed it were possible to induce magnets to do a tremendous amount of work, as claimed by the aforementioned people, then I claim that the magnets must first have very substantial energy imparted to them to undertake the task ahead. Secondly, when reaching this 'tremendous' state, they would start heating up and continue to do so until they reach the point whereby their magnetism would begin disintegrating, and continue to do so until the machine would eventually come to a halt, unable to start again.

There are a lot of people out there striving for the ultimate in rotary electrical machines. They all have my personal blessings for their endeavors, but may I hasten to add for those who make such claims, that they
exhibit a lack of experience and knowledge of the capabilities of permanent magnets in rotary electrical machines.

But don't be disappointed, readers, as I assure you that permanent magnets are indeed the answer to free energy. Correctly adapted to a rotary machine they are the 'gateway' to harnessing gravitational energy.

With the application of the 'Adams resonant pulse frequency equation' and the 'Cathie harmonic equations' combined with the 'Adams Pulsed EMG System', incredible energies can be very easily and cleanly made available.

I wish to state to all readers at this particular stage, that I have only, in the past year, made the decision to publish certain aspects from my twenty years work in the field of free energy research.

There are no doubt many other researchers who, for various reasons such as lack of finance, fear, suppression and very many other barriers, have not had even a chance to be heard. It is to be hoped the day will soon arrive when all can benefit from our work."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"An explanation to readers on matters pertaining to hysteresis loss, eddy current loss, magnetic drag. Also some advice regarding further information required from enquiries received to date by interested parties :

I would first like to state that it has been made clear that this machine has been proven to be capable of over-unity performance, plus the fact that it has proven itself capable of returning energy to its supply source. So we now come to the matters mentioned above.

If a machine is to run at unity or better, it must first 'overcome' those problems found in the conventional machine, which, of course, are principally those of magnetic drag, hysteresis loss and eddy currents, all of which waste energy in heat and hence require a cooling fan - with its attendant losses as well.

As explained previously, the Adams machine runs cool in comparison to the conventional machine and does not, therefore, require a cooling fan. Now these factors surely speak for themselves. It must also be borne in mind by the reader that in the conventional AC or DC machine, the internal heat of windings and stators reach boiling point within fifteen minutes. The Adams machine does not have this problem.

Given these salient factors, which in themselves are a starting point for those of you who are forward-thinking, I feel I have provided sufficient hints, information and guidance to enable those astute enough to realize the
potentiality of the principles given, to build a machine for themselves according to their own leanings as well as along the lines of the Adams machine.

Most of you know of the manual which has been published and distributed by NEXUS Magazine. My purpose in compiling this manual is to give those interested an insight into the principles of the mysteries of my machine, and I expect those interested, patient and persevering enough to accept that they must work out and work with these mysteries and to, like myself, to battle to get there. Only then will true understanding and enlightenment reveal itself and true reward, however slowly, be theirs.

Notwithstanding these statements however, I submit here a few further valuable recommendations for readers, and as time progresses, and as time permits, some further such tidbits of information will be drip-fed through NEXUS as a form of encouragement to all concerned.

I would like to inform readers at this point in time that, because of the steady flow of response I have had since publication in NEXUS, by enthusiasts, interested parties and investors alike, it is no longer possible to address enquiries of the nature of those above individually, other than on a consultancy basis. Although I will continue to contribute certain articles to NEXUS as long as I am able, and will continue to personally reply to all mail, I ask readers to kindly understand that a good deal of my time is involved in consultancy already on my advanced projects, so my free time is somewhat limited. I encourage readers to keep their eyes on NEXUS as I intend to remain as loyal to them as they are to me.

If contemplating the construction of a proving machine - note as follows :

1) Don't purchase expensive powerful 'neodymium' or 'samarium cobalt' magnets     without first having experience with cheap easy-to-get 'alnico' magnets,     for if you commence with powerful magnets you will find yourself facing powerful problems. Using powerful magnets will not prove anything beyond what alnico will do. However, given this, if you feel you MUST choose powerful magnets, for whatever your reasons, take heed -great care is required in the handling of them to preclude personal injury.

2) For a proving machine do not use less than 10 ohms each for two stators at 180 degrees apart; recommend series mode for first attempt. Don't be concerned about start windings initially and, remember, what can be achieved MICROscopically can be achieved MACROscopically and so I strongly suggest - walk before you run.

3) Should you experience any difficulty in designing and constructing the tapered disc contactor (machining, etc.) then use electronic switching, i.e. photo, Hall effect, or inductor effect, with switching current transistor, etc. The machine, correctly constructed, should still deliver a minimum 107% efficiency. The charging effect will, of course, be lost, and the input current to supply the electronic switching will raise the total input quite steeply. The point to be made here is that in using electronic switching, in a larger machine, the degree of loss due to this use of electronic switching is negligible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, for those who are seeking greater efficiency figures, it is advised to stay with the tapered disc contactor method and build a small wattage unit, i.e. 0.25 to 1 watt. This is the area of power rating within which you will gain quicker and better results which, in turn, will provide the necessary experience for designing and building a larger unit.

Once again the inventor cannot stress the importance enough, for those who wish to construct a successful device, to start at the bottom rung and listen to what the device is saying to you as you go along.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note for the Curious

I have received a lot of requests regarding an explanation accounting for such low temperature operation on full load. This one fact alone is indisputable evidence of a very high efficiency rating.

I have therefore decided to make up a set of drawings which will explain to the reader the questions regarding hysteresis, eddy current and magnetic drag losses, as well as temperature ratings, etc.

These drawings will be accompanied with written explanations concerning the 'how'and 'why' of certain factors.

These drawings and their accompanying information will be available directly from the inventor at the address given below at a cost of NZ $20.00 including postage.

Meanwhile, for further information on the 'Adams and Cathie' projects, you'll find it all in your future issues of NEXUS."

  Robert Adams
  46 Landing Road
  Whakatane, New Zealand

   The Adams machine was quite the topic of discussion at the April 1993 ISNE conference in Denver. It was first broken to the public attention by NEXUS magazine, published in Australia.

   We have had contact with Duncan Roads, editor of NEXUS, for about two years now and they have used several of our files as source material or verbatim from the board.

NEXUS covers a broad range of topics and always has several interesting articles that make it worth subscribing to. And Duncan also believes that information should be as freely shared as possible, and so recommends that folks copy and pass around information from NEXUS, just as KeelyNet, now in it's 4th year, has done from day one.

As to the ADAMS motor, I am a bit puzzled with the comments that gravitational energy is somehow used in the machine. From my admittedly limited understanding, it simply appears that he is using the back EMF to give additional thrust and thus a much higher efficiency.

With the use of the back EMF, there would be little if any hysteresis from the "collision" of the forward EMF with the back EMF and thus the reduction in heating.

We at KeelyNet would greatly appreciate reports from anyone reading this who might choose to build or otherwise experiment with the principle. You may upload as a text file or send a photo copy to the Vanguard Sciences address at the top of the document. Thanks....>>> Jerry

I am new to this echo area and I am not sure if anyone has discussed this topic before.

I have obtained plans for constructing a motor/generator from a Mr. Robert Adams in New Zealand and I have begun construction.

Seven people have since built this device in Australia and it seems to work fine, but no-one can explain the effiency anomoly that occurs after about 15 minutes of running time. In the two that I have personally seen, the eff. rating jumps from 85% (normal) then after about 15 mins goes to around 120%.

We have set up oscilloscopes, amp meters, volt meters, temp meters and can't account for the increase.

We do not have access to a magnamonitor to measure the magnetic field on the rotor, but we are still stumped.

Any ideas ? My intention is for it to be a Battery Charger.

David Galea
Melbourne Australia.

.
Vangard Note

  There are some peculiar activities that have happened with regard to the
  ADAMS motor. As you can see from the above email, these fellows claim to
  know of 7 people who have successfully replicated the Adams motor.

  In 1993, everyone was hot for it, wanting plans and such. Within a very
  short period, there was a business arrangement made with Adams which we
  heard was to produce a UNITY motor to be patented and sold in the U.K..

  Sometime toward the end of 1993, the talk was that the ADAMS motor had not
  proven out, that no one had successfully duplicated the effect or there was
  some anomaly in the measurement method. A very bizarre turnaround if you
  read the above email.

  At the 1994 ISNE meeting, Bill McMurtry of New Zealand gave a presentation
  in which he said flat out that the Adams motor did not work. We took Bill
  to dinner with Tom Bearden and Ken McNeil, but did not have an opportunity
  to speak with him in detail because he and Ken had some items to discuss in
  private.

  The collaboration of Adams with Bruce Cathie had increased the over unity
  output to numbers that were so incredible as to warrant not publishing them.
  I read something about it being on the order of 1:3000. At any rate, the
  Adams motor is far from dead if there have been independent successes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------