Do you think the transmitter and receiver are somehow isolated from the earth? All transmission cables have a second conductor. Look at the coax to your TV antenna: center conductor (signal) and outside sheath which is the ground return.

How do you explain balanced feedlines?
Or waveguides?

A signal travels on a line in the form of electromagnetic energy,whether the line is an earth return type,or not.

And,yes,there is such a thing as a single conductor transmission line,but it is only effective at VHF frequencies & above.
It is very much affected by external objects,can only bend in extremely large radii,& is of little practical use.

It is ,in fact,the "G" line shown in Fig(4) of the linked article.

As far as I can see,the connection between the operation of this real type of transmission line & the "theory" expressed in the rest of the article is quite spurious.

The "G" line would be completely ineffective for power distribution.

 

But wait! There's more!

A quick Google for "Goubau transmission line" brought up the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goubau_line

http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/accelconf/pac2009/papers/th6rep047.pdf

both of which give descriptions of the operation of "G" line,which are at odds with the
"throw away" comments in the article linked to by the OP.

 

Okay this confirms it for me. There are too many videos for this not to be true. This guy sends the power through freakin dirt!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhw2dd7Ntz0

 

Okay this confirms it for me. There are too many videos for this not to be true. This guy sends the power through freakin dirt!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhw2dd7Ntz0

Too many videos for this not to be true?

This is how you judge scientific validity?

There are plenty of YouTube videos out there of people showing their free-energy devices powering a small motor, or a string of LEDs, or what-have-you for months, too.

Consider this:

Thousands of secret "hair growth" products that have been around for literally centuries. Lots of people making little bits of money and then having to rename their product because sales tank as the word gets out that it is bunk. Along come Rogaine. Makes millions and millions of dollars even though it doesn't work all the time or all that great. Why? Because it DOES work.

Same with Viagra and a handful of other products.

If its something that people want, then there are going to be thousands of charlatans milking the gullible. Just think of all the pills or teas or smoothies or creams or herbs that we are always being told will melt the pounds away. Yet can you imagine what will happen if someone comes up with one of these that can truly be shown to work, even somewhat? (and just think back to the days of ephedrine, which does work but with nasty health consequences).

The same here. If this works as claimed, they would be billionaires in no time. So why aren't they?

 

You're right. But I'm only being realistic. They don't have any benefit from faking this, especially when their views are low and keep making new videos. There's a lot out there, a really good series of videos is by the youtube user theoldscientist. His videos are high quality and he explains everything to the tee. He didn't send power through soil but he sent power through one wire in numerous videos. Everyone talks about repeatability, well there's enough info out there and it looks like enough people have repeated the experiment.

But once again I know that doesn't 100% confirm it scientifically but I've seen enough to build my own. so far I only have one coil done. I'll post again when I finish mine.

 

And also, about the billionaires, I wouldn't say so. There are many articles about inventors mysteriously dying when coming out with inventions involving efficiency. In fact, I have a friend in the induction lighting business, he told me all about the different violent rejections his company gets with efficient lightings for cities. Power companies don't want efficient products because they will lose a lot of money.

That, and a lot of inventors don't care about the money or are not business savy. They always tend to open source this stuff. The ones that don't, end up dying.

 

It's true. The guy that invented the carburetor that makes any car get 1000 mpg was murdered by a hit man hired by Exxon Oil using a death ray invented to shoot down the airplane that can fly around the world on a drop of jet fuel.

 

Okay fine I'll give a popular example. There's Eric Dollard, who I read up on. He's been harassed by government for years for reproducing Tesla experiments. In fact, I watched his videos on single wire transmission which gave a lot of info on how to reproduce it.

http://vimeo.com/11917342
I know a lot of people are going to not watch this because its long, but just skip to the parts where he demonstrates various experiments with the single wire transmission. At 43:32 minutes they describe their setup on how to reproduce it.

I don't know why everyone is overly skeptical about this. It doesn't look hard to reproduce at all. If you watch the other videos on youtube, some of them just use a cylindrical transformer and a top load. The video I posted before just uses a sheet of aluminum for a top load. The only things that have to be considered, is making the transformer a step up transformer (around a 1 to 10 ratio), the resonant frequency, and the fact that the two transformers (transmitter and receiver) must be opposite wounding. That and an open mind to it possibly working.

 

There's Eric Dollard, who I read up on. He's been harassed by government for years for reproducing Tesla experiments.

I don't know why everyone is overly skeptical about this.

Then let me explain why:

I went through electrical engineering at the university here with many guys who were happily waiting to stampede into the electric power industry. many of my professors worked in that industry. One thing I learned:

Because of the quantity of power they deliver down transmission lines... and the losses..... they literally have dozens of genius engineers who do nothing but try to come up with a different trick to improve the efficiency of transmitting power... even if the improvement is .0001%, it's big money.

If you think there is a magical power transmission trick out there, go for it. PT Barnum should remain the brilliant man he was in his lifetime, even in our modern society.

 

Then let me explain why:

I went through electrical engineering at the university here with many guys who were happily waiting to stampede into the electric power industry. many of my professors worked in that industry. One thing I learned:

Because of the quantity of power they deliver down transmission lines... and the losses..... they literally have dozens of genius engineers who do nothing but try to come up with a different trick to improve the efficiency of transmitting power... even if the improvement is .0001%, it's big money.

If you think there is a magical power transmission trick out there, go for it. PT Barnum should remain the brilliant man he was in his lifetime, even in our modern society.

I get where you're coming from now. But if the theories are not 100% correct, then a genius will only be a genius with what he/she has learned. I know a lot of genius people at my university in electrical & nuclear engineering, and physics, but a lot of them make fun of people that challenge accepted theories and therefore they will never venture into other theories for physics or whatever their major is. If the genius thinks outside the box with an open mind, well then you're gonna have new inventions and new models in physics. That's how history has played it so far. Just look at particle physics! It's the accepted model that we're learning in schools but a lot of scientist are finding problems with particle physics and are trying to come up with overly complicated explanations to make sense of things and still there's confusion. So I'm not saying your wrong for being so skeptical, but it wouldn't hurt to keep an open mind even though you know genius people that haven't figured it out.

If everyone is looking in the same place for an object not there, it doesn't matter how well you can see. It won't be found until someone turns their head.

 

Isn't that called a pair of dimes?
My experience has taught me that I don't learn very much about a thing until I try to do it.
I learn even more, after I begin to teach it to others.
In my world, it's called learning levels.
Knowledge, followed by comprehension, followed by application, followed by analysis, followed by synthesis, followed by evaluation, and repeat, repeat, repeat.

I guess the downside in electonics and electricity is the lethal and costly errors people can make.

 

Isn't that called a pair of dimes?
My experience has taught me that I don't learn very much about a thing until I try to do it.
I learn even more, after I begin to teach it to others.
In my world, it's called learning levels.
Knowledge, followed by comprehension, followed by application, followed by analysis, followed by synthesis, followed by evaluation, and repeat, repeat, repeat.

I guess the downside in electonics and electricity is the lethal and costly errors people can make.

I agree, which is why I'm building my own with an open mind.

 

Then the consultation opinions from others are irrelevant, since you plan to build it anyway.

It kind of reminds me of my 30 years in the electronics industry: my boss would ask for my input and then ignore it and do whatever he had planned to do in the first place.

I was just trying to keep you from wasting time.