2026-10-04 Scalar EM Research blog (semresearch.wordpress.com) - recheck of the source page

URL: https://semresearch.wordpress.com/index/cold-electricity/ (the project's only text document is a 9/18/13 printout of this page). Read in Chrome; comment list read from the page HTML (curl) because the Chrome text extractor returned only the article.

Changes since the 2013 printout [web]

New comments bearing on the claims (quoted; commenters' own views)

  • chadj2 (author), 28 Jun 2021, replying to a critic: "I understand that the inductor can dissipate energy without a closed circuit. I was just trying to document the circuit in the video. You can see a noticeable difference in the sound and appearance of the spark between the exothermic and endothermic examples. There was another video he did where you could see frost on the electrodes. ... At this point I think the cold electricity is not electromagnetic and interacts primarily with atomic nuclei." Bears on claims 1-3: the blog author concedes the conventional inductor point for claim 1, keeps the spark-difference observation (claim 2), recalls a separate frost video, and revises his own theory (claim 3).
  • lance, 28 Jun 2021 (critic): "This is not cold electricity. Inductor can dissipate its energy without a spark or a closed circuit ... no inductor can magically form a magnetic field with zero current flow. So the battery is indeed discharged through the inductor." (Matches the inventor's own description that the counter-potential moves "through the coil and the battery"; see youtube-wayback notes.)
  • rod2m, 4 Dec 2014 (critic): "One switch (spark gap) can get cold ONLY because the other is getting hot. That's basic thermodynamics. (The same is true of thermocouples.)" and "You can't make a positron circuit out of matter". Bertilo, 12 Jan 2016: positrons would annihilate with electrons, emitting gamma rays. chadj2 replies (29 Dec 2014, 5 Sep 2016) citing NMR, semiconductor holes, rotating charged disks and the Floyd Sweet device. Bears on claims 2-3 (a thermoelectric/Peltier-type reading of a cold electrode is offered by a commenter).
  • Hilman Mauludin, 13 Jan 2016, asks whether the circuit works only once; chadj2: "SW1 and SW2 are not supposed to be closed at the same time." This contradicts the post body ("both switches are closed and opened simultaneously") [read: p.2]; unresolved within the page.
  • Duncan Pickthall, 2 Dec 2017: "the video by NRGF is no longer avaliable"; JW, 2 Dec 2017: both videos and "NRGFromTheVaccum entire channel" gone; Duncan, 6 Mar 2018: found "a copy of this video on an old hard drive" and re-uploaded it (Mo6gViPywRI); chadj2 asks him for "Free Electrical Energy", "I think that was the one with the green sparks"; Duncan: "Happy to have a look". No later report. (Duncan also posted a personal contact address in the thread; deliberately not recorded here.)
  • Warren Kistenbroker, 1 Nov 2013 and 4 Dec 2014: further videos of his own work ("asymmetric motor", "resonant balancing of radiant electricity ... back emf spike generated by pulsing a bifilar coil"). Links not resolved in this run.
  • chadj2, 2-3 Nov 2013: describes his own HV rig (TV flyback transformer to ~2000 V, multiplier peaks "over 20,000V" at about 15 W) and the shock-free neon experiment.
  • muf, 9 Apr 2015: links Genesis to Tesla's statement that "fast, intense impulses produce another kind of energy which is cold", and to Bedini. Ivo ("Master Ivo"), 2022-2023: describes high-side vs low-side coil switching and ~40 ns quenched discharge as the source of "cold" current; says he will present it on his YouTube channel (@MasterIvo).
  • Spam (Nichol, 2015) and off-topic comments not listed.

Bearing

The page is the project's only document; the recheck adds (a) the links needed to recover the inventor's primary material, (b) the record of the inventor's channel disappearing between 2012 and 2017 and partial recovery by a third party, (c) the blog author's 2021 statement partly retreating from the "no current loop" reading, and (d) new criticisms and alternative accounts. Recheck: yes.