I'm off topic here, but it seemed fitting to reply under the freebie presentation which caused it.
Funny, after so many years I hear that name again. Viktor Schauberger. Shit, remember that?
I'm a nut for the golden ratio, so much so that when I thought I understood the bestest most awesome representation of it, I went for it as best as I could, despite feeling repelled by the appearance counterintelligence science fiction and fantasy - something about a golden sun and Gnatsies in flying saucers. I couldn't forget about it though, because there's golden ratios and golden shofars in the Himalayan Blackberry. It's literally poking me and pulling my hair. But I can't be caught doing anything but rolling my eyes and scowling at such nonsense. But...but...Operation Paperclip is verifiable, and Schauberger's place with in it. Just what the hell were they up too? Schauberger was just helping the Third Reich move some logs down some novel flumes, Silly nut. Thus his selection for Paperclip by the central smarts bureau after the war. Wait, what did Adolph and the central smarts bureau want with a forester again?
It seemed straightforward enough once I had settled on the geometry, make the damned thing, rig it in into an insulated system and spin some some water through it that is a little warmer than 4 Celsius, make sure that after moving the tank of water through it at say, once per second, no cooling towards 4 C occurs. Sounds kind of insignificant, but giving a closed system kinetic energy and than having the temperature fall, that's against the 2nd ler of thermodynamics. Impossible nonsense. Thus all official channels replying more or less, GFY. The wild guess: move 'some' water through it 'pretty quickly'... Oh hypothesis and shots in the dark.
As a 3rd year physics student about to fall away from academia, I was looking at Culoumbs law, and then at Newton's law of gravitation, then at the Biot-Savart law, and reading something about dark energy and dark matter in astronomy. Hey professor, how do they know there isn't a reflection of the Biot-Savart law? just like Coulomb and Newton are mirroring each other? "That was researched decades ago, it can't be true because it would violate Parity Symmetry." Says the professor, like duh. Oh, I say. Keep you stupid mouth shut.
Then years later after college, I'm reading about how some German university experiment apparently violated Parity Symmetry. It seems there are conditions in which Parity Symmetry does not apply. I think I should find an official channel and ask, why not a novel force based on mass current, again, but I don't get around to it before the tale of Viktor Schauberger comes along.
I'll go ahead and throw a bit of my life away at some shot in the dark. It's not like I have anything else I'm compelled to toy around with, and it's not like I have to actually tell anyone what I'm trying falsify. It's just a turbine.
A few hundred hours of apoplectic focus later, I kind of had a thing. Turns out, I can has 3-d fibonacci spirals in clay and copy it with silicon rubber molds and wax.
Then it turned out, I fail hard at metallurgy. I doped that damned wax surface with a dozen different things, the smaller test run with some pricey and very noxious smelling silver paint seemed to work. But then the real run of the electroplating project failed hard. Oh the effort I put into making a copper disc case to surround my weird sculpture, to be submerged in so many gallons of copper acetate bubbling away with the air pump, a few hundred dollars for the power supply, and current is flowing. Is it working...? How low my spirits sank when I pulled that thing out of it's poisonous blue bath days later. Worthless nodes all over the near points, almost no copper deposited on the inner curves. Damn it all to hell, why did I ever start wasting my time with this shit.
Don't give up! You only failed the electroforming step. You've spent too much time and minimum wage labor money to just give up. Okay. I suspect the electroplating is mostly failing because of the complexity of the spiral. We are about as far away from a simple plane as we can get after all. A few hours of research later, I decide electroless electroforming is the way to go. Wait, that's an oxymoron and not a thing, I mean electroless copper forming by solution deposition, I think (still pretty new to metallurgy.) I'm trying to find out, just how long will it take, just how many times would you have to change the bath to get say, a copper surface 1mm thick. It's looking like, a lot of times. It's going to cost, thousands dollars. I work part time for minimum wage. I can't throw most of what I earn in a year at silly shots in the dark. I ask lots of people before I drop it, but nobody in anything resembling an official channel with resources whom I happen to email seems to want to hear a damned thing about 3d Fibonacci spirals. Sigh. Looks like I better move on.
I encounter Schauberger's name again for the first time in something like 7 years. In a presentation by Zachary Weiss. Go figure. I hope you enjoyed the trip down memory lane...
Anyways, the point, comrades and resources might have been encountered. I figured I'd ask, as Wheaton Labs has presenters bringing up Schauberger, even if it is only with reference to the water cycle. So....if any skeptical but not quite 100% certainly bogus readers of Schauberger are up for a pain in the ass metallurgy project, probably not, but you never never know, it could be worth the while.
Also I just realized, my spiral had to be large enough that I could work it into form out of clay, somewhat accurately by hand. Muh digits be big. I reckon, that iffun one was able (might not be possible because the shape is awfully wrapped around itself...) to use a 3d printer to create an itty bitty 3 dimenshy fibonacci spiral, you could make the wax whirly-pipe-spoked wheel 10x smaller, thus reducing the electroless forming and rigging/testing cost by factor of about 10. Shit! I should get on that. So busy trying to be like Sepp and live a little, I don't think I'll make it alone. If someone didn't falsify it already. Google search returns on "testing Schauberger's turbine" don't seem to return any accounts of actual tests on anything resembling actual 3D fibonacci spirals. The pure math approach photographed wasn't quite a kudu horn, if I had all the time in the world I'd try a few iterations and see them fail before I said, okay, some asshole wrote some excellent wabbit hole counterintelligence. Google seems to only supply the same old ghost stories.
Clearly, nobody wants to be caught in public with such nonsense, so anyone who can't help but wonder could express interest in a private channel. Does the project need some free labor? Applied maths degree, math modeling sculpture, can continue researching and experimenting with metallurgy process or whatnot. I would gladly throw away quite a bit of time again, just to lay the damned ghost story to rest before my own damned eyes. It haunts.