http://www.iet-community.org/research/f ... nique.html
Schauberger gave the following example: In a mountain stream he observed a trout which apparently stood still in the midst of rapidly streaming water. The trout merely maneuvered slightly, looking rather free from effort. When it got alerted it fled against the stream --- not with it, which at first sight would have seemed to be more natural.
On some occasions a cauldron of warm water was poured into the stream, quite a long distance upstream from the fish, for a moment making the river water slightly warmer. As this water reached the fish, it could no longer sustain its position in the stream, but was swept away with the flowing water, not returning until later. From this experiment Schauberger concluded that temperature differences is of great importance in natural river systems. He even tried to copy the effect of the natural movements of the trout in a kind of turbine, which he coined trout turbine.
By studying the gills of the fish, Schauberger found what looked like guide vanes. These, he theorized, would guide streaming water in a vortex motion backwards. By creating a rotating flow, a pressure increase would result behind the fish, and a corresponding pressure decrease in front of it, which would help it to keep its place in the stream.
Aslo from
http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/Schauberger_rev.htm
TWO KINDS OF MOTION
Schauberger's studies convinced him that "water in its natural state shows us how it wishes to flow, and we should follow its wishes". In time, this interest in the movement of water directed his research and design efforts toward broader questions about motion. "What," he asked, "is motion? Are there different types of motion? Might there exist a form of motion as yet unknown to science?"
Through research sponsored, first, by the Austrian government and, later, by corporate enterprise, Schauberger developed a radical theory that argued for two kinds of motion within nature: one, which breaks down; the other, which builds up and refines:
The form of movement which creates, develops, purifies, and grows is the hyperbolic spiral which externally is centripetal and internally moves towards the center. We find it everywhere in Nature where growth or movement is taking place, in the spiraling of the nebulae in space, in the movement of our planetary system, in the natural flow of water, blood, and sap.
On the other hand, the destructive and dissolving form of movement is centrifugal in Nature‑-it forces the moving medium from the center outwards towards the periphery in straight lines. The particles of the medium appear to be forced out from the center. The medium is first weakened, then it dissolves....
Nature uses this action to disintegrate complexes which have lost their vivacity or have died. From the broken-down fragments, new coordinated forms, new identities can be created as a result of this concentrating form of movement. The centripetal, hyperbolic movement, on the other hand, is synonymous with rising temperature, heat, extension, expansion, explosion.
In nature, there is a continuous switch from one movement to the other; but if development is to occur, then the movement of growth must predominate.
Schauberger believed that, in nature, these two kinds of energies work in cooperation. He would eventually conclude that water's ability to carry greater loads at maximum density and the salmon's ability to hold its position in the rapid stream relied on the constructive, centrifugal kind of energy, which modern science had not yet identified because its manifestations cannot be accounted for in the classical models of physics.
Unfortunately, so Schauberger claimed, the theoretical errors of modern science also had great practical implications, since a major result is a modern technology based on the destructive, centrifugal movement alone‑-a situation that ultimately raises havoc with the natural environment. For example, he pointed out that most internal combustion engines of the time were only fifty percent efficient; such poor performance, he believed, was because these engines used "the wrong sort of motion". He wrote:
Our machines and processes channel such agents as air, water and other liquids and gases into the type of motion which Nature only uses to decompose and dissolve matter. Nature uses another form of motion for rebuilding. When our technology only uses the decomposing motion, it becomes a dead technology, a destructive one, dangerously affecting all of Nature.