The more you post, the more I realize that my original opinion of you was so very wrong; I was way too charitable.
Someone who wants to give away their "discovery" for the good of humanity does not start with the disclaimer that what the circuit does and how it does it is strictly not open for discussion. Because you deleted your post shows a lot.
Also, I did look at your now deleted "schematic" You are missing the basic physics. You can not flow 1000A, or even 1pA if there is no circuit. Just alternately connecting the ends of a battery to an "output" and claim that it has any effects is junk science. Quacks and snake oil salesmen have been pushing it for a century. You are just the latest in a long and ignoble line.
---55p
P.S. I suggest you stick to the forum where people are offering to soup up a mechanical relay for you, so it will run at your target frequency of 10MHz.
I don't want to spread it around too much without the supporting information, which I have not committed to type. It is dangerous. It would be like distributing PCP to elementary school children to describe the complete device. There are limits.
There is no current flow, apparently you missed that part.
Well, explain to me how a permanent magnet works, how they attract each other and metals. An editor of Discover magazine went on a quest to find the answer, which led him to a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, who engaged in a 15 minute-long evasion which ended with the reproach that the editor wasn't really interested in science, just in baiting scientists. The best answer he could find was "virtual photons". Welly welly welly well, virtual photons. Could anything be more flimsy and insubstantial? Or stupid? How about the "Forbidden domains" in glow in the dark materials? Or the quantum tunneling that has been verified in certain enzymes in living systems (whatever "quantum tunneling" means in any real sense). Or the "infinite number of photons" required for the Red Shift equations? Or how Heaviside arbitraily truncated Maxwell's equations, or how Poynting then ironically dismissed Heaviside's "nondiverged component"? Mainstream science is chock full of holes, which is why Arthur C. Clarke wrote that new scientific ideas go through four stages of acceptance.
1. It's crazy
2. It might work, so what?
3. I always said it would work
4. I thought of it first
Theories make wonderful toys. Some of them can even be used to make machines that "work", to the extent of being extremely lossy devices. But theory should never trump observed, repeatable phenomena. There is something else there. Several people who have experienced the effects have asked me to turn it off after a short time, even though there is no electromagnetic radiation emitted, and there is no direct contact with the body. In fact, the machine can affect a specific organism at least from Cincinnati to Missouri.
I'm sorry that it angers you that you committed a goodly part of your life to the study of things based on faulty premises. That's why I never became fluent in any field, though I have been able to use concepts from many fields to produce inventions of great use. I suspected false premises from the beginning, and what do you know, I was right.
Maybe it has something to do withe the "Heaviside nondiverged component" or Thomas Bearden's idea that every charge is a "negative resistor". I don't know and I don't claim to know. What I do know is that I have a robust effect that requires many brains, as opposed to one, to wrangle it into practical use. Although it does have it's uses already, I feel I have only barely scratched the surface.
I am considering using separate batteries or battery packs to avoid the possibility of a dead short, we'll see how that works out. Also, two tiny solar cells in on-off photoconductive mode (flashing LEDs) as switches. I will have to check the on-off delays in milliseconds, resistance in off mode. Etc.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it, Chumley.