Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.
 Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here: https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?  (Read 16037 times)

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2014, 01:07:22 PM »
Final posting to wrap things up...

About Bedini motors and energy from me:  "Each time the coil discharges into the charging battery there is a finite amount of energy in that spike.  Then the battery has a charging efficiency, and a discharging efficiency that is proportional to the load current.  We can keep it simple and state that the two efficiencies combined will be say 80% as an example.   So if the source battery supplies 200,000 Joules, what you can get out of the charging battery is 200,000 x 0.3 x 0.8 = 48,000 Joules.  That's why over the years you guys have used the line, "You can't take a charging battery that was just charged and put it in the source battery position."  You would claim that a "'radiantly' charged battery cannot be put in the source battery position."  You guys would state that to discourage people from making that test.  And I have read reports by people that do make the test and they are disappointed that the motor dies out quite quickly.  The answer is in my example above:  Source energy from source battery = 200,000 Joules.  Extractable energy from charging battery = 48,000 Joules.  When you run the Bedini motor with all the inefficiencies you lose 152,000 Joules."

In their latest clip which is all about "getting over unity when factoring in the mechanical output" (to promote the new book) the setup now has a pick-up coil driving a FWBR driving a bank of LEDs.  So indeed, they do have a mechanical load in this setup and are showing a useful output.  There is a cap pulser circuit for charging the charging battery.

There is a mechanical load on the motor (finally).

But what are the problems with this clip?

They show the voltage and current readings for the source battery.  That's okay.
They don't show any measurements for the pickup coil + FWBR driving the LED load.  Big problem.
They don't show any measurements for the cap pulser output.  Big problem.

Aaron probably has 15 years experience.  Peter probably has 30 years experience.  So between them they have 45 years worth of experience and they are pitching a new book about "how to get over unity from a Bedini motor" and they don't make any proper measurements of the output?  What a joke!  They don't even bother to make an estimate of the cap pulser charging power based on the cap start and end voltage and the pulsing frequency.

The truth: If they did a an emulation of the charging battery with a low-pass filter they could make an accurate measurement of the average power output of the cap pulser.  If they got rid of the LED load and just used a variable load resistor and a true-RMS multimeter they could make an accurate measurement of the average power output for the pick-up coil.  They could change the value of the load resistor to experiment with different mechanical loads.   They could play with that setup to their heart's content and try any possible combination they could dream of and the power output will never exceed the power input.

MileHigh
Arron has never had much idea as to what is going on,he kind of bumbles his way through things. If you try and correct him on his forum,you just get what i got-booted out lol.
You know that saying MH-->if you cant dazzle them with brilliance,then baffle them with bullsh-t.
(I think Arron baffles him self most of the time)And Peter should know better.

These two are no better than those that try and sell so called OU devices that are fake-EG-a 3kw water powered generator->,they just do it in the form of a book.

I'd be more than happy to go head to head with Arron in a build off-->the most efficient pulse motor build off. But he wont take up my offer,as he knows that would be the end of his self aclaimed fame,and book of knowledge. Imagine that-Arron cooked by a truck driver/mechanicle fitter.

What do you say Arron?-you up for the challenge?,or are you just going to hide in your dark corner as you do when some one challenges you and your rubbish claim's. You can use what ever resorces,build equipment,and money you like,and i'll use a \$50.00 budget,recycled material,and do it all on my own. Once the machines are built,we will send them of to some one who knows there way around accurate power measurement's-some one like poynt or TK.
None of my builds are or ever have been OU or self runner's,so you should win hands down with one of your self runner OU machines.So come on Arron,show everyone that you are speaking the truth-->come and kick my ass all over the OU forums-->in sted of just kicking me out of your forum.

TinMan

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #16 on: November 04, 2014, 01:13:21 PM »
Those clowns wouldn't know how to test an overunity machine if they had one sitting on a table in front of them, which they clearly don't.

You know, I am halfway tempted to get the MHOP down off the shelf again. It would be trivially easy to mount this pre-wound "generator coil" next to its rotor and show it lighting a bank of LEDs, while the usual spike-collector from the drive coil is pulsecharging its own run battery or an external battery. But really, I am tired of working for free, trying to help educate people a little so they don't waste their own time and money on useless fantasies, or in support of people like those Bedini demonstrators who have no scientific integrity at all.

I will bet that they have not even done non-powered rundown tests to determine exactly what the wheel losses actually are. Please, Err-on, correct me if I am wrong. What power does the wheel actually dissipate in bearing friction, windage, etc. when running at the RPM shown in the video? Do you even know how to determine this value? Here's a slightly easier question: how much energy is stored in the rotation of the wheel at a given RPM? Still too much for you? Ok, how about this: How much does the rotating wheel+magnets assembly actually _weigh_ and how is its mass distributed? Can you calculate the rotational moment of inertia ... or would you like me to do it for you?

#### Hoppy

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4135
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #17 on: November 04, 2014, 02:18:59 PM »
I am not an engineer. I am a psychologist.
But I am pretty sure these guyz are pushing this just for the money.
Nothing there really.
A nice collection of colorfull characters though. And degrees.

Yes, that's the conclusion a lot of people who have studied Bedini devices over past years have arrived at. I'm sure John is sincere in his beliefs that batteries conditioned on his energisers will show more out than in but he is also a business man needing to make a living. It can be fun building his wheel energiser but that's as far as it goes IMO. I did think it would make an interesting garden feature as a water wheel.

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #18 on: November 04, 2014, 05:01:48 PM »
Well, I hope Aaron is reading this thread and sulking.  He really lacks character when he selectively deletes comments to advance hie Orwellian cause.

I mentioned before that I used the generic term "back-EMF spike" to mean a coil discharge and Aaron accused me of not understanding the difference between energizing a coil and a discharging coil.

Here is what he says on the YouTube clip that is viewable to all:

Let's quote you right here: "Then you could measure exactly how much energy per back-EMF pulse goes into the charging battery."

Back EMF is always a lower voltage than the applied voltage when charging a coil. Back EMF (Lenz's Law) happens DURING the application of energy to charge a coil.

When the coil is switched off, we get an inductive spike of hundreds of volts, which is NOT "Back EMF". The Back EMF is ALREADY GONE when switching off the coil.

You don't know the difference between Back EMF and the inductive spike from a collapsing magnetic field.

Because you haven't graduated from Preschool to K, I'm not going to waste my time responding to anything else you bring up. You are a joke and a time waster - take your lies and ignorance elsewhere and stop contaminating the comment section with this kind of stupidity. Go away.>>>

My response is not visible any more, he deleted it:

<<< Don't make me laugh.  You are just playing a silly game of semantics.  Most people use the generic term "back-EMF spike" for a coil discharge and there are a few others.  So I used that term because most people still use that term.  So you are just playing a game trying to score some points on the playground.  Get real, your nose is growing.  You are fully aware I know what the difference is between charging and discharging a coil.  Just like you are fully aware that when it comes to electronics I can spin circles around you with my eyes closed.  You know it.  You will get a full response on OU.com.﻿  >>>

So read it and weep Aaron.

#### Paul-R

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2077
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #19 on: November 04, 2014, 05:31:08 PM »

When the coil is switched off, we get an inductive spike of hundreds of volts, which is NOT "Back EMF".

I am as confused as heck, MH. It would be really useful to have a clear definition of
1. inductive spike
2. back emf
3. CEMF (just for good measure).

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #20 on: November 04, 2014, 05:39:06 PM »
Paul:

I honestly don't have the energy to go there, sorry.  However, it has been covered many times in many threads so you can try searching on this forum.  I can also suggest you try YouTube.  Or even better, find legitimate web sites for electronics tutorials.  I think a good one is called "All About Circuits."

MileHigh

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #21 on: November 04, 2014, 06:31:12 PM »
Personally, I always call that particular phenomenon an "inductive collapse" spike.

Let's compare: The motor shown in Err-on's clip is running on 12.6 v and around 1.2 amp input, right? Call it about 15 Watts input. And it lights up a bank of LEDs with perhaps 9v x 30 ma = 270 milliWatts of power produced by the generator coil. WOW, what a load!  (This is of course estimated since Err-on chose not to measure the power drawn by the LED bank, but as I showed earlier it is a reasonable estimate. Running a JT circuit instead of a simple always-on DC, resistor-limited bank can reduce that to under 100 mW for the same apparent brightness, for 40 white LEDs.) And it is collecting the collapse spike onto some caps which are then periodically pulse-discharged into another battery. Right?

MHOP, on the other hand, runs on 24 v and around 120 mA including the strobe system, or a bit over 100 mA without the strobes. Being very liberal, call it about 2.5 Watts input, or one-sixth the input power of the other motor. It self-starts, does not need any pushing to start rotation and has no trouble at all charging an external 150 uF capacitor to nearly 350 volts in just a few seconds, by siphoning off (instead of recirculating or snubbing) that collapse spike.

Instead of this system, an external battery could also be charged in an identical manner to the Bedini system, using a simple comparator to select dump voltage, switching an SCR to discharge the cap into a battery.  A simple generator coil held near the rotor, feeding a FWB of 1n5817 diodes and a small capacitor, produces 4 volts, with easily enough current to power 6 LEDs.

MHOP's rotor is only a few inches across and stores a tiny amount of energy compared to the heavy bicycle wheel of the Bedini design. Can you imagine what an MHOP would do, scaled up to the same size and power consumption as the motor in Err-on's clip? It's enough to make me chuckle into my coffee cup just thinking about it. But what do Mile High and I know about pulse motors anyway, eh, Err-on?

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #22 on: November 04, 2014, 07:12:23 PM »

I am as confused as heck, MH. It would be really useful to have a clear definition of
1. inductive spike
2. back emf
3. CEMF (just for good measure).
They are all magnetic induction.

1. An inductive spike is the release of energy in a stored magnetic field when a circuit switches from a low impedance path through an inductor to a high impedance path.  Voltage at the switched end of the inductor swings so as to maintain the current flow of the established magnetic field.  The higher the impedance, the higher the difference voltage that develops and the faster that the stored energy dissipates.

2, 3. BEMF also called CEMF most often refer to the generator voltage of an electrodynamic machine such as: motors, generators, and alternators, etc.  The voltage is the result of changing magnetic flux density across a conductor.

#### wattsup

• Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 2606
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #23 on: November 06, 2014, 01:49:54 PM »
Hmmmmmmmm.

But if there is no overunity with Bedini, what's this doc (attached his Paper94) published by a Dr. Myron Evans, notably his designation of Spin Connection Resonance? Matt Watts at OUR asked me if my model of the atomic construct (including Spin Conveyance) resembled this guys theories, so I looked into this guy for the first time ever and pulled out this specific Bedini doc. No it's not the same at all. However, this may be of interest to some of you in this thread.

For me Mr. Evans is just conjuring up more junk science layered over our already thickly layered junk science we have inherited by fame and fortune seeking scientists that were all members of the Cabal (Faraday/Maxwell to name two), either deeply or on the surface they have been controlled by the Bankers to keep things in line with their "feed them enough to function but not enough to think" model. I am not saying those two premeditated such folly but they have been used by the Cabal for their own advantage of taking true gravity driven effects and commandeering them to be understood and known and now ingrained as notions of magnetism, flux, field, electron, electron flow crap.

Hahahahahahahahahaha..................

wattsup

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #24 on: November 06, 2014, 03:11:00 PM »
Wattsup:

I am not a "Cabalist" so I can't really go there.  The paper looks bogus to me.  Also, is it the battery magic from the current pulses, the spin/resonance business, or factoring in the "mechanical" output that allegedly gives you the COP > 1?  Or, is there no COP >1 and it's just a battery charger/rejuvenator?  It all seemingly depends on which way the wind blows.

When you are on the bench you are observing what happens on a macro scale.  The challenge is to use your test equipment to measure and track the energy flow in the circuit over time.  Now, using the "bucket of liquid energy" analogy, which is absolutely a true and valid analogy, what is a Bedini motor exactly?  The coil is your bucket to hold energy.  The bucket is leaky and it also can overflow if you fill it up for too long.  Leaking or overflowing represents the energy spilling out and "falling on the ground."  "Falling onto the ground" in real life is the waste heat production in the motor.

So here it is:  When the transistor switches on, the leaky bucket is being filled with energy.  Typically the bucket will not overflow but if you keep the transistor switched on too long it will.  When the transistor switches off, the bucket flips over on a pivot and empties the energy into the "charging battery bucket."  Most of the liquid energy makes it into the charging battery, but some is lost from splashing.  When the bucket is empty, it flips back into position and waits for the transistor to switch on again.

That's all a Bedini motor is:  A leaky energy bucket being filled and emptying into the charging battery.  If you know your electronics and how to use your scope, you can construct a timing diagram and show the flow of energy.  It's not that hard to do at all.

So that's a Bedini motor:  A leaky bucket.

The energy flow says it all, you don't really have to dig deeper than that.  Any Bedini enthusiast should put all of the mumbo-jumbo on the back burner and try to successfully do the most important analysis of all:  Do a waveform timing diagram and then add the energy flows to the timing diagram.  That tells you what the Bedini motor is _really_ doing, everything else is window dressing, and there is a lot of pseudoscience thrown in the mix.

As far as I am concerned, from the "official" Bedini camp, nobody has explained the energy dynamics a la leaky bucket like I described above.  Look at the latest clip:  Claims of COP > 1, and just the usual fluff discussion with no serious demonstration with measurements.

MileHigh

#### Hoppy

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4135
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #25 on: November 06, 2014, 03:26:02 PM »
Wattsup:

Also, is it the battery magic from the current pulses, the spin/resonance business, or factoring in the "mechanical" output that allegedly gives you the COP > 1?  Or, is there no COP >1 and it's just a battery charger/rejuvenator?  It all seemingly depends on which way the wind blows.

MileHigh

Its quite simply explained in a nutshell IMO. The energiser is around 50% efficient and the battery is claimed to hold the 'free' energy as long as you build it right and measure it right - right! and I nearly forgot, the wheel is not free! Beyond that its all a money making exercise!

#### bboj

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 84
##### Re: Your take on the latest book-self running machines?
« Reply #26 on: November 06, 2014, 03:30:37 PM »
Yes, that's the conclusion a lot of people who have studied Bedini devices over past years have arrived at. I'm sure John is sincere in his beliefs that batteries conditioned on his energisers will show more out than in but he is also a business man needing to make a living. It can be fun building his wheel energiser but that's as far as it goes IMO. I did think it would make an interesting garden feature as a water wheel.

Well. Sincere BELIEFS have nothing to do with science and technology as far as I am concerned. Scientific method still rules I think.