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.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83853
  • *Latest: jb45

  • *Total Posts: 521904
  • *Total Topics: 15552
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims  (Read 245328 times)

Online ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7135
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1980 on: August 09, 2019, 02:03:11 PM »
 Ray
exactly what do you want to see
A free fan hack ??
A motor doing what..?..running a light bulb or  putting a small charge into a battery while using less power ?
Would you like to see a free hack to turn your oscilloscope from a $500  scope into $1000 scope on the Internet ...would you like to be taught that for free on the internet ?


Would you like to be taught how to use your PC as an oscilloscope ...spectrum analyzer on and on for free on the internet
 or would you like to hack your car and get much more gas mileage
 is that the kind of free ....energy we’re talking about ?



 If you don’t want to see YouTube hacks ?? please be more specific ...do you want free energy or do you want over unity ...seems the distinction has now been made .
Waiting for Stefan’s  friend....


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1980 on: August 09, 2019, 02:03:11 PM »

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1981 on: August 09, 2019, 02:57:49 PM »
Well it pointless arguing. What I want to see is a build of the device of the motor that really works.
By saying 'works' i mean that in good faith either from any of you guru's here as I want start getting into a build.

Oh and Please no joke junk stuff stuff of youtube  ;D ;D it's not nice,

Raymondo

There are no self running motors that have been proven to work.
If you want free energy,buy some solar panels.

In saying that,i am still in pursuit of the impossible.
One of two things will happen--
1- i will succeed
2-i will die trying

But first we need a clean path to follow,and the cleanup starts by getting rid of fraudsters like Rick,Aaron,and the likes. They contaminate actual research with there snake oil sale's pitches,and give good people bad names--like they are doing to the works of Tesla.
Nothing they do is related to Tesla's work,they just use his name to try and make there garbage sound good--which it is not.

People like Rick take other people's work,and call it there own.
If you look at Rick's !loving path! circuit,and his fan setup,it is identical to Imhotep's fan charger from over 12 years ago,and the circuit is the same as bedini used in his SSG.
None of these snake oil salesmen have anything of there own,they just take-rename,and sell others work-->and under false pretenses.

The best thing you could do is build the simple SSG and go from there.
Make slight modifications,and see which one improves the efficiency.
This is where i started,and went on from there.

Here is a replication of one of my circuits(the twin BEMF circuit i designed many years ago)
Lets see Rick show one of his motors charging both the run and charge battery at the same time.
So many things buried in the past that need to be revisited.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HwUuPQn2W8&list=FLsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w&index=78&t=0s


Brad


Brad

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1982 on: August 09, 2019, 03:40:36 PM »
Brad,
If I am funny by pointing out how silly you are then I accept the compliment.  ::)
Nice complete evasion of everything I wrote! Your response is entirely that it is "fancy talk." Impressive Brad. You just repeat your denials which is what I expected. You don't realize that your responses are always just fallacies. Or maybe you do.

What is "whacked out" in showing how you can make billions of fans more efficient and produce more output? Your rejection of the most obvious thing here shows how prejudiced you are. You can't even grant one point because you are so filled with hatred.

Now remember, this fan demo is in the greater context of saying that it is the least beneficial circuit option--it is just a basic sample of what is possible.

A very small gain is nevertheless a gain Brad.

This is about the funniest sentence on this forum so far:
"You may think your smart with your word's,but there is no substance to anything you say at all,so your fancy talk is just a waste of your time."
Wow! You really took the time to properly spell, use correct grammar and type out that one! And it is actually your post here that has "no substance to anything you say at all". Incredible. You are only proving my points here Brad.

Brad, I sell things that people beg for. I don't go around advertising. My customers refer others to me. I often spend many hours talking to people for free. I have free websites offering free material since the beginning of the internet. I have put up books and thousands of pages of historical information for free. And before that I gave away the information to people in print and on disks. I have paid for these libraries and websites myself. But people have asked for specific products and so I offered them. I didn't come here with products to push. I have shared raw information that does not require products from me. I have made many things open source. I don't sell things based upon lies, but based upon what Tesla taught, and what the top electrodynamicists of history have taught. You mock that as "fancy words" because you are limited to very crude high school level electronics. I can't help that you try and oversimplify everything. I'm trying to make it simple enough.

I'm not making money from you Brad. I am selling to people who ask. But I am showing everyone how to do this for free. I am paying with my own time and free websites for people to have this free information. I have a few items for sale as I have to live just like you have to make a living. If people didn't want this then I wouldn't be doing this. Obviously it is important enough that you are obsessed with it and are desperate to silence me. Just look at yourself for a minute. Go back to your previous apologies and consider what you have already said after you put your foot in your mouth foolishly. You have some serious problems Brad. It's obvious to everyone that you really don't believe these words you are saying. If it was so obvious that I was wrong then there would not be close to 150,000 views on this thread that have mostly happened in the last 2 months. You wouldn't be spending so much time on this if it wasn't important. Yet you never address any of the important points that I make, you just sweep everything away in one big red herring fallacy.

You just don't get the basic point. If you get more out than what is thought possible, then that is practically free gain. Pretty simple Brad. You assume the gain is from the primary input. Just because that input made the motor action, and is a trigger for the secondary action in charging a battery, doesn't mean that energy came from that primary input. That is the point in debate here. You just argued in a circle saying it is. The energy from the input is already accounted for in the motor action and the regular circuit losses. My point is that when we add the loving path loop then more energy appears that is useful under the circumstances. You say that it was already there. In some sense yes, but it wasn't manifesting because it was suppressed in a way. It was deliberately shorted out. We can all agree that what I have done in this is an improvement. But you will never want to admit that. And that is my main point.

The deeper point is that this is just a tiny taste of Tesla's shuttle circuit engineering that Barrett pointed out in 1991. For your information, he applied that very engineering in his very important patent:

Oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) networks for conditioning energy in higher-order symmetry algebraic topological forms and RF phase conjugation
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5493691A/

"The present invention is in the spirit of Tesla's outlook on electromagnetics. Tesla's approach to electrical engineering addresses and accents primarily the inductive-reactive part of electromagnetic field-matter interactions, rather than the resistive part. His approach is more comparable with the physics of nonlinear optics and many-body systems than with that of the single-body systems of current electrical engineering. The Tesla approach is fundamentally a nonlinear many-body approach and may be contrasted with the approach of mainstream electrical engineering, both linear and nonlinear. The nonlinear aspects of mainstream electrical engineering are based on feedback in the resistive field, whereas the nonlinearity in Tesla's approach is based on coupled inductive oscillators using to-and-fro shuttling of energy to and from isolated capacitative stores through non-circuit elements attached to conventional circuits. These network arrangements, which are called oscillator-shuttle-circuit networks herein, or OSC networks (Barrett, 1991), result in adiabatic nonlinearities in complete oscillator-shuttle-circuit systems."

This was is along the same lines as another he filed at the same time as the groundbreaking ultrawideband radar patent:
Active signalling systems
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5486833A/en

I have shown who sponsored him in his latest book on Resonance Radar last week. These are top level advanced processes Brad. You are acting like and are at a high school level. Grow up and admit and consider the existing technology like this. Again, I am just trying to do the most basic thing to bring this to your attention. If I don't start at this level then how are you going to appreciate the very complicated systems? Again, you are upset not because of the reasons you give, but because you want more output than this simple fan demo. And that is understandable. But if you can't appreciate a little gain then you will not be open to more. And you will not get how this all works. So go read the groundwork patent from Barrett and tell me that he is some fool that misrepresented Tesla and tell me why the big companies and DoD thinks otherwise. When you humble yourself maybe you may benefit from trying to understand the principles here. Then you will get what I have been doing for 15 years now. Let me know when you sincerely do that and I'll be here to help you.

I have to ask Rick,are you also a comedian ? ,as you really have some whacked out idea's.
What i  mean is--you are good for a laugh  :D
But anyway,lets clarify for those here.
You make a video,where within the first couple of minutes you claim to be showing a free energy !fan!. Your idea of free energy is being able to draw a very small amount of energy from the fan without it effecting the speed at which the fan is rotating,or the amount of work the fan is doing,all while the P/in remains the same--right?.
This is why i was asking if you were also a comedian  ::)
You may think your smart with your word's,but there is no substance to anything you say at all,so your fancy talk is just a waste of your time. The reason i dislike bedeni,Aaron,and now you,is because you try and sell stuff based on lies. You claim to have free energy machine's,and Overunity machine's,but you don't --you lie,just as bedini and Aaron do,all in the name of making a dollar from those less aware of your agenda.
You lie in your video's,as you have not once shown a free energy device or an OU device.
You say in your video on the fan that it is free energy,but you know as well as anyone that the !so called! free energy comes from the source the fan is running from. You think because you have increased the efficiency of that fan motor(which we have no way of knowing if you have or have not,as your measurements are just plain rubbish),that the small amount of energy being drawn from it to charge a 12v battery is free  ::). Well the bad news for you is-->it is not free,it was supplied to the fan motor by the source-->your power supply. On top of that,you have no idea as to how efficient your fan is,you have no accurate P/in measurements,and there was nothing hooked up to the charging battery other than a volt meter-->you have to be kidding,right?.
[Bla, Bla, Bla.]

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1982 on: August 09, 2019, 03:40:36 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1983 on: August 09, 2019, 04:05:11 PM »
Brad,
If I am funny by pointing out how silly you are then I accept the compliment.  ::)
Nice complete evasion of everything I wrote! Your response is entirely that it is "fancy talk." Impressive Brad. You just repeat your denials which is what I expected. You don't realize that your responses are always just fallacies. Or maybe you do.

What is "whacked out" in showing how you can make billions of fans more efficient and produce more output? Your rejection of the most obvious thing here shows how prejudiced you are. You can't even grant one point because you are so filled with hatred.

Now remember, this fan demo is in the greater context of saying that it is the least beneficial circuit option--it is just a basic sample of what is possible.

A very small gain is nevertheless a gain Brad.

This is about the funniest sentence on this forum so far:
"You may think your smart with your word's,but there is no substance to anything you say at all,so your fancy talk is just a waste of your time."
Wow! You really took the time to properly spell, use correct grammar and type out that one! And it is actually your post here that has "no substance to anything you say at all". Incredible. You are only proving my points here Brad.

Brad, I sell things that people beg for. I don't go around advertising. My customers refer others to me. I often spend many hours talking to people for free. I have free websites offering free material since the beginning of the internet. I have put up books and thousands of pages of historical information for free. And before that I gave away the information to people in print and on disks. I have paid for these libraries and websites myself. But people have asked for specific products and so I offered them. I didn't come here with products to push. I have shared raw information that does not require products from me. I have made many things open source. I don't sell things based upon lies, but based upon what Tesla taught, and what the top electrodynamicists of history have taught. You mock that as "fancy words" because you are limited to very crude high school level electronics. I can't help that you try and oversimplify everything. I'm trying to make it simple enough.

I'm not making money from you Brad. I am selling to people who ask. But I am showing everyone how to do this for free. I am paying with my own time and free websites for people to have this free information. I have a few items for sale as I have to live just like you have to make a living. If people didn't want this then I wouldn't be doing this. Obviously it is important enough that you are obsessed with it and are desperate to silence me. Just look at yourself for a minute. Go back to your previous apologies and consider what you have already said after you put your foot in your mouth foolishly. You have some serious problems Brad. It's obvious to everyone that you really don't believe these words you are saying. If it was so obvious that I was wrong then there would not be close to 150,000 views on this thread that have mostly happened in the last 2 months. You wouldn't be spending so much time on this if it wasn't important. Yet you never address any of the important points that I make, you just sweep everything away in one big red herring fallacy.

You just don't get the basic point. If you get more out than what is thought possible, then that is practically free gain. Pretty simple Brad. You assume the gain is from the primary input. Just because that input made the motor action, and is a trigger for the secondary action in charging a battery, doesn't mean that energy came from that primary input. That is the point in debate here. You just argued in a circle saying it is. The energy from the input is already accounted for in the motor action and the regular circuit losses. My point is that when we add the loving path loop then more energy appears that is useful under the circumstances. You say that it was already there. In some sense yes, but it wasn't manifesting because it was suppressed in a way. It was deliberately shorted out. We can all agree that what I have done in this is an improvement. But you will never want to admit that. And that is my main point.

The deeper point is that this is just a tiny taste of Tesla's shuttle circuit engineering that Barrett pointed out in 1991. For your information, he applied that very engineering in his very important patent:

Oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) networks for conditioning energy in higher-order symmetry algebraic topological forms and RF phase conjugation
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5493691A/

"The present invention is in the spirit of Tesla's outlook on electromagnetics. Tesla's approach to electrical engineering addresses and accents primarily the inductive-reactive part of electromagnetic field-matter interactions, rather than the resistive part. His approach is more comparable with the physics of nonlinear optics and many-body systems than with that of the single-body systems of current electrical engineering. The Tesla approach is fundamentally a nonlinear many-body approach and may be contrasted with the approach of mainstream electrical engineering, both linear and nonlinear. The nonlinear aspects of mainstream electrical engineering are based on feedback in the resistive field, whereas the nonlinearity in Tesla's approach is based on coupled inductive oscillators using to-and-fro shuttling of energy to and from isolated capacitative stores through non-circuit elements attached to conventional circuits. These network arrangements, which are called oscillator-shuttle-circuit networks herein, or OSC networks (Barrett, 1991), result in adiabatic nonlinearities in complete oscillator-shuttle-circuit systems."

This was is along the same lines as another he filed at the same time as the groundbreaking ultrawideband radar patent:
Active signalling systems
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5486833A/en

I have shown who sponsored him in his latest book on Resonance Radar last week. These are top level advanced processes Brad. You are acting like and are at a high school level. Grow up and admit and consider the existing technology like this. Again, I am just trying to do the most basic thing to bring this to your attention. If I don't start at this level then how are you going to appreciate the very complicated systems? Again, you are upset not because of the reasons you give, but because you want more output than this simple fan demo. And that is understandable. But if you can't appreciate a little gain then you will not be open to more. And you will not get how this all works. So go read the groundwork patent from Barrett and tell me that he is some fool that misrepresented Tesla and tell me why the big companies and DoD thinks otherwise. When you humble yourself maybe you may benefit from trying to understand the principles here. Then you will get what I have been doing for 15 years now. Let me know when you sincerely do that and I'll be here to help you.

It is good to see that you finally admit that you are only making a slight improvement in efficiency,and not making free energy as you have been claiming to.

What you now must understand is that even though you might make a slight gain in efficiency,you are still running at a loss. These are the things you should be telling people,not that they can make free energy.

But in saying that,you would be better off just buying a top end fan,and saving even more energy,due to there higher efficiency.

But the record is straight--you admit to only making a slight improvement in efficiency,and not making free energy.

Now,how about your claims of having overunity machines ?
Are you going to set the record straight there as well-->it would be the right thing to do.


Brad

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1984 on: August 09, 2019, 04:44:43 PM »
Brad,
How do you know this? Proven to who? You really believe that you know everything and are the judge of everything? You are only working at high school level electronics.

The problem with you Brad is you are confused. On the one hand you are certain of the conventional theory and insist upon under unity dynamics but then you hope that you can experience the impossible. So then why are you so aggressive? If you were not so full of hatred then maybe you could actually learn something.

Again, prove to us that you understand Tesla at all. You don't obviously. It is easy to say something, but you back up nothing. You are just a troll that hides behind your ignorance.

The fan came from me 14 years ago. Bedini did the tape motor drive model and I improved upon it and made the fan. Others copied that. We did a video together in 2006 after I had shown those fans to over 100,000 people the years before.

The circuit is not entirely the same as the SSG so you don't know again.

It is true that Bedini didn't invent the SSG type of circuits. I realize that now and I have exposed him for claiming to be more than what he was. That is old news Brad. Everyone builds upon the work of others. I give credit to everyone I know to have contributed.

So you attack the SSG type circuit and claims and now you refer people to it.  :o Wow!

Then you show a video just because you are mentioned in it. You assume you figured that end part the first time. But we did all these options years before. Some of that goes back to the 80s as well. But here you are taking credit for something that others did before you. Maybe you figured it out by yourself, but it just goes to show that if you attack someone in your ignorance you may find out that you are the guilty one for your own violation.

But why post a video like that and not attack the guy like you do me? You have some very preliminary readings from a guy with a very crude motor (which is fine as I have made many like that myself early on). You have a double standard Brad. If I quote all the attacks you hurled against me for showing similar things how do you account for that?

Now tell us if this guy really had that be a self-runner in the long run. That is not the proper way to make that system self-run. I talk to thousands of these kinds of guys over the years. I get all the details and try and help them out. We all learn from each other.

I have already shown videos where the run battery remains at the same place for an hour while running the motor and powering significant loads. Here is one that demonstrates exactly what I was mentioning here in 2015 that you attack me about:

https://youtu.be/6he58A5xTIQ

There are other videos as well. I have shown these motors running at many of my meetings over two days where the batteries stay charged. Same batteries I have used for years (with old date stamps), so they are not ruined either.

There is a proper and improper way of self-charging. The first point of my company is to ensure battery longevity. So any method of self-charging that damages or degrades the batteries (such as in solar controllers) is avoided. For what is the point if you damage the battery and make it some consumable. That was one of the main reasons I rejected Bedini because he was a battery killer. The Tesla switch can be over unity self-running, but it will kill the batteries. The only way to do that is with high frequency or using capacitors like Benitez 100 years ago.
So you have to look at the batteries over more than just a few minutes, cycles, or months to properly judge the results. It takes years to determine the effects on batteries. That is what I do. But batteries are not necessary, and neither are motors. But they are easy to see these things with, and everyone has them.

There are no self running motors that have been proven to work.
If you want free energy,buy some solar panels.
In saying that,i am still in pursuit of the impossible.
One of two things will happen--
1- i will succeed
2-i will die trying
But first we need a clean path to follow,and the cleanup starts by getting rid of fraudsters like Rick,Aaron,and the likes. They contaminate actual research with there snake oil sale's pitches,and give good people bad names--like they are doing to the works of Tesla.
Nothing they do is related to Tesla's work,they just use his name to try and make there garbage sound good--which it is not.
People like Rick take other people's work,and call it there own.
If you look at Rick's !loving path! circuit,and his fan setup,it is identical to Imhotep's fan charger from over 12 years ago,and the circuit is the same as bedini used in his SSG.
None of these snake oil salesmen have anything of there own,they just take-rename,and sell others work-->and under false pretenses.
The best thing you could do is build the simple SSG and go from there.
Make slight modifications,and see which one improves the efficiency.
This is where i started,and went on from there.
Here is a replication of one of my circuits(the twin BEMF circuit i designed many years ago)
Lets see Rick show one of his motors charging both the run and charge battery at the same time.
So many things buried in the past that need to be revisited.
Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1984 on: August 09, 2019, 04:44:43 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1985 on: August 09, 2019, 05:02:34 PM »
Tinman:  Rick's fan device which he introduced is just the first process of many.
Later on there is the second and third stage process where reactive loops are introduced.
Eventually the device works with the input battery not discharging.
Let Rick explain the process as it unfolds and then criticize the final process if you still think it does not work.
I am surprised you are not asking questions about the next 2 processes.

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1986 on: August 09, 2019, 05:49:37 PM »
 author=rickfriedrich link=topic=17491.msg538250#msg538250 date=1565361883]


I like how you say that bedini's chargers kill batteries,and yet you use the very same inductive kickback to charge your batteries lol.

Quote
The problem with you Brad is you are confused. On the one hand you are certain of the conventional theory and insist upon under unity dynamics but then you hope that you can experience the impossible. So then why are you so aggressive? If you were not so full of hatred then maybe you could actually learn something.


No,you are twisting things around-as you do.
I am referring to those like you--that is what i appose.
Those that make big claims of free energy and overunity,but never deliver or provide any proof what so ever. That crap about not being able to prove anything over the internet is garbage,and you use it only as an escape goat,so as you have a distorted reason not to provide any proof.
Funny thing is,most of us here have been doing the very thing you say cannot be done,and we prove one way or another whether a device works as claimed. So you are wrong again,and such devices can be proven over the internet. The reason you say your devices cannot be proven over the internet is because you have nothing to present that is OU.

Then there are these fantasy terms you lot use,like energy from the vacuum,radiant energy,and your best one yet-->out of phase energy lol.

Quote
Again, prove to us that you understand Tesla at all. You don't obviously. It is easy to say something, but you back up nothing. You are just a troll that hides behind your ignorance.

Rick
That is not me you are describing there-->that is you down to a T.
You are the one that continue's to make claim's but fails to deliver.
So where is your backup to your extraordinary claim's ?.

Quote
There is a proper and improper way of self-charging.

There is no self charging.
Charge only comes from a source,and that source cannot be the charge itself.
You are of course free to show us all a self charging battery,but we all know that will not happen.

Quote
I have already shown videos where the run battery remains at the same place for an hour while running the motor and powering significant loads. Here is one that demonstrates exactly what I was mentioning here in 2015 that you attack me about:

https://youtu.be/6he58A5xTIQ

More garbage.
I can show a battery running a resistive load,and the voltage will climb.
This just go's to show how little you know about batteries ,and what chemical reactions can take place within them when under load.
And as far as a negative resistance go's-->bollocks.More snake oil salesman bullshit.
If you had a negative resistance,then you have an energy source,not a sink.

Quote
There are other videos as well. I have shown these motors running at many of my meetings over two days where the batteries stay charged. Same batteries I have used for years (with old date stamps), so they are not ruined either.

Oh we have all seen the large 1000 amp hour battery banks running 50 watt motors before.
And we have all seen you show a voltage across those batteries.
But not once have we ever seen you do any accurate battery analysis after the run's.
Show me one video where you do a specific gravity test using a hydrometer on those batteries before and after running your motors for days.

Quote
The circuit is not entirely the same as the SSG so you don't know again.

The circuit works the very same way,only you use a hall switch,and bedini uses a transistor to make and break the current flow to the driving coils.
Both send the same inductive kickback to a second battery--there the same.

Quote
So you attack the SSG type circuit and claims and now you refer people to it.  :o Wow!

Once again,you twist things around.
I attack those that make false claims about the SSG circuit,in order to generate a cash flow-->like you do.

Quote
How do you know this? Proven to who? You really believe that you know everything and are the judge of everything? You are only working at high school level electronics.

Perhaps you'd like to put your skills up against mine ?
How about we see who can build the most efficient electric motor ?
Then we get a 3rd party to verify our claimed efficiency  ;)

Quote
Then you show a video just because you are mentioned in it. You assume you figured that end part the first time. But we did all these options years before. Some of that goes back to the 80s as well. But here you are taking credit for something that others did before you. Maybe you figured it out by yourself, but it just goes to show that if you attack someone in your ignorance you may find out that you are the guilty one for your own violation.

I have seen all the variations of pulse motor circuit's,and there is not one like my twin BEMF circuit.
If you are so sure there is,post a schematic,and lets all see.

Quote
But why post a video like that and not attack the guy like you do me? You have some very preliminary readings from a guy with a very crude motor (which is fine as I have made many like that myself early on). You have a double standard Brad. If I quote all the attacks you hurled against me for showing similar things how do you account for that?


Now you see Rick,this is where you fall flat on your face.
Why would i attack a guy for replicating my circuit when it was me that asked him to replicate it for verification?. You see Rick,when i make a claim,i get some one else to replicate my work,and then get verification from them that it works as i say it dose. You on the other hand do not want anyone to replicate your work,as you know the result will be negative--such as Itsu's was.
He done an excellent job at replicating your system,but the wheels fell of your wagon when his accurate measurements came back negative. And i can tell you now,Itsu runs rings around you when it comes to electronics and accurate measurements.

Quote
Now tell us if this guy really had that be a self-runner in the long run. That is not the proper way to make that system self-run. I talk to thousands of these kinds of guys over the years. I get all the details and try and help them out. We all learn from each other.

The truth is Rick,you have never helped anyone achieve a self running device,as you do not even have one your self. You are lost in the bedini battery land of mistakes and misunderstandings.
But you know that-dont you Rick,and you do not want to let the cat out of the bag. ;)

Quote
The first point of my company is to ensure battery longevity. So any method of self-charging that damages or degrades the batteries (such as in solar controllers) is avoided.

I would trust a good solar charge controller over your battery toasters any day.

Quote
For what is the point if you damage the battery and make it some consumable. That was one of the main reasons I rejected Bedini because he was a battery killer. The Tesla switch can be over unity self-running, but it will kill the batteries. The only way to do that is with high frequency or using capacitors like Benitez 100 years ago.

There is no OU tesla battery switch.
Speaking of knowing Tesla,please post Tesla's !battery switch!

Quote
So you have to look at the batteries over more than just a few minutes, cycles, or months to properly judge the results. It takes years to determine the effects on batteries. That is what I do. But batteries are not necessary, and neither are motors. But they are easy to see these things with, and everyone has them.

Lol--oh,years now lol.
You lot do give your self a larger leeway each year.
Please tell everyone here what exactly you !think! you are doing to the batteries?.

And one last thing.
We are all dying to know as to how this !out of phase! energy is any different to !in phase! energy.
You love using the term,and you say i know very little,so what is this !out of phase! energy?


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1986 on: August 09, 2019, 05:49:37 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1987 on: August 09, 2019, 05:53:28 PM »
Tinman:  Rick's fan device which he introduced is just the first process of many.
Later on there is the second and third stage process where reactive loops are introduced.
Eventually the device works with the input battery not discharging.
Let Rick explain the process as it unfolds and then criticize the final process if you still think it does not work.
I am surprised you are not asking questions about the next 2 processes.

Because it is the same quackery as the first process.

I am still awaiting those efficiency measurements from you,so as you can back up your claim that i am a liar.


Brad

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1988 on: August 09, 2019, 06:20:35 PM »
Bad Brad, you are just a liar. I did not say that. The efficiency gain is one thing. But the battery charging is free energy. You intentionally twist what I wrote.

You continually divert from the debate and you just play these word games and diversions because you are trying to save face by attacking me with fallacies.

You don't understand what is meant by loss, efficiency and COP from what you say.

It is good to see that you finally admit that you are only making a slight improvement in efficiency,and not making free energy as you have been claiming to.
What you now must understand is that even though you might make a slight gain in efficiency,you are still running at a loss. These are the things you should be telling people,not that they can make free energy.
But in saying that,you would be better off just buying a top end fan,and saving even more energy,due to there higher efficiency.
But the record is straight--you admit to only making a slight improvement in efficiency,and not making free energy.
Now,how about your claims of having overunity machines ?
Are you going to set the record straight there as well-->it would be the right thing to do.
Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1988 on: August 09, 2019, 06:20:35 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1989 on: August 09, 2019, 06:51:55 PM »
Brad,
Again, you just deflect from the points I have made and make up new fallacies and lies. The very first line shows this. That is why you are doing the lol, because you are laughing in the hope that your lie will mislead your friends here. Again, you just always assume the worst. And you are wrong.

I have provided proof. You are a fool to think you can prove OU claims over the internet and you know that. You really think that people should believe a meter reading? You will disbelieve any meter reading you don't want to believe. Everything I show you you automatically disbelieve. You just want the ability to fake any disproof claims because that is why you are here. So I'll say again:

POINTS HAVING BEEN PROVEN SINCE JUNE 2019:
1. OU Claims and Disproof OU Claims Cannot be Proven Over Video, Pictures, and Words Over the Internet. People Can Only do Science and Prove Truths of Demonstration to Themselves In The Real World.
2. Forums Can Only Provide Information to Other People which Needs Personal Verification Unless it is Self-evident.
3. Free Energy and Over Unity Do Not Imply Self-running or Self-looping, while the Inverse is True.

Now I do NOT mean that people who know each other in the real world and are in regular exchange should not trust each others claims in exchanging pictures and videos and words. While that is fine, it is still limited as people do make mistakes. But this forum and OUR is not set up that way. It is only an information exchange. This is also a highly controversial matter which affects many trillions of dollars. Naturally there is a lot at stake to suppress this information. And that is why we see so many trolls like you doing just that. You may not be paid, I have no idea. But your actions are highly suspect. As I pointed out you attack me for the very things the guy was doing in the video you just mentioned. This shows you have other reasons for attacking me. Maybe you got the visit Brad. Was that it??? I mean, people don't do what you are doing unless something drastic forces them to. If this was so silly then you wouldn't have put all this time into it. I mean, here you are telling people that there is something with the SSG after all. But all your lack of reasoning prior was in complete contradiction to that. There is therefore something else going on here. Maybe more than your hatred towards me. It is becoming more and more desperate and irrational. And therefore you are only proving my points more and more.

author=rickfriedrich link=topic=17491.msg538250#msg538250 date=1565361883]
I like how you say that bedini's chargers kill batteries,and yet you use the very same inductive kickback to charge your batteries lol.
No,you are twisting things around-as you do.
I am referring to those like you--that is what i appose.
Those that make big claims of free energy and overunity,but never deliver or provide any proof what so ever. That crap about not being able to prove anything over the internet is garbage,and you use it only as an escape goat,so as you have a distorted reason not to provide any proof.
Funny thing is,most of us here have been doing the very thing you say cannot be done,and we prove one way or another whether a device works as claimed. So you are wrong again,and such devices can be proven over the internet. The reason you say your devices cannot be proven over the internet is because you have nothing to present that is OU.
Bla, Bla, Bla.

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1990 on: August 09, 2019, 08:26:51 PM »
Then you are pushing "quackery" yourself. For you write:

"The best thing you could do is build the simple SSG and go from there.
Make slight modifications,and see which one improves the efficiency.
This is where i started,and went on from there."

The SSG is a species of the Loving Paths first stage process genus. And the other stages are just more advanced stages of this.

This was one of the only positive things you have posted here. But that contradicts everything else you are writing. Just makes it seem like there are two opposite people using your account or that something else is going on. You admit here that there is something to the SSG. And yet you attack me for saying that.  :o



Because it is the same quackery as the first process.
I am still awaiting those efficiency measurements from you,so as you can back up your claim that i am a liar.
Brad
« Last Edit: August 10, 2019, 12:23:41 AM by rickfriedrich »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1990 on: August 09, 2019, 08:26:51 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1991 on: August 09, 2019, 11:03:05 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhd8Ye4gcVk






However,  I have always thought that there were system losses on the earth side.  So it looks like maybe a 60% gain to me.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fhd8Ye4gcVk

Online ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7135
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1992 on: August 10, 2019, 01:30:49 AM »

Aprox
3watt input charges it’s own batteries runs external load

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0sjqoshznU

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1993 on: August 10, 2019, 02:39:58 AM »
Then you are pushing "quackery" yourself. For you write:

"The best thing you could do is build the simple SSG and go from there.
Make slight modifications,and see which one improves the efficiency.
This is where i started,and went on from there."

The SSG is a species of the Loving Paths first stage process genus. And the other stages are just more advanced stages of this.

This was one of the only positive things you have posted here. But that contradicts everything else you are writing. Just makes it seem like there are two opposite people using your account or that something else is going on. You admit here that there is something to the SSG. And yet you attack me for saying that.  :o

Only you are confused by what i write,while the rest here understand that the SSG is a good learnig tool,but not a free energy device like you and bedini claime it to be.

Your latest video is the funniest yet,and i enjoy watching you fumble your way through them. But watching that video,and looking at your schematic for it,clearly shows just how little you know about your own devices. Your schematic is incomplete,and i bet you cannot complete it as it should be.
You are at pre-shool level as far as understanding current paths.

It is no wonder you see !free! energy everywhere.


Brad

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1994 on: August 10, 2019, 03:13:52 AM »
The monopole SSG is for asymmetric engineering. It depends on large battery banks or being a trigger to power many loads with additional reactive loops. It appears you never really understood it. But why would you recommend it as a learning tool here which is a thread about OU? You did that while showing a video that claimed to self-charge. Then when I pointed out your contradiction you change that and say it is not a free energy device. You just keep flip flopping all the time. What good learning can you do if that is not a free energy device at all? Your post is misleading people, just as you try to mislead people about me. You deliberately refrain from sharing what you believe about free energy processes. While it appeared that you were promoting this as an OU until I pointed this out, everything else you say is an attempt to disprove OU. Why not make some positive contribution here?

Thanks for the compliment. 'I love you more.' lol You remind me of when I was a kid with my brother and we were always wanting the get the last word before we went to sleep.

Wow! Again, you are desperate or having too many beers or something. Obviously the diagrams are merely representative. They are for a very small space to represent the idea as simple as possible. If you are referring to the AC circle that portion was exactly as found in similar textbook images which were not pre-school. Come on, it was high school! You should know that, because that is the level you are representing. They don't start electronics in pre-school  ;)

FREE ENERGY IS EVERYWHERE! It's in the sunshine, wind, waves, radiation from the cosmos, and can be collected from any disequilibrium system. You live in a dark reality Brad, and ignore the gifts all around you.

Only you are confused by what i write,while the rest here understand that the SSG is a good learnig tool,but not a free energy device like you and bedini claime it to be.

Your latest video is the funniest yet,and i enjoy watching you fumble your way through them. But watching that video,and looking at your schematic for it,clearly shows just how little you know about your own devices. Your schematic is incomplete,and i bet you cannot complete it as it should be.
You are at pre-shool level as far as understanding current paths.

It is no wonder you see !free! energy everywhere.


Brad

 

OneLink