here is a scope shot of my wave form my test circuit. PS i claim no originality for Nelsons idea and help

thanks Nelson.

Jeg you certainly come top of the class in levity,  it's very basic science.

I would have thought the battery idea electrons are shifted in are different (ignoring holes).
why you dig so deep ?   

I was getting over 600 volts till i started de tuning it with a smaller coil it charges the 4.7uf cap instantaneously almost!
it's lethal and gives RF burns.

Itsu doesn't waste his time or ours by making false claims he cannot support with evidence. You do.
That makes you a LIAR, Rick. And nobody can believe anything that a proven LIAR says, unless it is
supported by valid evidence.

Hi TK, Yes, RF has shown himself to be very dishonest IMO. He implies or claims OU in various videos of his,
but never backs it up with any sort of reasonable demonstration which employs proper measurements
or which is self-looped. He then attacks and insults people here who merely point this out,  and has
been regularly spamming this thread as well now.



Some people may be wondering why RF has been attacking John Bedini.
John Bedini used to have a webpage (not sure if that webpage is still up) which documented how RF
and a couple others conspired together behind John's back to try to steal the design details of a little
transistor oscillator John had made with a tiny blocking oscillator soldered right inside the transistor case,
which they thought John was claiming/implying was over unity. John found out about how those guys
took one of those transistor devices apart and sent details of the schematic to each
other in email behind John's back. Also, in later years John Bedini released a statement
that RF had been selling John's proprietary technology without John's permission as well.
Since then RF has been attacking John.   

BTW, RF keeps spamming a picture here from a test I did which showed that LED lights can light very 
brightly even while consuming only about 60mW. Anyone with even a basic knowledge of reading meters would
realize that a digital ammeter which only reads to two decimal places will display 0.01 for currents
from 0.01A all the way up to just under 0.02A. Even though this was explained to RF, he either
still can't understand such a basic concept, or because he is very dishonest he implies that
the meter is reading incorrectly. 

I do feel bad for the people with little understanding of RF's history and little understanding of electronics
which RF has been stringing along with all this sort of nonsense. This is why I am speaking out against this guy.
Much of what RF says here or in his videos is clearly nonsense, and that is why people here with a good understanding
of electronics have been pointing this out here.

I truly hope Stefan's friend has a burden for his planet and the people here
you Rick play as a God ..and try to tell me its Dark outside when I'm standing in sunshine..
and people die while you Fiddle. and you can take that to the bank !!

Hi Ramset. The chances for any OU claim being false is probably at least 99%, it seems.
RF has been talking a lot of nonsense here when asked if he can back
up any of his claims with a reasonable demo, so realistically the odds are probably
even worse for any of RF's claims. I wouldn't advise anyone to hold their breath
waiting for RF to ever back up any of his claims in any sort of reasonable way.

Chances are Stefan's friend is not going to fare so well if he tries his tests with
small incandescent bulbs instead of LED lights, and if he tries to self-loop his setup.


All the best...

Edit: Here is the link to the John Bedini webpage I am referring to:
http://www.johnbedini.net/john34/history.htm

scope shot
Driver is CD4047 with squ wave output driven into MosFet electrons self excited for peek BEMF

Hi Raycathode. FYI, BEMF (back EMF, AKA counter EMF) is not the same thing as
'flyback' spikes (inductor switching spikes), so it is not clear at all to me what you are trying to say.
Having switching spikes when pulsing an inductor is a normal thing. What do you mean to point out?

Rick maximus Friedrich,
Come on man show your negative energy pulsing 'more out than in claim' that John Bedini showed in as his
selling point the so called 'Tom Bearden invention'! all you have to do is show it working, show them the clip
that you discuss here on this very thread and JB shows in CD no 7.

Why can't you do it ? do it man!

what's the problem ?

Jeepers, man.  You come into this thread late and Rick has to reinvent the wheel.  Go to the beginning and read the posts.  Rick shows the inductor upon inductor upon inductor powering his loads in one of his lengthy videos.  If you are gonna criticise Rick then do it on the basis of facts not pubtalk.

Yeah the idea is crazy. Like I said, it was if he was drunk when he said that. But he wasn't. At first appearance you would think he was getting mixed up with an antenna system but he clearly wasn't saying that at all. He's not talking about being high off the ground at all, or running wires or antennas. He was really messing with these guys for some reason. This was as wild as his "voodoo box".

Hi Ray
At second video we see more a missunderstanding than a secret. If JB was right then at sea level there would be no opposition from the coil after collapse. Meaning there would be no inductive kickback at zero level which is wrong. 

ps. To take it a little further, what about in a deep hole below sea level? Will the coil augment instead of opposing? I don't think so.

Here is the link to John Bedini's webpage from John Bedini's old website where John Bedini documented in detail how
Rick Friedrich and some others went behind John's Bedini's back to steal the design of one of John's oscillator circuits,
which Rick and others believed was 'OU'. John called this particular mini oscillator his 'SG Radiant Oscillator'.
http://www.johnbedini.net/john34/history.htm

Here are a couple of relevant quotes by John Bedini from the above listed webpage on John Bedini's old website:

"This is the history of the SG Radiant Oscillator and how things get stolen even when you have people you trust helping you.
Even if they signed a confidential disclosure you still can't trust them. And then people ask why I do not answer them.
Judge for yourself why you never have seen John talk about the oscillators.
However, Peter and I never said anything obout OU at all since we were just testing The Negsistor effect in the transistors oscillators."
…
"So the whole time Rick and his friends come to visit they take my information and pass it around like playing cards.
It was later found out that they were making my oscillators and selling them without permission, nor would I ever give them permission,
You the people be the judge of what was going on with this gang."


Crikey! Is all I can say to this...

Void of truth,
You again fill more pages with lies and diversions. Why don't you do something positive? I guess that is not what you are here for.

Once again, you fail to understand basic things and just repeat nonsense.
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.

I attacked no one. I responded to your attacks.

As for the Bedini page, I have actually done a video exposing his lies. I actually show that I still have all the emails pertaining to that. John changed his story, moved around the wording and didn't prove anything with his statement. It was me that brought that ordeal to his attention and he publicly thanked me for that in 2006 on internet forums. Obviously he spoke well of me until 2012 7 years later. So if I had done something wrong in 2005, like these guys were doing behind his back, then why commend me for bringing it to his attention in 2005, and then in 2013 change the story to make me the one that did it? You see, I sent John the emails back in 2005 and in 2010 he asked for them again. That is why you see a 2010 date on the emails but they pertain to 2005 period. So that was misleading in itself. Then he puts all different colors on the words and mixes them around so you don't know who is saying what. Then he fails to share what he actually wrote to everyone at the time, especially about me bringing this to his attention. That had nothing to do with me. A friend of his name Stan M. (not the famous Stan Meyer) was given by John one of his prototype oscillators which he was in the process of patenting. He opened it up and shared the details with a bunch of John's friends and later to me. I shared that with John and he blew up. That was the end of the story. It resulted in him taking it out on people on the groups. But he was not upset with me for telling him that. So this was really bad for him to change that history many years later to make me out to be doing something that others had done before I even knew these people. One of the guys mentioned in his page was an top engineer and had nothing to do with it either. He was the one that discovered this page in 2013 and brought it to my attention. John was a bitter old man who hated so many people in the end. I never stole that oscillator nor did I ever sell it. I was never given one of them like Stan was. I had nothing to do with it. If I had done that in 2005 why would John in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 speak so highly of me?? Did he provide any evidence of his claim? No. He provide the emails I sent to him (which he changed around), which I showed in my video the actual emails. And I have no problems showing people that in the real world if that was needed.

As Brad asked not long ago, why did people like Aaron and John, and now you guys attack me when all I am doing is sharing information and helping others? The truth is I crossed a line in showing too much. He never wanted to show anything. He told me not to do the kits or show people the lawnmowers, cars and boats. I thought he was joking, but he was just a big name gatekeeper playing games with people. But if that was all he had on me then that is incredible when it is so easily disproven. I had a long talk with his lawyer and told him the facts. They were all talk and no substance.

As for you lies about your meters, you still defend them. You said the one meter reads up to 0.02 as 0.01, but your picture shows it as 0.022 and not less than 0.02. Even Red mocked your meters when I assumed they were mine. My point was that you didn't just lie about that, but that if your meters were not even accurate then we could not even determine what the real voltage was either. And obviously that the proven points above hold true, that you can't prove anything over the internet. Your refusal to admit your mistakes and cover up your lies reveals your intentions here Void.

Like I said, if you have something positive to share about OU then let's read it. But your example so far is the worst possible demonstration. So the very things you are saying about me you are doing yourself. This is exactly the work of a Troll, to accuse others of the very thing you are doing, and while you are doing it at the same time! 

Again, if I was just saying nonsense then why would Void continually fill these pages with all this? On the contrary, Void is trying to suppress valuable information here. Nonsense just needs only a few words and people move on. But we are approaching 140,000 views on this thread now. Must be something of importance going on here. Yet what we have here is an absolute denial of everything I have ever said and done by a good 10 or more people. I have responded to every question for a month and a half now, while people refuse to respond to anything I ask. My responses are never acknowledged and I just get more demands from the same trolls as if I owe them something. When I show them up they just resort to fallacies and expect something to be proven over the internet. They say I'm supposed to do that when I say I can and do do that in the real world to real people.

Here's a really intelligent statement from below:
"The chances for any OU claim being false is probably at least 99%, it seems."     
This is exactly the reasoning of a troll. Fill up the thread with such nonsense in the hope that it will drown out that which is important. You can always count on the trolls coming out to fill several pages of vomit after something important is shared.

Yeah, I have backed up my claims in the real world.

Hi TK, Yes, RF has shown himself to be very dishonest IMO. He implies or claims OU in various videos of his, but never backs it up with any sort of reasonable demonstration which employs proper measurements or which is self-looped. He then attacks and insults people here who merely point this out,  and has been regularly spamming this thread as well now.
Some people may be wondering why RF has been attacking John Bedini.
John Bedini used to have a webpage (not sure if that webpage is still up) which documented how RF
and a couple others conspired together behind John's back to try to steal the design details of a little
transistor oscillator John had made with a tiny blocking oscillator soldered right inside the transistor case, which John seemed to be claiming/implying was over unity. John found out about how those guys took one of those transistor devices apart and sent details of the schematic to each
other in email behind John's back. Also, in later years John Bedini released a statement
that RF had been selling John's proprietary technology without John's permission as well.
Since then RF has been attacking John.   
BTW, RF keeps spamming a picture here from a test I did which showed that LED lights can light very 
brightly even while consuming only about 60mW. Anyone with even a basic knowledge of reading meters would realize that a digital ammeter which only reads to two decimal places will display 0.01 for currents from 0.01A all the way up to just under 0.02A. Even though this was explained to RF, he either still can't understand such a basic concept, or because he is very dishonest he implies that
the meter is reading incorrectly. 
I do feel bad for the people with little understanding of RF's history and little understanding of electronics which RF has been stringing along with all this sort of nonsense. This is why I am speaking out against this guy. Much of what RF says here or in his videos is clearly nonsense, and that is why people here with a good understanding of electronics have been pointing this out here.
Hi Ramset. The chances for any OU claim being false is probably at least 99%, it seems.
RF has been talking a lot of nonsense here when asked if he can back
up any of his claims with a reasonable demo, so realistically the odds are probably
even worse for any of RF's claims. I wouldn't advise anyone to hold their breath
waiting for RF to ever back up any of his claims in any sort of reasonable way.
Chances are Stefan's friend is not going to fare so well if he tries his tests with
small incandescent bulbs instead of LED lights, and if he tries to self-loop his setup.


All the best...