Does it also pertain to patented devices ?
what's an energizer....
Also noted the 12kv...... this ain't no toy.... no indication of where the 12kv is coming from or where it's going.. replicate at your own risk.....
right..... I too recall reading somewhere that it was a typo... what if it wasn't a typo though... folk will be hard pressed trying to reproduce a 12kw claim, however, it may prove to be a worthy lesson, learning what it takes to produce 12kv in the "suggested" manner...
Some hints: "The Watson machine was discharging 45000 uF (3 x 15000) capacitors charged to about 50 V, once a second into the batteries. ... J
Here is a link to a thread by someone that claims he was successful in building the Bedini/Watson machine. He originally made an offer to me to let me come see it in operation. Then he said he was moving. After he got moved I tracked him down again but he said he was on the road all the time with a new job. I never did get to see it in person. I did not take time to go back through the whole thread but I believe there was a video or two of it operating. And there were several pictures and drawings if I recall correctly. Might be worth looking into his claims.
We are on the same page.....however.....in light of all the copying and pasting that was going on back in the day.....and this coupled to my own endeavours, I am inclined to think that it wasn't a typo... in the right circuit, 12kv can work wonders...
15uF @ 12kv nets you a tad over 1k joules....
170uF @ 12kv nets you a tad over 12k joules.... yeah....
I think I am going to stick with 12kv Gylula......
Regards
on another note.... me thinks something's not quite right with the circuit....but that's me....
If the caps were completely discharged every second (which they probably weren't if they were discharging into a battery),
and then fully recharged to 50V every second, it would work out to 56.25 Watts output to the batteries. If the capacitors were only being
partially discharged into the batteries every second, then the power output from the discharging caps would be less than 56.25 Watts.
Starter motors really " pull the juice " way beyond 12 Kw....
Gearing was also mentioned, looking at the picture everything is " in line " could the motor have had a built in epicyclic gearbox?
.
However if you recall Naudin had a bingo fuel generator that looped - made gas that
ran the motor that ran the generator/welder that made the gas....
It behooves me that nobody picked up on the. To me its another lifter project of more
potential value.
Norman
So,is it going to be the Bedini energizer?
I have modified the below schematic to include the cap--would this be correct?
I have all the parts needed
The motor
The duel pole-duel throw relay,rated at 60 amp's.
A 38kg flywheel
4x high current 10 000Uf 63v caps
Magnets ?--any one know what type of magnets John used in his energizer,as he always seem'd to have a soft spot for ferrite ,but i have 19mm x 25mm neo's
Coils i can wind--any spec's on those,other than 250 turns each? What core material?.Wire size?.--are they hooked in series or parallel ?--guess we can sort that out when it's running,and set to achieve our 50 volt's at the caps.
Was there claims that this device is an OU device?
What was it's purpose?,as all i see is a motor drawing power from the source,and a generator returning power back to the source.
Brad
The proven OU device here is the FLYWHEEL, but nobody seems to check i posted above on this page. We might need Buck-Boost converter on that HV capacitor being charge to convert it to pure amperage(12v or 24v) that can drive the motor when switch over. Chas Campbell was one of the example, so many have already uploaded the so called FLYWHEEL Free Energy Generator on the Youtube.
Will
you and I both know that Lindeman's claims are just that: claims, full of hot air, never demonstrated to be truly OU by anyone who has ever tried them and certainly never self-looped or daisy-chained.
I don't think he'd recognize a 24 volt aircraft starter motor if he woke up next to one some morning.
The caps would only drop down to battery voltage at best,so they will never be fully discharged.
At any rate, the charge to the battery would most likely be something less than 56 Watts based
on what was described, was my point.This would seem to indicate the total power draw from
the batteries would have to kept lower than 56 Watts.
I think you mentioned that the generator coils are supposedly designed to produce high voltage rather than high current?
The problem is that large capacitors need high current to charge up quickly, so you would have a catch 22.
To save wasting lots of time, in my opinion it is very reasonable to want to focus on OU device claims which have been
demonstrated to be a 'self runner'.
Anyway, the problem in looking for an OU device to replicate is that most people who have claimed to
have built one and who have demonstrated a supposed self maintaining (self running) setup do not typically release
full critical circuit build details. Even in cases where half decent schematics are available, often some critical build details are still missing. ;D
If that wasn't the case, other people would have likely replicated the devices already.
There is also the problem of various people making videos on Youtube or whatever claiming to have replicated
an OU device, but typically it turns out that they just don't know how to make proper measurements or they neglect to do so.
If you added up all the time people have wasted in these forums looking at OU device
claims where it just turns out that the person making the claim had no idea what they were talking about, it is an awful lot
No necessarily.
Large caps can also be seen as small Uf value,but a high voltage rating.
If we take a !say! 100Uf 1000v cap,it can be charged quite quick with minimal current,to say 300 volt's. In this setup,we have 1/2 a cycle to charge the cap,and so low current could be used,as long as the potential is high. But when the cap is discharged into the battery,we get a large rush of current flowing from the cap,to the battery,in a very short period of time.
We could look at this like driving a nail into hardwood with a hammer.
If we hold the hammer by the head,and push the hammer down on the nail,we will not drive that nail into the wood.
But,if we hold the hammer by the handle,and hit the nail with a sharp blow,we will drive that nail into the wood. Maybe something like this happens within the battery?--maybe sharp blows of current get the job done more efficiently ?.
So,here we have a low current over a long time charging the cap,and a high current over a short time discharging from the cap.
...
Both Lindermann and Bedini have claimed,and apparently shown self running devices.
Both have claimed that this one is a self runner.
Hi Tinman. I think it was mentioned previously that three 15000 uF caps were used.
If you make the assumption that the three caps were in parallel (I don't know if that was the case however)
then that is a total capacitance of 45000 uF. Smaller capacitance caps charge up more quickly, but they
can't store as much energy as caps with larger capacitance. The calculation for a battery charge of max 56 Watts
was based on a capacitance of 45000 uF charged to 50v in one second. A smaller amount of capacitance will store
less energy however.
I can't comment on whether Bedini or Lindemann have ever convincingly shown a self runner
or not as I haven't seen all their videos, but I have seen a video on Bedini's 'Tesla Switch' setup in
which Bedini was talking about 'negative energy', but I saw nothing in his setup that would indicate
some sort of unusual form of energy was involved. Having experimented with that setup myself,
what it does is slosh charge back and forth between batteries, which may well increase efficiency,
but in my testing I saw no indications of OU or 'negative energy' being involved. Stuff like that tends
to make me take Bedini's claims with a grain of salt. :)
yes... I have an objection.... the device depicted in the diagram is labeled as an "energizer" not a generator..... the information that the community was provided by Peter Lindeman "after the fact" should not be taken into consideration, why? He never explained what it was, instead while intersted parties were distracted, he substituted the energizer for a conventional generator, alternator, dynamo, what have you....
If you insist on using this charging method, know that you will be at the mercy of Lenz, each time your cap is discharged below 620v, or whatever the maximum voltage is of your generator. Some time ago I had an offline discussion with Matt Watts, I shared with him how I interpret this situation and how to get around this limitation...
Cogging is compensated for by the flywheel...so we don't have to care about that....The "energizer" in the example also uses an offset there are an even number of magnets and an odd number of coils.... one could setup an offset between an even number of coils and magnets, however, this is a more involved process... Point is...cogging isn't an issue..
The voltage at the output, through what mechanism it's produced, what level it must reach, these are issues of paramount importance. The voltage must be HIGH, allowing for one to charge a relatively small capacity, between 10 and 200uf in a single impulse. The mistake being made is to be found in how we assume the system accumulates energy over several cycles....it doesn't!
Look.....The fact that the community is even entertaining the idea of replicating this device shows that those chomping at the bit, ready to go weren't paying attention. Bedini informed the community that the SG is the Watson machine!
The machine cannot run itself, not how its setup.... you might have a chance though, if you can convert the generator into a motor during the time when the prime mover is disengaged.....
Well we have some saying low voltage,and high current.
Then we have PL saying high voltage,and low current,to lessen the drag on the generator.
If we have your 45000uF cap bank charged to 50v,then we have 56 joules of energy stored in the caps.
If we have a 300uF cap bank charged to 600v,then we have 54 joules of energy stored in the caps--not much difference.
But here is the advantage of using the smaller value caps at a higher voltage.
Lets take your 45000uF cap bank that has that 56 joules of stored energy in them.
We dump that energy into the battery,and your caps will drop to 12 volts at best.
You still have 3.24 joules of energy left in your caps that is not delivered to the battery.
Now we look at the 300uF cap bank that has 54 joules of energy stored in them.
We dump that into the battery,and have 12v left across the caps.
300uf cap with 12v across it has only 21.6mJ of stored energy left in it.
So which cap bank delivered the most amount of energy to the battery?.
Hi Tinman. If you charge a smaller capacitance cap to a much higher voltage, it still
takes current over time to charge that cap up. The higher you charge a capacitor,
the longer it is going to take to charge up unless something unusual is going on.
It wouldn't hurt to experiment with different total capacitance bank values though to see
what the impact is on performance.
Batteries are weird because they are electro-chemical in nature and I think
in some cases their weird behavior can sometimes fool experimenters. However
if you leave a setup running steady for say 48 hours or so while drawing say 35 Watts or so
from the battery, and the loaded battery terminal voltage hasn't dropped at all, then you
may really have something. It is when people do a test run for less than 24 hours and then
also measure the unloaded battery terminal voltage and that sort of thing that can
lead people to draw wrong conclusions. :)
I'm not sure what you meant in your other comment in regards to having an open mind.
I have an open mind or I wouldn't be experimenting with this kind of stuff myself.
I just mentioned some ideas on how to possibly reduce wheel spinning. :)
Anyone is free to experiment however they like... IF some people want to try to replicate
setups where they don't have all the details , that is up to them. ;)
your common sense, and years of experience should have you answering yes to all of those questions...
I assist how I choose to assist....you don't get to dictate how I share and communicate my perspective. All the schematics one need are already in the public domain....the problem is, authorities and those who label themselves authorities see things at face value, what you see is not always what you get.... for the record, I know as much as the next guy about what John had....I came to my own conclusions after "considering" what he said, and what he didn't say.
There you go again, jumping to conclusions..... things are not as they seem...
See this is when it helps to be a fanboy rather than a debunker.... The prior, knows the goal, and works towards it, using what was given to discover the missing pieces.... shooting in the dark (trial and error) are the tools of the ill prepared, the lazy, the debunker...
The funny thing about your statement here is you think you are informing me of something....you aren't....as the story goes, watson copied bedini, eventually bedini perfected the design, miniaturized it, passing it off as a novelty.....got the public intersted in it...protecting the idea, preserving the concept.... this went on for 20+ years.... finally, he scaled it back up and presented the scaled up version in 2010... a fundamental change was introduced, namely, the SG was married to the Kromrey, with the SG operating as both an energizer and prime mover, while the kromrey operated as a generator and motor.... wrap your noggin around that one.......
How about brainstorming what the damn thing was supposed to be before you begin anything, and drag folk along in your wake for the ride of their lives which, if it continues the way it's going, will lead to another bashing of the inventors work, not because he failed, more like the replicator failed to appreciate the inventor's vision...
The prime mover, the flywheel and the energizer must become one..... comprehend the concept, and then mirror it, nesting one system within the other, forming something likened to a fractal.... just like he did....
With regards to the SG, everything is even for the most part.... we never see Bedini actually do an odd even setup, we assume he had one when we research the Watson machine....assuming the attached image is a photo of the Watson device.. Look carefully at the magnets and see that they do not align with the coils. As I stated before, you can engineer an offset within an even system, however, it's more complicated....
Other researchers, old men when Bedini was young, were exploring and or investigating odd versus even. Check muller and adams for more information.
Offset in an even system yields superior results to odd versus even systems, that has been my experience.
I responded out of respect, you are aware that Tinman does not want me posting here....so....I hope I answered your question.... I will be respecting his wish from here on out.
vindication..... this was pointed out on page 3.....useless babble my ass....
unfortunately you are still missing the point.... the layout is wrong..... the magneto must become a motor.....
the capacitor discharge path which includes the charge battery, is through through the magneto, specifically through the very same inductor which charged the cap.
I will demonstrate this, however, I will not provide any diagrams I just want it to be known that it can be done! If you want to do it, figure it out like I had to...
no brad its not mentioned in the diagram, dig like you did before and find that I am right!
you're too close minded for your own damn good...
if you knew his work, you would have identified it just like I did........ you would know that he superseded his old shit.....
.I offered to make a demonstration but after this post see that there is no point.....
@all
Biggest mistake of the Bedini thingy is the diameter of the Energizer/Generator coil wheel seems slightly greater then the flywheel so any drag on those coils will be transferred to the shaft tenfold. Leverage is the most neglected factor in our rotating machines and cannot be compensated by fancy switching. So if the base design is faulty, the total design will not work.
Now the leverage of the flywheel will always be greater then the breaking leverage of the drag causing generator coils.
But guys will not think about their designs in advance. They will just jump in blindly thinking that "REPLICATING" someone elses mistakes will produce a different result.
wattsup
So.... instead of let's say a 24 inch generator wheel, you used 3 or 4 smaller diameter generator wheels on that same shaft?
Well thats not very good math Wattsup.
So now the generator wheels are 1/4 the size,but we have 4 times as many.
This means--no loss/no gain.
You just made 3 left turns,and ended back where you started from :D
I responded out of respect, you are aware that Tinman does not want me posting here....so....I hope I answered your question.... I will be respecting his wish from here on out.
This is the Youtube video made by the guy who said he got his build based on the Watson motor
to self run:
Bedini Machine aka Watson Machine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdiK8sb81XU
From what I understood, he said that once the motor was up to speed, he switched out the
start battery and he said the device was powering itself and charging the battery at the same time.
If you change the magneto from the style depicted, this no longer qualifies as a replication....
and for the record....the magneto in johns diagram doubles as a motor... now I know what you're thinking, assuming you are considering what I'm saying, "the induced is higher than the applied".... I entertained that very same thought and through careful observation was brought to the profound conclusion that it doesn't matter....
It's clear he wasn't really interested in proper measurement, if you watch any of the old videos from back when this schematic was drawn, he really didn't know how to make proper measurement....neither here nor there... with that said we can rule out any sort of meter...
What we know is that he's dumping caps into batteries, we are provided with suggestions regarding their capacity and voltage prior to being dumped..... all that to say this....maybe, just maybe, if rumors regarding batteries exploding when hit with high voltage cap dumps are true, maybe that circle with the arrow in it is a variable resistor. Throw away some of that energy before it gets to the battery...... yeah...that's what I would have done if I were in his position back in 84......
incredible.... you do what you want and get to call it a replication....
Unless you or anyone else can !show! or !prove! that my magneto works any different than the one John show's,then it is a replication.
Both are PM magnetos.
Both have coils that the magnet pass.
Both output an AC current.
Both are series connected.
The only difference is,mine produces a higher frequency.
So many times we here--oh,you need a special this,and a special that.
And so many times,those that make this claim,can provide no details what so ever as to what is so special about the bits required,or why they have to be that exact design.
Here,with you,we have that very same situation.
Brad
Hi Guys.
Indeed, as I see it there's no need for a rectifier if all poles are the same.
On another point. If Mild Steel bolts were used as core material they would get partially magnetised. ( holding their own magnetic field )
Can anyone verify that the coils were Bifilar wound, pretty sure I read this somewhere?
Cheers Graham.
Hi Guys.
Cheers Graham.
Indeed, as I see it there's no need for a rectifier if all poles are the same.
On another point. If Mild Steel bolts were used as core material they would get partially magnetised. ( holding their own magnetic field )
Can anyone verify that the coils were Bifilar wound, pretty sure I read this somewhere?
Brad.......Brad.... it's a special magneto.... just because you say it's not doesn't mean it isn't! Here's the best part, his way is "the" way, a lesson was to be learned, you are passing up on an opprotunity.... your years with pulse motors using like poles should have prepared you.....they didn't..... instead of revisiting what you may have missed, you now and then insist that the inventor was an idiot, and proceed to perfect that which you obviously don't get..... comprehending nothing.... I know this because I made the same mistake!
What amazes me is that you know.... What saddens me is that you don't know you do.... it's like I said before, your years of experience with like pole systems were supposed to prepare you for what we are discussing right now, this video reveals your lack of knowledge, it doesn't help your case.
I had a wonderful exchange with Mags a few days ago, among other things, we discussed the significance of the a principle you demonstrate but don't comprehend (not going to tell you what, but if he watches your video, a few words from me and he will know exactly what I am referring to). It blows my mind, watching you perform the experiment, and fail to comprehend its significance....
On another note... the magneto is a motor.... the fact that you cannot see this is a sign that you are winging this whole thing.... The years you spent bashing and correcting John while using concepts he inspired would have been better spent in silent contemplation and reflection on what was being provided.... had you gone that route, you would see more than you do.... I will share proof from the horse's mouth that the magneto is a motor with Mags..... no point sharing that info with you...
Mags.....where are ya....we need to talk....
What did I say....only the ignorant chase OU.....
you don't hear me saying anything about OU.....you on the other hand... don't worry your pretty little head about what I am sharing with Mags..... he will see what you can't, he will know what you don't... you have no idea how refreshing it is to be able to sit through your presentation and know that you have no idea what you're talking about, even better than this is when you can point out the flaws, and share these insights with a like mind is its own reward...
I don't care!
That is brilliant Brad! When I first looked at your schematic I didn't look at it closely. I just assumed you were connecting the output in parallel with the batteries. Now that you added the switch I looked closer and realized you were connecting the output in series with the batteries.
Carroll
I am thinking if you get the energizer rewired so the current is higher and the voltage lower
Or possibly use a step-down transformer to get higher current at lower voltage
the whole system will speed up and maybe go into a run away condition.
What did I say....only the ignorant chase OU.....
you don't hear me saying anything about OU.....
So,the motor is started with the switch in position A, and when up to running speed, the switch is switched to position B
The question is-->what happens when the switch is switched to position B?
How about you define useful, do so without asking for schematics, measurement data, or demo model plans... what you and many others consider useful ain't useful...
Where is your useful contribution.... all I see is a individual kissing up to and cheerleading for the guy he believes is disseminating what he considers useful information..
This is not a replication, it stopped qualifying as such when Tinman took it upon himself to change the magneto, and mix concepts illustrated on the diagrams he found. A second battery has been added, and the cap is now series as opposed to parallel like we find it in the source diagram....WTF.... this is what's going for a replication?!? Individuals like yourself accept this proudly..... when the tests fail to deliver what all hoped it would, after the audience is schooled on proper measurement gathering techniques.... he will use his signature , "Bedini Rubbish" line and all of you agree with him.....
What am I doing here....if only you had ears to hear.....
It is not a self runner, but it could be scaled up.
No big effort or investment needed, just a few hours of time and some parts from junk...
Perhaps somebody want try it :)
With one core you get 50 micro watts, with 10 or 20 core you probably can blink a LED...
People may not want to spend time reading through a long PDF
I expect a strong response here....
Unfortunately as an explanation I can offer only even longer PDF... and if 4 pages is too long... probably it does not help anyway.
:-X
Many people here are quite limited in free time. ;) I don't see why you shouldn't be able to post
a brief description about what specifically you think is unusual with your setup. :) Just a few lines
to say what you think is happening that you think is unusual or notable.
Very well. Pulsing coil on ferrite core with very short and high current pulses produce NR.
Nothing really unusual. Many people claimed it but nobody demonstrated it.
With minimal efforts you can see a real FE effect... and experiment arranged so that you don't need do precise measurements, you just see it on scope traces.
Thank you for your time :)
Very well. Pulsing coil on ferrite core with very short and high current pulses produce NR.
Nothing really unusual. Many people claimed it but nobody demonstrated it.
With minimal efforts you can see a real FE effect... and experiment arranged so that you don't need do precise measurements, you just see it on scope traces.
Thank you for your time :)
I for one am interested in what you have to say here. If you would, please attach your pdf so those of us that do have the time may gain from your experience!
Regards,
Pm
I for one am interested in what you have to say here. If you would, please attach your pdf so those of us that do have the time may gain from your experience!
Attached PDF describes shortly how I came to it.
PDF with experiment is here http://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg513078/#msg513078 (http://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg513078/#msg513078)
There is also thread on OUR http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3453.0 (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3453.0)
Hope it helps somebody.
At the microwatts level and even at the low milliwatts level I think it is hard to
reasonably draw any conclusions unless you can make it self running somehow... I am not trying to be negative here. :)
Just speaking from long experience...
@Vasik- Unbelievable! I remembered someone who had published test results of BH curves that were unusual, but my past searching on the web had been unsuccessfully, that is, until now! So, low and behold, here you are!!! I greatly appreciate your work and would like to express my sincere thanks for sharing.
Hi Void,
I tend to agree with you. From long experience you probably also know that self runner is much more complex and expensive thing.
It is very unlikely that anybody who achieved it want talk to people and even more unlikely that anybody take him seriously.
Thats reality of our busy world :)
Regards,
/V.
Ramset, Tinman:
You always have to draw the line somewhere in this world regarding *all* matters. If someone
is disrupting things, then something needs to be done or it will likely only continue or get worse. ;)
If someone obviously doesn't have a clue about how to communicate in a civil manner, then whether it is
in a work place or a library or a court of law or in a family household or in some sort of discussion forum, you
just have to draw the line somewhere and do something concrete about it when the line is crossed. Otherwise
chaos is the only likely result. ;D
I realize that disruptive behavior and constantly throwing out insults etc., is the mentality level of many people in
this world, but that doesn't mean you have to put up with that sort of ignorant behaviour here. ;D
It doesn't matter at all if that person potentially has something useful to add. If they are constantly disrupting
things and throwing out insults, then obviously something needs to be done. There typically is just no reasoning
with people who are that ignorant/troubled, so in such a case something needs to be done. Otherwise, there is a a good
chance that many who are interested in some serious exchange of knowledge and ideas here will quickly move on...
I am personally not interested in building motor/generator setups myself, as it is not my thing, but I am quite
interested in what the key working principles are supposed to be behind them which are supposed to lead to the 'OU results',
and whether they can be shown to actually 'work' in practice. If it works in a motor/generator setup, then I think
there is at least a possibility that the same principles might be put to use in a complete solid state setup as well.
This is why I have personally been following along with this discussion about Bedini's motor/generator setups so far.
Let's please stick to discussing the topic at hand, and if one or more people are disrupting things and won't take
the hint to cut it out, then simply do something about it... ;D
Is this going to be just another thread overrun by trolling and insults like many other threads, or what? ;)
Hi Brad. I can't say for sure, but I would guess that it will not help much in any way.
The batteries will continue to run down with no charge being applied to them.
From what I can see, the whole point of this type of arrangement is to send a charge to a
battery within a one second or so window while the battery is fully disconnected from driving the motor.
The reason for this is if you try to send charging pulses to the battery while the battery is still driving the
motor, that momentary charge pulse or pulses (which equates to a small momentary battery voltage increase on the battery)
will just cause the motor to drive a little bit harder while the charge pulse(s) are being applied, and there will be
little to no gain in charge in the battery. To try to get around this problem, Bedini's approach was to disconnect
the battery from the motor for about one second, use the momentum of the big flywheel to keep the generator
up to speed, and send one or more charging pulses to the battery during this one second window where the
battery is not connected to any load.
I don't know Bedini's stuff really in depth, but the impression I get is that Bedini's OU claims for these type of setups
seems to involve having a special configuration of generator (energizer) and taking advantage of a special type
of pulsing to charge batteries in an unusual way. It seems supposedly some sort of special battery charging
action is supposed to occur which allows the batteries to charge much more efficiently than would normally occur with
more 'normal' battery charging approaches. Possibly just sending huge momentary current pulses to the battery using a large
capacitance capacitor pulse discharge is the 'secret' to getting the battery to charge faster than normal, but
something also has to first get that large capacitance cap bank charged up very fast as well during the one second window
where the cap bank is charging, so the 'energizer' would seem to need to be doing something unusual as well.
Also, Bedini has mentioned that the battery can get damaged from charging with those large current pulses,
so it makes me wonder if these large setups can really work for any sort of an extended run even if you
can get the battery to stay charged for short runs. The question is, does sending really large current pulses to a
battery really give it a true charge, or is it just some sort of misleading 'surface charge' that occurs
which makes it look like the battery is staying charged up for shorter runs, but which will not really keep the
battery charged for long duration runs over 24 hours?
I will be interested to see what your current setup can do as it is, to get a baseline of how it is performing.
If it is not performing well, maybe building a bit smaller scale setup using the most efficient DC motor you can
find and following Bedini's approach to building the energizer as closely as can be determined with whatever details
are available could maybe be tried by someone to see if it has much better performance than your current setup.
author=Void link=topic=17491.msg513070#msg513070 date=1510674750]
There is the problem--finding info to Bedini's energizer.
What ever we find,be it from Bedini's own hand drawn schematic,to some here,it's not how it is built or works.
The fact is,if there is a cap across the energizer's output,then that cap will absorb any pulses sent from the energizer,and so,no pulses will reach the battery--it will be a smooth current flow for the 1 second period the energizer is returning energy back to the batteries.
So,the way it is done,using a Bedini style energizer,is the power is only pulled from the coil's as the magnet is leaving the core.
So it is a half wave rectification of each coil.
The energizer it self,built the way stated in the !book!,would be of very poor efficiency.
We have hand wound coil's,soft iron bolts for core's,which would mean a large loss due to Eddy currents in the core's them self.
I have read the !books!,and must say that the energizer,built as Bedini stated,will not have a hope in hell of delivering the energy required,back to the battery.
I will be building the energizer/magneto that Bedini specifies,but i do not hold much hope for it to perform the way we need it to.
Even if we stick to exact's,there will be those here that will tell you you have done it wrong-->and they will be the same people that cannot tell you how to build it right.
Brad
Well, suppose someone had access to actual machines actually built by or under the direct supervision of John Bedini himself? Even with his signature or trademark right there laser-etched into the plastic? If _these_ machines were tested properly and found wanting -- that is, if they did not run themselves in self-looping, or by daisy-chaining with identical machines, or produce any actual overunity performance -- what then Mags and EF? What would be the conclusion?
Would you say that the Bedini phenomenon was just a mass delusion perpetrated by a huckster, or would you say that the experimenters themselves were idiots or dishonest or worse and needed Bedini himself (or his ghost) to operate the machines properly? Or is some other conclusion possible?
What then?
"This thread will be a place where we replicate/build to the exact specs,any claimed OU device. We will need actual builders here,and not just keyboard jockeys."
I have in the past seen what people call "replications" that end up not being anything close to "exact specs", and then they say they have come to conclusions that the original must be bogus because their NEW VERSION of what they think is a better plan did not work. It is so laughable. But Im not laughing. Im disgusted. This has been happening for years now. Its a joke.
Then Cifta thinks the latest circuit is some sort of genius, and it hasnt even been tested yet. That circuit IS NOT the Bedini circuit to the EXACT SPECS as the thread was stated to follow. So lets just toss the 'no keyboard jockeys' rule also then why dont we. ;) I mean, if we dont have to follow the EXACT SPEC rule, why should any other rules apply? ??? Ridiculous.
Of anything Erfinder has said here, it is all meant to say pretty much what I have just said. So Im in total agreement with his arguments on this, as 'should' many others here.
Brad said the thread was inspired by a pm to put up this thread. And just a few posts later Brad says how about the Bedini, then settles on it.
From what I understand over the years, the Bedini devices/machines were not about a circuit layout to produce claimed results. LOOK AT THE ENERGIZER!!! Everything else is off the shelf!!! The energizer is the only thing that you cannot buy ready made!!!! How is it that all of you can overlook that and just pick and choose what you think you can replace that with and call it an exact replication??????? ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
Well, if you all know better, then carry on. The end result will be "Bedini was a fake", and making that claim with a machine that had nothing to do with Bedini. That is my prediction. A prediction based on experience here in this and other forums. I cannot respect that in the least.
Here is where I am in concert with Erfinder here...
In fact I would need to test it myself to come any conclusions. So my answer is no.
With all that you just said, does that give lots of leeway to not having to stick with the circuit shown and just creating some new circuit that one thinks is just better before knowing and experiencing the original at all? ??? ::) What is so wrong with building the so called replication as closely to the depiction as possible especially if that was the set objective of the thread?? This is the problem with yours and other replications. They are alterations, not actual replications, and then you guys use that to debunk claims saying there is no difference. I cannot accept nor respect those conclusions. Sorry, but......
If the energizer is the 1 unique thing that we see in the depiction, would that not be something we should concentrate on being all else is obvious?
Brads 12v motor may not be the one that works best for his setup for example. Its just pulling a 12v motor off the pile and saying this is the one. Its, this is the flywheel and this is the gen, and the circuit, as simple as it already is, needs improvement and altered before anything is tried with the original circuit. Heck, maybe there are 50 other 12v motors that would be better fit. This isnt some 3 day build that we can say for sure that Bedini had nothing to match his claim. You should know this.
Me? Im putting together some things to experiment on the energizer end first. None of the other stuff matters unless the energizer is the best gen we could hope for. Then I would look for or build the most eff motor as a driver as needed. Then is the flywheel too much, not enough, or just right. Correct the switching as needed, etc.
Sure once the replication is made and tested, then things can be varied as necessary during testing naturally as we dont have those specs. But to just assume that the energizer is just some typical gen or alternator is wrong, otherwise that energizer would be labeled and look like say a car alternator, or 12v, 120v whatever generator. It is not.
Mags
Have you tested these machines you talk about?? Lots of speculated 'ifs'.
.it only took ten pages for the discussion to transition from a piss poor replication into a full blown debunking... congratulations!
author=Magluvin link=topic=17491.msg513113#msg513113 date=1510702689]
.
Then all you have to do is !as i have asked on many occasions now!,provide the exact spec's of the energizer--it's that simple.
Perhaps you missed my post,when i clearly stated that it was nothing more than a question--a thought i had along the way to building the exact machine-->that no one seems to know what it is-->the exact bit.
Are you too going to be one of those that say !it's all wrong!,but cannot provide what is correct?
Can you state the differences between my energizer and John's,other than the way it looks?
Then provide proof that my energizer is different to that of John--other than it's appearance
What is different about the electrical output between mine and Johns?
Nope
Grum put up the Bedini energizer,and i said lets give it a go.
Then explain to everyone here,how Bedini's energizer is any different to any other PM generator.
Once you have done this,then you have the right to say we are doing it wrong.
It wouldnt matter if we replicated it down to the last bit of dust on the flywheel,when/if it showed negative results(like every one elses exact replications have),we still would have done it wrong--hey Mag's.
As i stated earlier,there will be those that claim it is being done wrong-->those very same people will not be able to explain as to why or how it's wrong,nor be able to provide the exact specs needed to make it right.
You have caught the Erfinder flu--much to say about how things are wrong,but provide nothing that is correct ::)
Brad
author=Erfinder link=topic=17491.msg513129#msg513129 date=1510747128]
....
Im afraid your shit out of luck now Erfinder.
I just spent the last 1 1/2 hours looking through all my saved PDF file's on an old HD.
Guess what i found ;)
Bedini's Free Energy Generator book from 1984.
Guess what it has in it :D --Yep,the actual list of the parts used,a description of the complete device--The V2,and a description of how it all worked--all the details for an exact replication.
You should now be doing back flip's,as you can no longer say that it will not be an exact replication--no more of your garbage.
Just in case you dont believe me,i have added a screen shot for ya.
Just finished reading the whole thing,and now i have the ammo needed to put your sorry ass back into it's place--unless you think you know more than JB him self.
Sorry to say,but the energizer really is nothing more than a simple PM alternator--from JBs own mouth lol.
Your goose is cooked,and your constant babble has just be exposed for what it is--bullshit.
Have a nice day
Brad
I'll send you a care package if you want....all books, all videos, old and new.... you know how to reach me.
Unless of course,the voltage across the caps and motor was at a higher potential than the two supply batteries voltages combined.
The fact is,if there is a cap across the energizer's output,then that cap will absorb any pulses sent from the energizer,and so,no pulses will reach the battery--it will be a smooth current flow for the 1 second period the energizer is returning energy back to the batteries.
Another claim that just cant be.
It is claimed that for 1 second,the batteries feed power to the motor,and for the next second,the energizer recharges the batteries.
If we look at Johns own schematic below,we can see that that is just not the case,as it has commutated switching,and the time the motor is powered,and the time that the energizer is charging the battery,is dependent on the RPM of the motor.
Lets say the motor is doing a mere 1000RPM.
That would mean that the commutator would switch from powering the motor,to charging the battery 32 times a second-a far cry from 1 second each.
Here is the thing....And its a response to all your replies above.....
Clearly the 2 depictions show all N mags. Why do you think that there were all N mags? Some gimmick? Or is there a purpose that is not magical but logical for the situation?
Why not try and make it as shown? Too much work involved? Its only 6 coils. Only 6 magnets.
If this were a place that actually wanted to investigate claims, like say even a gov project facility for example, where people took the time to try and replicate with all that is shown as accurately as they could, to get some sort of base reference, do you honestly think they would substitute the energizer portion of the machine with you washing machine motor as a gen? If the people were serious about what they were trying to investigate, then the answer should be no.
Tk calls Bedini a huckster. And I imagine you follow the same lines going into this. So there is no vested interest in going all the way because you are all set on it is a joke. Too much bias to delve into it seriously. Like I know you are doing a lot with what you have shown of what you are attempting to show. Im not doubting that and Im as impressed as Erfinder with what you have put together in a short amount of time. But I truly believe we will all be missing out on the actual ideas involved in the original workings by doing so, if you happen to conclude that the machine is worthless after the fact... Thats what Im trying to convey here.
Back in the days of the Whipmag, Tk, then his short name was Al, he stressed that replications should be as accurate as possible. Well these days it doesnt seem that way and replications become altered so much that they are not even recognizable in so many ways I want to cry. :-X ;)
Gota git to work.
Mags
I know you are going into this with the idea that you will not see good results.
If the cap and batteries are in parallel, then they will all 'see' current coming in pulses from the energizer.
The approximate one second on and one second off is in reference to Watson's large machine
where he was supposed to be using the 555 timer based switching controller circuit devised by Bedini.
When using the controller circuit, you can set the switching duration to whatever you like. How they knew
Watson was using a one second switching duration I am not sure, but that is what Lindemann reported.
I dont agree with this Void,as that is why we have caps in battery chargers--to smooth out the pulses before the current flows into the battery.
Then Cifta thinks the latest circuit is some sort of genius, and it hasnt even been tested yet. That circuit IS NOT the Bedini circuit to the EXACT SPECS as the thread was stated to follow. So lets just toss the 'no keyboard jockeys' rule also then why dont we. ;) I mean, if we dont have to follow the EXACT SPEC rule, why should any other rules apply? ??? Ridiculous.
Mags
Hi Brad. When the battery and cap bank are in parallel, they are acting as just one large capacitor.
They will all absorb the current pulses in a similar way. The battery can be seen as a very huge capacitance
capacitor, although internally it has a different structure.
Mags,
I am really disappointed in your reaction to my post. I was only commenting on an idea thrown out by Brad. He asked what do you think will happen if the circuit is connected like he showed. It was only an exercise in free thinking. I never suggested it was a good circuit nor an improvement over the original. In fact as has been pointed out by others the batteries will of course run down as there is no means to keep them charged. I just thought the idea of connecting the output in series with the power source was a good example of thinking outside the box.
I occasionally get good ideas from you and Brad and Erfinder and others. I don't always agree with everything any of you post but I still look forward to your opinions and ideas. If me expressing my opinion about something upsets you so much then I will just keep my thoughts to myself.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Ok,well that go's against every thing i have seen on my bench,as a capacitor will do a far better job than a battery at soaking up pulses of current.
Perhaps i should re-examine this on the bench with the scope.
Dear Erfinder
Your post's are now being removed.
You are no longer welcome in this thread--my thread.
So please start your own thread,if you wish to prove us wrong,by building a working Bedini machine,and presenting it to the members of this forum.
Cheers
Brad
Hi guys :
If stator coil is an open-circuit while magnet is approaching and so there is no any opposition, rotor gains some energy just only from the fact that magnet is attracted from the iron core. It is some kind of magnetic energy transformation to kinetic. So to my innocent eye, looks like that if coil is activated from the moment that magnet is aligned with it, up to a certain "critical" moment, then after this point attraction again will equalize the loss in kinetic due to Lenz which takes place when coil is "on".
At least one of the effects that could take place in there. ::)
The biggest mystery that remains to me is how the large capacitor bank can get charged up
to such a high amount in the short cap charging window durations that it can keep the battery fully
charged up when pulsed into the battery. If someone can demonstrate this showing that the battery can
stay truly charged up even when running for 2 or more days steady, that would really be something....
Here is a comment that John Bedini made about the Watson generator in reply to someone using
the user name 'Electricity' in the Energetic Forum back in Nov. 2010.
John mentions you just need 'one mono pole energizer'. What exactly is Bedini's 'mono pole energizer'?
Does he mean an energizer where all the magnets are oriented the same way and all the coils are in phase?
=============================
http://www.energeticforum.com/117591-post48.html?s=825af460b5aafab19b288e41b7a711ad
11-20-2010, 04:30 PM
John_Bedini
The Watson Answer
Electricity,
The mystery is none as it is right in front of you. I will give it to you again.
The machine requires one DC motor, 555 timer circuit for pulses to chop the DC motor, one mono pole energizer and one large mass weight wheel. The two signals are out of phase from each other, and a capacitor tuned to the energizer. That is the mystery. Other than that some simple wiring, you won't do it on a small scale. As I said it is right in front of your eyes. It's the way you think about it.
On a big scale it's very easy to work on. Simple logic the bigger the generator section is the slower you must turn it. Since it is not a conventional generator you must store the charge before you discharge
the capacitors to the batteries. If the timing is right the batteries charge right up to full.
It's your own mind stopping you from success as your own mind understands what your intentions are, that is what is stopping you.
All your questions have been answered for years. Very easy to see that once the machine works we will never here of you again.
=============================
Edit:
By a 'tuned' capacitor, I would guess he means that you should try different total capacitance values in your
cap bank and see what works best. Obviously though the cap bank total capacitance has to be chosen to charge
to a voltage higher than the battery voltage or the battery won't charge...
In another comment I saw from Bedini somewhere else, he mentioned that the cap bank only needs to charge to 2 volts
above the battery voltage to get good results, but he was referring to a different setup there I think.
John Bedini also mentions above that "you wont do it on a small scale", so it would seem
based on this that if you build it too small scale it won't work...
All the best...
John says in his 1984 book-bedinis free energy generator,that his working modle had a 1/12 hp motor-or 60 watts.
This means his working modle was very small-not large.
Brad
John says in his 1984 book-bedinis free energy generator,that his working modle had a 1/12 hp motor-or 60 watts.
This means his working modle was very small-not large.
Brad
...if you are smart about using leverage to your advantage this will bring you 1/2 to 3/4 of the way to OU.
A continuous output of 12 kW for ten minutes, eh? At 120 volts, that would require a current of 100 amps. I'd like to see the wiring and connectors of this machine, and the load bank used to demonstrate it.
Quote from: Mags
<blockquote>...if you are smart about using leverage to your advantage this will bring you 1/2 to 3/4 of the way to OU.</blockquote>
Magsie, today's "ordinary" COTS motors and generators are already 80 to 90 percent of the way to OU. If we combine that with a lever system that gets us 3/4 of the way to OU... we have 0.9 x 0.75 = 0.675 of the way to OU !!
Again, which post are you quoting me from Alsetalokin??
This is how I will refer to you from here on in. ;)
Magsie ;)
The Rotor. :)
Perhaps just a mix up between you and wattsup Mags
Hi TK. I don't know where they got that 12 kW figure from, but from a picture of the large device
it appears it only had the generator on it that was used to charge up the cap bank which was
used to pulse the batteries. There was no mention of what if any load was connected during the
10 minute demonstration, and whether mechanical or electrical.
All the best...
Perhaps.
Perhaps Alsetalokin should do quotes like regular folk so others or the quotee can refer to it directly and not have to go back through 10 pages to see where it came from.
Perhaps if he had done so then he wouldnt have per happenstance had thought it was my words before posting
Perhaps he doesnt have to follow MileHigh in pm and refer to me a Magsie as MH calls me there all the time and just today again.
Perhaps it might seem odd that I would say such a quote when I have stated quite a few times in recent months that I am aware of motors and speakers and other things that are 90% eff and better to 100% eff.
Perhaps.
Mags
That was fast Grum lol.
Now we have all the specs,there cant be any argument about it not being an exact replication.
Trying to find soft iron bolts is turning out to be a challenge.
Soft steel -no problem. Soft iron-big problem.
May have to make some from some soft iron rod.
Brad
Perhaps 12kv is much more believable figure than 12kw.
It should be a lot easier to figure out how to get 12kv from the machine you see than 12kw. ;)
Set the whole bedini machine next to a 12kw motor or gen. What would you think then?
Mags
But what thread will you put on them? What head? What grip length, what threaded portion? Matching soft iron nuts, or what? Do you know the thread spec of Bedini's soft iron bolts? There's a big difference between M6 and 3/8-16. Or hex head vs. socket-head capscrews. Etc.
Wrong thread or head = inexact replication. Therefore doomed to fail.
Right?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d8PHDG4yE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4d8PHDG4yE)
Seriously, the issue of how "exact" to get during a replication is a gnarly one. The persons skilled in the art should be able to tell what is truly important and what is not, or would be interested in finding out through experiment as you suggest. Soft iron bolts? Right there one becomes suspicious because a soft iron bolt is about as useful as spaghetti suspenders or a jello frisbee. But OK, we've all encountered less-than-Grade 3 crap that breaks or strips when you put any torque on it. And how could thread pitch possibly matter, one asks oneself. But you can bet your bippy that, should TinMan's or anyone else's "exact replication" fail to perform as claimed, someone from the Church of Bedini will claim that the replication wasn't exact enough. We've all seen this happen many times. Even though those claimants and complainants cannot do it themselves, they still think they can tell other people how to do it.
Well, now we are back to my question up above, which you seem to have ignored or misinterpreted. What if someone had access to several actual devices built by and under the supervision of Bedini himself, and they don't turn out to work as Bedini and his acolytes claimed? Here there is no issue about whether or not the "replications" are exact enough, because the great JB advised, built and signed off on them himself. Do these things only work when operated by Bedini himself? Well I guess we are "SOOL" then.
And if the results claimed by Bedini and his disciples DO show up in someone's replication, then is the time for experiments to begin, to see what is the cause of those results. Are the artefacts of interpretation or measurement? Are they indications of real overunity performance? But first the results claimed need to be reproduced reliably, and so far that hasn't happened.
Wattsie, today's "ordinary" COTS motors and generators are already 80 to 90 percent of the way to OU. If we combine that with a lever system that gets us 3/4 of the way to OU... we have 0.9 x 0.75 = 0.675 of the way to OU !!
(Corrected misattribution, sorry about that :-[ )
Now we have all the specs, there cant be any argument about it not being an exact replication.
Trying to find soft iron bolts is turning out to be a challenge.
Soft steel -no problem. Soft iron-big problem.
May have to make some from some soft iron rod.
For me personally the use of the @ symbol I find mildly offensive. Grumage, Grum or just plain Graham will do nicely. :)
Hi Grumage. Some people put the '@' symbol in front of a name to help draw attention that this portion of the
comment is directed to a specific person. There is nothing offensive intended when people use the '@' symbol
like that. :)
Hi Jeg.
This is one of the areas of conjecture, I’m rather lucky as I have many different cast Iron flywheels to choose from. But what size/weight, 20 Lbs is quite a mass? Are we looking to just carry the drive motor over the off period of the commutator? Would 14 Lbs be ok?
Now whilst we’re in “ contemplation mode “ :)
How many previous tinkerers actually used a “ wet “ Lead acid battery for the device. I know I didn’t. Could there be a difference at the “ Ionic “ level? It’s the Ionic reversal that was supposed to be the MO according to what I’ve read.
Cheers Graham.
I wonder if transformer laminates are more appropriate (as I have many of them).
I also salvaged an electric screwdriver and took out its 18V 1800RPM motor. I'll report its performance even I have spotted an old AC universal one. Looks like it can be converted for dc input operation.
My question guys is what are you going to use as for the heavy iron disk? Is anything other except of a car that can be salvaged??
I have been wondering why Bedini spent so
many years on motor/generator setups rather than just focusing on pulsing batteries with simpler soild
state circuits. Maybe rotating a mass adds some 'gain' into the equation, or maybe there are other reasons,
but I haven't come across anything specific yet as to why Bedini focused so much on motor/generators.
Never played with Bedini ideas. What triggered me with this replication is that it combines many forms of energy, and looks possible to transform them in a constructive way so to counteract the Lenz effect.
In case this is of use to anyone here, I did a quick test to see what the
current waveform looks like when discharging a 5300uF (3300uF + 2000uf)
cap bank charged to 24V into a small 12V 5AH Sealed Lead Acid (SLA) battery.
I wanted to see what kind of current spike waveform I get from that arrangement.
I used a clamp current probe over the wire to measure the current waveform.
My SLA battery was sitting at about 13.1V. I just used some test leads to connect
things together in this quick test setup, so there is probably a little extra
resistance in there skewing the results a bit. With thicker wires and everything
connected really solidly, the current might well peak a little higher and be of a
shorter duration.
A 5300uF cap bank charged to 24V = 1.5 Joules
When it is discharged to 13.1V, it has 0.455 Joules remaining in it.
That means that for each discharge of the cap at 24V into the battery, about
1 Joule of energy will get transferred into the battery. How much of that 1 Joule of
energy the battery can actually absorb with each discharge pulse is another matter...
It looks like the cap discharge current pulse peaked at about 17.4A, and the
current pulse lasted about 10ms. Not sure why the current pulse was squared
off a bit at the top. I think this should be a close enough representation though.
I think the point I've been trying to make is that virtually all replications will still allow the excuse of "not exact enough" when/if they are found not to meet the OU claims of the originator.
But if someone can get their hands on an original unit, that once was claimed to be OU by the Builder Himself, even that might not remove all possibility of the "not close enough" excuse -- as local conditions may vary, or any of a number of other factors not directly associated with the build itself.
Void, that little flat spot has me thinking. Could it be an artefact of the probe you used? Out of range, signal truncation? I wonder if a good noninductive CSR would show the same flat top. It might be interesting to try both your current probe and a CSR on the same pulse.
Void, that little flat spot has me thinking. Could it be an artefact of the probe you used? Out of range, signal truncation? I wonder if a good noninductive CSR would show the same flat top. It might be interesting to try both your current probe and a CSR on the same pulse.
Looks to me that battery presents some resistance for this very brief period, which eventually breaks down.
Dirt at the conducts or an internal battery's characteristic?
And it is also this stair like decay if you zoom at the picture. Except if Void changed V/div after waveform's capture.
@Void (can't help myself @grum) (When I talk to any @member)
So, now maybe try the same thing with two then three batteries in series to equal the actual discharge voltage and more. See if there is a difference from your firsts.
wattsup
Hi Itsu. Thanks for doing that test. It is interesting that your current probe also
showed a squared off top on the current peak. Strange that you measured such
a higher current peak than me using your 0.1 Ohm CSR, as your setup was similar
to my test setup. Maybe the test leads I was using have too much resistance and
that reduced the current peak quite a bit.
At any rate, it shows that even with a relatively smaller sized cap bank and charged only
to around 25V you should still expect quite large cap discharge peak currents, so if you
are using a relay to discharge the cap bank you may want one that has quite a high current
rating, like Tinman said he was going to try. If you are planning on using a commutator, then
keep in mind that the cap current discharge pulse could take up to 25 ms or possibly even longer,
depending on the resistance in commutator contacts and wiring connections.
All the best...
There is no reason at all you could not have all south poles out on the rotor.
There will be those that think they know better,but they will also be the same people that have nothing to offer them self.
Brad
Common Brad. Is poking jabs the intention of this post? I mean like in the beginning you were so sure that the washing machine motor was a better bet. And you were claiming that the windings in the first depiction had rectifiers on the coils.. Gees man. ER is not in this thread any longer because you could not take the criticism that may have been a bit deserved, maybe? ???
So maybe we all just chill a bit.. d
Mags
After years of experimenting,i bet my left nut that the washing machine motor would make a far more efficient generator than that which Bedini used in his energizer.
If you wish to follow the nothingness that many here have,be my guest.
Regardless of what you think he may think he knows,i will be building the energizer to the specs stated by the inventer him self.
I think-like all those before you,you will be sadly dissapointed as to how much you !dont! get from Erfinder.
While he continues to put me down-as in your new thread,he will get the same back from me-end of story.
Brad
These are the claims by the inventer.
For me on all this, as I have said with TK that with soo much negative bias, and even more so by you here, Im thinking you are just putting it all together here for nothing.
If you are so against the possibilities,
why go through all the trouble to prove what you claim has been proven again and again that there is nothing good to find here?
Why choose to even rehash it all? There doesnt seem to be even an inkling of possibility at all coming from you. Thats too bad.
So do you accept the new bet and keep your nuts???? ???
Hi Brad. What is the source of this new information on Bedini's setup?
All the best...
And if you accept, dont include me in this bet. I didnt lay my nuts on the table. Wouldnt do that for anything in the world. Thats just 'nuts'. lol
Mags
It comes from JBs 1984 book,that is about this device,along with information referred by John from other papers.
Below is a couple of pics with JB and his actual energizers from the early 80's.
As you can see,it is nothing like the one in the schematic posted on this thread.
That schematic was one JB drew up for Jim Watson.
Jim made a few of his own changes,and that is the energizer Jim displayed at the International Tesla conference in Colorado Springs.
If you want to know a more indepth description of this high current pulse charging of lead acid batteries,then here is the link below.
Where as i gave a very basic description of this battery charging effect,this page go's more in depth to what is actually happening !apparently!.
http://www.cheniere.org/misc/battery%20poppers.htm
Brad
Yes John Badini RIP a very clever man one device he disclosed built and gave away and published goes unnoticed by
many but could change many lives if it was really developed and exploited.
Allen
Hi Brad. I had already read both JB's 1984 book and the info on Tom Bearden's site you referenced.
That's why I commented previously here that at least some of the claimed OU effect is supposed to be related to pulsing the battery
and some supposed effect of resonating the ion movement with the 'vacuum energy' or something like that, based on Tom Bearden's
theories. I was surprised that you said John's own 1984 setup described in his booklet didn't have a separate flywheel, as the picture
included in that JB 1984 booklet shows what appears to be a separate flywheel on JB's device. :) John experimented with a lot of different
setups, and many of his other setups didn't have a separate flywheel. It may not matter if the flywheel is separate
or part of the energizer rotor, if the energizer rotor has enough mass on its own to double as a flywheel.
I'll be interested to see how your JB 1984 device replication attempt performs.
All you can do is replicate as close as you can figure it was built by JB with the info that
is available. John has mentioned using welding rods to make the soft iron cores in the past, so soft iron
wire or soft iron rod may work about the same. A person has to be practical in part choices otherwise they
may never be able to make any replication attempt. ;D It sounds like what you are constructing should be
reasonably close to what JB did in his 1984 device based on the info that is available.
All the best...
author=Magluvin link=topic=17491.msg513337#msg513337 date=1511245001]
I'll make it real simple for you Mag's,as it would seem that you want me gone.
You post a video-along with the full schematic and construction specifications,of a self running/self charging machine,that works as JB claims his dose,and i'll leave this forum the day some one replicates the device,and confirms that it works as claimed by the inventer(other than Erfinder)-->hows that for a deal :D
Nope.
Im putting it together for confirmation --one way or the other.
The negativity stems from the countless years of !books of bullshit!,where the Bedini group sell books on false pretenses==that being,it will show the buyer the way to make a free energy device--all the secrets are exposed.
Thats where the negativity comes from Mag's.
And just where did you get that from?
I think you are mixed up with-->i am against those that come into this thread,claiming that they know it all,but have nothing to show or share--those that claim that things are being done wrong,but cannot provide information as to how to do it right.
My replication will be as stated by the inventor,where clear instructions are given in the book the inventor wrote him self,on the very device being replicated here.
I love fishing Mag's.
I never catch anything,but i keep going,in the hope that next time,i will land the big one.
Because i know first hand what can be achieved,and keep looking for an answer to one single question i have regarding one of my own machines--and one which you will be seeing some time in feb-march next year.
I do,as long as you can provide what i asked for above.
The best way to prove me wrong,is to show what i say dose not exist ;)
I will be more than happy to leave this forum Mag's,if thats what it takes to bring a free energy device to everyone here.
Brad
Efficient how? as in what do you see there function as? as in what if they were not being used like a "normal" coil with core for induction.
Maybe they are part of a "magnetic" capacitor of some sort that allows the PM to move past the coil\core and get closer to the next coil\core before that "magnetic" capacitor is discharged out via the coil into the low resistance, low voltage battery??
The "normal" capacitor will be offering a high resistance,, so higher voltage lower current but maybe still able to hold an opposing field to the changing PM and maybe somehow holding the soft iron core "charged",,,,
Just rambling outside the box a little,, looking at things from a backwards view so to say. This way, however, the Energizer might also be a motor during the discharge pulse,, a pulse motor of sorts?????
I had said much earlier that I would not reply here again. But Tk made reference to me so I had the right to reply. So beyond this post I will NOT reply any further. AND, I simply had to reply to Wattsups post as it seems very odd what he implied, and he has yet to return to clarify.
Also from reply #207.... "1-why all north out with the magnets?. The answer is simple."
Yeah, sure. But earlier before you read the book, how simple was it then? It was all nonsense according to you. ::)
It is clear that you do not believe you will ever see any good results from this Bedini build.
"After years of experimenting,i bet my left nut that the washing machine motor would make a far more efficient generator than that which Bedini used in his energizer."
Well according to what you were first building here and saying all N out is not necessary or better than your washing machine motors NSNS config and "guessing" that there were rectifiers in the coils, etc, it is clear that you knew nothing about this bedini machine till you read the book here recently, yet you had and STILL have all these ideas and convictions of what you thought it was and just proceeded to apply what you thought was a better way of going about it. As of late it is very clear you knew nothing much at all on this machine before you read the book. So your Bedini bashing has been based on what you have heard and seen from others and not by your own investigations on the subject to come to your own educated conclusions.
This is what ER had issues with and I do also.
"I think-like all those before you,you will be sadly dissapointed as to how much you !dont! get from Erfinder."
Well right now I can say that this statement is only your opinion and far from the truth that I know right now. I will not divulge what I have learned from him as I have very high respect of him at this jucture. Very. He will disclose his years of clearly very great knowledge, way beyond many, in his own time.
With your device on the shelf you refer to at times, and the arrogant claims you make of it and imply that it is special, and do not disclose how to build it or what the principles are that make it so special to the people here, you are showing you are in the same position he is in with what he knows. This is clearly hypocritical of you.
And right here and now, I can say he would rock your world with just 1 of his discoveries let alone the many other ideas and discoveries he has made. At this point, compared to everything I have seen here over the years, he IS top gun. And I can say that without having to bet my nut because I know that I would never have to drop my pants to fill that bet.
My stance on replicators having positive initiatives towards OU still stands. That is what this site is 'suppose' to be all about. And clearly by many of your statements here, you are only doing all this to prove Bedini was a complete fraud and not to actually see if there is something special to it.
Graham--there may be something in this after all. ;)
??? ??? ??? ??? If the batteries are in series and equal the discharge voltage, then there would be no discharge to show on the scope.. :o ??? ::) Mags
Hi Brad. Looks like you are making good progress. By your 'pulse charging system' do you mean
your JB motor/generator setup? If you do, the DC motor may be producing EM noise that is getting
picked up by the scope probe across the battery, so that could be a possible source of the high frequency
pulses seen in your scope shot. Just something to consider as a possibility. I don't know what
your exact configuration was, so just throwing that out as something to consider.
All the best...
Hi Void.
As stated in my post,i was using my power supply,which is a smooth DC output,set at 15 volts to charge the cap.
Still working on the energizer.
\
Ah,ok
Sorry,i should have been a little clearer.
But anyway,i was just driving the circuit ,and charging the cap with my PS,then dumping the cap into the battery-no motor or energizer at this stage.
As i was using mechanical relays,the arcing at the relay contacts may be what we are seeing.
But as the frequency is close to what Tom Bearden states,either it is in the battery it self,or they too were seeing the arc frequency across the battery.
But the battery charged quick,and after placing a good resistive load across it,it is clear that it was a good heavy charge,and not some surface charge.
Will be doing some further charge and load testing as i go along.
Brad
As i was using mechanical relays,the arcing at the relay contacts may be what we are seeing.
But as the frequency is close to what Tom Bearden states,either it is in the battery it self,or they too were seeing the arc frequency across the battery.
But the battery charged quick,and after placing a good resistive load across it,it is clear that it was a good heavy charge,and not some surface charge.
Will be doing some further charge and load testing as i go along.
Brad
the reference to recent "bets" here made me take another look at a Post On EF the other dayHmm it's full of half truths and misleading doctored science facts, a bit of a time waster and would be better of placed in the bin :-\ that's my opinion sorry.
Quote
It is suggested by no less an authority than Andrija Puharich that are hero Tesla was also 'Nutless' perhaps to remove sexual 'urges' and so concentrate on his research ?
I often wonder if some readers and contributers to energetics I would be very happy to name might like to urgently consider the same procedure ? (in the interests of science)
https://vimeo.com/4935037
end Quote
I have removed the posters Name [since he removed the post ,but it was copied by another member]
careful with the bets...... :o
Watch this if you think its all crud !
But don't get up set by this guys first comments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVD1dIGcmXk
Hi AG. Before he turned on the relay his battery was sitting at 13.13V, andYes as the guy puts pressure on the contacts he is ether drawing out the on time or the off time and the frequency goes up where the gain goes in voltage goes up or appears to. Another video of Nelson Rocha does the same sort thing but he has a resister and a capacitor in the coil energizing circuit and a cable tie adding pressure to the coil contacts to alter the wave form.
at the end when he turned off the relay switching his battery was reading 13.03V. :)
All the best...
How NOT to make a commutator....
LH, poor moulding method caused a shrink in the resin going below the Coppers edge.
RH, The Copper failed to adhere to the resin and moved during the machining operation.
Number 3 is curing as I post....
Cheers Graham.
Hi Void.
Sadly, not to be....
The resin shattered during machining possibly due to us having a heavy frost last night. Yet another curing as I post.
Six coils to wind, the kitchen table preferable to the un heated workshop.
Cheers Graham.
It's alive!
:)
Hi Grum and Tinman. How are you guys making out with your test setups?Is it that your just copying JB device for historic purposes ?
Anything new?
I have been running various general tests with battery pulsing and cap charging/discharging.
Nothing too Earth shattering to report back so far. ;D
If you are recycling energy back to the battery using cap discharges it should extend
run times, and I can see this from some of my own basic tests, but I have seen no signs of
anything I would consider very unusual or over unity yet.
All the best...
Hi Grum and Tinman. How are you guys making out with your test setups?
Anything new?
All the best...
Hi Grum and Tinman. How are you guys making out with your test setups?
Anything new?
I have been running various general tests with battery pulsing and cap charging/discharging.
Nothing too Earth shattering to report back so far. ;D
If you are recycling energy back to the battery using cap discharges it should extend
run times, and I can see this from some of my own basic tests, but I have seen no signs of
anything I would consider very unusual or over unity yet.
All the best...
Hello All.
I've been busy reinforcing the device and making a new commutator. I used a low viscosity Epoxy resin that has taken over three days to fully cure.
An old boss of mine kindly donated a brand new 10 AH LA motorcycle battery and another former employer gave me a new DMM.
If all goes well with the machining of the commutator today I hope to show you all our progress.
Cheers Graham.
About pulsing 12v set up coils. Try using 1uf -10uf 400-600v for the capacitor being charge, and connect a bulb to it. We found some result with the same set up on coil but different types of capacitor being charge. 12v power input. on 10,000uf 4v is the only charge we get. On a 4uf capacitor we get 400v which could light a build if the pulse on the coils are continued. We found that when we charge e.g. 10,000uf or 4700uf the charge are being converted to lower voltage let say 4v, which eventually dies out and can not sustain the system. But with 1uf -10uf 400-600v with just 1 pulse bulb could be lit continuously as long u give it a pulse. With lower UF capacitor we get higher voltage, and the voltage can make the system sustain.
Will
Nice work Void, it's always good to have graphs.
But...it would be even nicer if you could do a comparison. Take two identical batteries, charge them both equally (charge each first, then connect in parallel and let sit for a while to equalize). Then connect one to the system you used to get the data for the above graph, and connect the other to an ordinary resistive load that will give you the same average current draw. Plot voltage vs time as you have done but for both batteries so the discharge curves can be compared.
Hi Grum and Tinman. How are you guys making out with your test setups?
Anything new?
I have been running various general tests with battery pulsing and cap charging/discharging.
Nothing too Earth shattering to report back so far. ;D
All the best...
If you are recycling energy back to the battery using cap discharges it should extend
run times, and I can see this from some of my own basic tests, but I have seen no signs of
anything I would consider very unusual or over unity yet.
Well,after many hours work,and keeping as close as i could to Johns spec's on the 1985 energizer,--err ::)
Will not be wasting any more of my time on this heap of garbage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBPI9qyQ-O4
Back to the big one,which has some sort of chance of working,
Brad
...
There are two of us building this machine,so we will wait and see how Grum go's--i have the feeling the results will be much the same.
There is another method i have tried with some success in the past,and that is by having a PM embedded within a neutralizing coil,which is encased within a core.
This then has a generating coil wrapped around the outer perimeter of the core.
Brad
So,where we gain in one area,we loose in another.
Ok,decided to play around with the energizer a bit more.
Brad
Hi Brad. Yeah, maintaining LC resonance puts more load on the driving part of the circuit, in normal
circumstances anyway. To see an OU energy gain something very out of the ordinary will have to be
happening somewhere.
I have been running tests on battery pulsing in various ways to see if I could find any unusual
battery charging effect like Tom Bearden has theorized about, but so far I have not found anything
that looks really unusual. The alternate pulsing of the motor drive and cap discharge with the use of a
sizable flywheel to keep the generator spinning up to speed during the cap discharge pulse window
is one possible source for getting an unusual gain, but of course you have to be able to get the cap bank to charge up
to at least 2 or 3 volts above the battery terminal voltage in a suitable amount of time first before trying the alternate pulsing,
which is where you seem to be having an issue.
The problem with trying to replicate other people's setups is most people who claim and demonstrate OU devices typically do
not provide enough specific details to do a proper replication. I am skeptical of John Bedini's claims because, that I know of, it seems
he never demonstrated anything publicly that really convincingly looked like over unity. As most people no doubt realize, doing relatively
short demonstrations when powering with batteries can potentially be very misleading. When powering with batteries you have to do relatively
long test runs to see how the battery can really hold up, but this of course depends on the capacity of the battery you are testing with.
I try to keep an open mind however. Maybe there is something unusual hiding in Bedini's setups. :)
All the best...
My capacitor is across the coils to create a resonant condition before the FWBR, I'm dumping from the FWBR back to the battery.
I can do a follow up tomorrow with your suggestions plus any others, if anyone is interested.
put a 100 V bulb anywhere across several points in this circuit, for instance on x and y .
it lights brigthly : voltage has been mutiplied by a factor of around X7, so a Q=7, so a 700% factor multiplier for voltage.
remark : the amperage stays the same.
:o
Yes you can :)Is he? didn't he pick a lot of stuff up of the late John Badini? look him up on the energetic forum and see what it says on their credit where it's due I say.
Rick Friedrich is the only guy that I know , along Gérard Morin, who has :
- made important, I should say revolutionary / changing the world discoveries
- has interstood them, mastered them with his own talent, and time, and
- shared them with no condition, no money ticket, no hinderance, nor partial hinderance, with no delay, to the world,
- offers for nothing or almost free through his product all the plans, schematics, so that YOU can understand, and so that YOU can build it
- as a model for every researcher and inventor in the world, for those willing to build the free world of unlimited food, unlimited energy, that awaits us
- has thoroughly (I'm unable to say completely as I don't know) open the Don Smith famous massive overunity "1 gigawatt in a matchbox" systems that remained a big mystery for everyone for more than a decade, that he has now opened, explained and given the clues and explanations thereof. It is apparent that Rick has a deep bown respect for Don.
Can it even be assessed of which magnitude of importance the book Rick has published on Don Smith, and his RICK kit, is not the hand of God Himself to make the revolution come down on earth.
Rick wrote in his book("don smith's magnetic resonance systematic index series") ,
"Don Smith was the Real Deal".
Now, I write : " Rick Friedrich is the Real Deal".
Yes you can :)
Rick Friedrich is the only guy that I know , along Gérard Morin, who has :
- made important, I should say revolutionary / changing the world discoveries
- has interstood them, mastered them with his own talent, and time, and
- shared them with no condition, no money ticket, no hinderance, nor partial hinderance, with no delay, to the world,
- offers for nothing or almost free through his product all the plans, schematics, so that YOU can understand, and so that YOU can build it
- as a model for every researcher and inventor in the world, for those willing to build the free world of unlimited food, unlimited energy, that awaits us
- has thoroughly (I'm unable to say completely as I don't know) open the Don Smith famous massive overunity "1 gigawatt in a matchbox" systems that remained a big mystery for everyone for more than a decade, that he has now opened, explained and given the clues and explanations thereof. It is apparent that Rick has a deep bown respect for Don.
.......
I woud be very careful about reprinting something which may or may not be true. In England recently someone was jailed for 2 years for putting out revenge pornography. Making posts with no evidence except citing someone else can be both a civil and criminal offence and you won't catch me doing it.
There have also been cases where people have put out fake likes and dislikes being taken to court. The internet is changing fast and hiding behind handles is no longer accepted or tolerated.
I woud prefer responsible discussions on the technology being described rather than character assassinations.
Hello Guys !
Why not take a simple working recipe and build from there ?
Rick Friedrich has shown a great tool of how to produce easy overunity on this video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik
how to produce a multiplication of voltage , or amperage, or both.
How is that done and possible ?
Well, I am going to help you build one in a single hour's time below.
What you can also do, to be safely and thoroughly taught by Mr Friedrich, is get his "kit" : the "resonant inductive coupler kit" that comes with a 3 hours video to show you what is OU out of the simplest recipe on earth.
For our friends in any other country in the world, who do not have 100 USD to spend, and who may have a bit of cables , and can spend a few dollars in a few electronic parts, I am going to show you what is shown in the RICK kit, without departing, as said Tesla, from the interest of buying it.
I. You will build 3 coils which are as follows :
- 2,5 centimeter diameter (a plumber plastic should be around this and work even at 3 or 4 centimeter).
- 0.5 mm to 2 mm width for the wire
- 54 to 57 turns.
inductance : around 157 uF.
get 3 "100 pF" capacitors.
II. put all those in series :
x capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil y
III. send a SQUARE frequency of 863 KHZ at 11 to 15 volts at x and y points.
the frequency can be approximately deduced from well established formulaes, for instance :
https://goodcalculators.com/resonant-frequency-calculator/ (https://goodcalculators.com/resonant-frequency-calculator/)
IV. put a 100 V bulb anywhere across several points in this circuit, for instance on x and y .
it lights brigthly : voltage has been mutiplied by a factor of around X7, so a Q=7, so a 700% factor multiplier for voltage.
V. remark : the amperage stays the same.
You may now Thank Rick Friedrich for creating this kit in hommage to Don Smith, which I highly recommend to buy (100 USD).
Key words : Tesla, resonance , Tesla lecture 1893, high frequency, Rick Friedrich, resonance coupling, overunity, voltage multiplication, amperage multiplication.
- 2,5 centimeter diameter (a plumber plastic should be around this and work even at 3 or 4 centimeter).
- 0.5 mm to 2 mm width for the wire
- 54 to 57 turns.
inductance : around 157 uF.
Itsu, i'm a bit of a novice on this but from what i know doesn't the C value and the L value of 'impedance need to be the same for both items ie Rc and Lc ? for your selected frequency? Hmm, hows your formula knowledge and maths?
https://ncalculators.com/electronics/reactance-calculator.htm (https://ncalculators.com/electronics/reactance-calculator.htm)
working out inductive and capacitance reactance impudance ;D ;D oops meant impedance
I will leave you to it it's good fun (if you have the time to wast). guys don't realize what's involved in this so-called zero point 8) 8) have fun and good luck.
Hi AlienGrey,Hi wasn't aware impedance matching was the same as resonant frequency as one can get multiple points of resonance with a coil scope and signal gen, not to wory though.
You have a little bit unusual approach to bring an L inductance and a C capacitance to resonance. It is ok that at resonance
the L and C will have identical reactance values (which cancel) but you do not need to use such approach. And no doubt,
you can arrive at your goal by using the reactance calculator and iterate values for matching the two reactances.
Simply you can instead use online LC resonance calculator (that are based on the Thomson formula) which gives the resonant frequency
the moment you punch the L and C value into it. And then the reactances at the resonant frequencies will surely be equal.
Member benfr included a link to such calculator in his post and here is another one:
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/tools/tank-circuit-resonance-calculator/ (https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/tools/tank-circuit-resonance-calculator/) Just enter 100 pF and 163 uH (that was Itsu's actual coil inductance
he used) and you get 1247 kHz, pretty close to his scope measurement of 1224 kHz (see his white trace data on the right). If you read and understand, the problem Itsu noticed and asked was the coil data (number of turns, coil OD) member
benfr provided does not give 157 uH inductance but much less. This is one main point, ok?
Peace
Gyula
Hi Grum,
the 3 coils are initially vertically positioned, but are flexible, see picture.
I did try severall positions and distances, but mostly the resonance frequency is influenced by that, not
the output amplitude or signal shape.
Thats why i am asking if i am doing something wrong and if this is the circuit Benfr has in mind.
Itsu
Hey AG,
...
While your on can i pick your brains on NE555 any idea how i can get a 50/50 waveform out of a 555 without having to keep adjusting it with another pot and a diode or using a D type at double the frequency as I need a span of 30khz to 80 khz ?
Many thanks Itsu.
Did you try with one coil laid horizontal WRT the others?
:)
Simply said, if you can multiply voltage while keeping the same amperage, you have therefore overunity.
Hi3 pages back re Rick F and his fancy 50 dollar 157uhry coils one guy finds a junk RC calculator that ets a 100uf cap to resonate at 1 khz, is that a joke or what ?Please give more details, where is 1 kHz and where is 100 uF in these LC circuits involved? Who wrote that, give Reply #
https://www.1728.org/resfreq.htm (https://www.1728.org/resfreq.htm)
Resonant Frequency Calculator
anyway, see pic!
Hello Guys !
Why not take a simple working recipe and build from there ?
Rick Friedrich has shown a great tool of how to produce easy overunity on this video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik
how to produce a multiplication of voltage , or amperage, or both.
How is that done and possible ?
Well, I am going to help you build one in a single hour's time below.
What you can also do, to be safely and thoroughly taught by Mr Friedrich, is get his "kit" : the "resonant inductive coupler kit" that comes with a 3 hours video to show you what is OU out of the simplest recipe on earth.
For our friends in any other country in the world, who do not have 100 USD to spend, and who may have a bit of cables , and can spend a few dollars in a few electronic parts, I am going to show you what is shown in the RICK kit, without departing, as said Tesla, from the interest of buying it.
I. You will build 3 coils which are as follows :
- 2,5 centimeter diameter (a plumber plastic should be around this and work even at 3 or 4 centimeter).
- 0.5 mm to 2 mm width for the wire
- 54 to 57 turns.
inductance : around 157 uF.
get 3 "100 pF" capacitors.
II. put all those in series :
x capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil y
III. send a SQUARE frequency of 863 KHZ at 11 to 15 volts at x and y points.
the frequency can be approximately deduced from well established formulaes, for instance :
https://goodcalculators.com/resonant-frequency-calculator/
IV. put a 100 V bulb anywhere across several points in this circuit, for instance on x and y .
it lights brigthly : voltage has been mutiplied by a factor of around X7, so a Q=7, so a 700% factor multiplier for voltage.
V. remark : the amperage stays the same.
You may now Thank Rick Friedrich for creating this kit in hommage to Don Smith, which I highly recommend to buy (100 USD).
Key words : Tesla, resonance , Tesla lecture 1893, high frequency, Rick Friedrich, resonance coupling, overunity, voltage multiplication, amperage multiplication.
"That was in 1891, prior to my going to England to lecture before the scientific societies there, the Royal Institution and the Institution of Electrical Engineers. I had a wire run out through the window, and placed on the roof all sorts of devices to constitute this capacity [shown in the diagrams as an elevated square]. The first step was to connect this alternator [shown in the diagrams as a circle] with one terminal to the water pipe system and the other end to the antenna. I had already proved in my lecture at Columbia College that I could transmit energy through one wire; therefore, I was prepared to find that a current of considerable strength could be passed through this wire here [connecting the alternator to the elevated capacitor], although it was insulated. My idea at that time was that I would disturb the electrical equilibrium in the nearby portions of the earth, and the equilibrium being disturbed, this could then be utilized to bring into operation in any way some instrument. That was what we would now call, simply, impressing forced vibrations of very high frequency on an antenna. We have introduced the term "antenna" since that time. . . ."[/font][/size]
Overunity which is a misnomer, (better use efficiency or COP),
Make resonant circuit with parametric pumping input frequency and the method of converting output to very high frequency. That way OU is real I think.
https://hackaday.com/2019/04/26/parametric-amplifiers-and-varactors/ (https://hackaday.com/2019/04/26/parametric-amplifiers-and-varactors/)
I spotted this effect in 2005 with the room filled with electrostatic response from all metals. The proper grounding then makes current flow outside of the wires. In fact Tesla said it in plain sight in his interview. I believe Barbosa and Leal perfected Tesla method but we won't know due to cryptic patent text (like always).
Why I feel you are pulling our legs?
Gyula
Sorry but I already wrote to you ()but you disregard it) that there have been several other people who operate neon lamps from very low input voltages, why should I build such circuit you refer to when it needs a function generator etc?
Here I quote from my earlier post on circuits you can also build and get rid of the use of a generator:
https://www.google.com/search?q=ne-2+lamp+voltage&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m (https://www.google.com/search?q=ne-2+lamp+voltage&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m)
NE-2 : VDC 90 Design current 0,3 mA ( Farnell data) ergo starter input power 0,027 VA
with Voltage drop down to average 0,02 VA input
benfr, this is the energetic demonstration level !
Hi a.king21,
Would like to ask you whether you are aware of the received power levels quantitatively at the output of each receiver module? LED lamps (say with 3 to 5 W data sheet ratings) are surely lit but actually how much power drives them is not shown as measured, this is why I ask.
It is ok that performing such measurements is not easy (instruments are in the vicinity of the strong EM near field of the single transmitter coil). Perhaps Using a full wave diode bridge across the AC output of each receiver modul and say the use of 100 or 220 uF puffer capacitors to filter the diode's DC output would help: this DC output then could drive a known resistor load across which just a DC voltage level check would be needed.
The value of these resistors could be calculated like this: if the shown LED lamps were say 12V and say 3W rated, then their equivalent resistance were (12 x 12) / 3 = 48 Ohm, ok? (use a 47 Ohm, at least 2W rated ones). This is the load any such LED lamp (12V, 3W) would represent towards any 12V voltage source when the source is able to maintain the 12V voltage level. For other LED lamps the same calculation can be used to learn what actual load they represent when fed by their specified voltage.
Obviously, if the voltage level is say 11V or 9.5V or less, the consumed power by this LED becomes less and less too, LED lamps are non linear loads. However, the actual DC power dissipated in a resistor can immediately be known by a simple DC level test across the resistor. If you find say only 10V across a 47 Ohm resistor, then the consumed power would be (10x10)/47=2.1W and so on. Notice that a 2V less input voltage (wrt 12V) results in almost 1W less power draw.
For diode bridges, the cheap UF4007 fast Si diodes are fine, especially if each diode in the bridge is made of two paralleled ones, to reduce overall voltage drop across the bridges.Or use Shottky diodes to make the bridges to reduce voltage loss further on.
This way, by summing up the DC power levels in the resistors across each receiver output, and checking the DC input to the transmitter coil driver IC, a fair comparison of the input and output powers can be obtained.
Are you aware of any such tests done on a single transmitter, multiple receiver modul setup?
Could you do such tests if you have such kit? This is the only way to arrive at any performance evaluation.
If truth is important, that is.
I am not trying to nit-pick with you or anyone else, even a 'mere' COP = 1.5 result would be fantastic, not to mention anything higher, like a COP 144 claim. Do you agree?
Thanks, Gyula
Gyula,
concerning your writing in this post above, what would be the preferred setup for the coils, vertical like in the
below picture or horizontal which i understand from Rick's video?
Planning to drive the center coil (transmitter coil) directly from my FG (initially) with a 47pF series cap. and
the 5 receiver coils each with a 100pF series trimmer cap. to the by you suggested FWBR, 220uF puffer cap and a good known resistor.
Itsu
Gyula,
concerning your writing in this post above, what would be the preferred setup for the coils, vertical like in the
below picture or horizontal which i understand from Rick's video?
Planning to drive the center coil (transmitter coil) directly from my FG (initially) with a 47pF series cap. and
the 5 receiver coils each with a 100pF series trimmer cap. to the by you suggested FWBR, 220uF puffer cap and a good known resistor.
Itsu
a.king21,#327:It's in Rick's video, but you have to understand it is not my process. We have to do things step by step. Then there comes a point of general comprehension, which is like a point of no return. Everything becomes obvious at that point.
bigger coil with 3,75 Watt electric input and claimed 900 Watt (EMF) output
Such an electromagnet would change the energy market ! Inductive heating and to electricity conversion !
Do you will publish your information ?
Sincerely
OCW
a.king21,Square wave.
Would like to ask whether the gate driver is driven with sine wave or square wave by the function generator?
The importance of the gate driver: The innovation by Rick is in the gate driver, because it causes a more disruptive discharge. The disruptive discharge is something which Tesla championed. In this case it produces a larger magnetic field.
The difference is without the gate driver and with the frequency generator that has 20V PP you only get 250V PP on the transmitter coil, but 1300V with the gate driver @ 9V. So the gate driver dramatically increases the gains because of the fast rate of change.
This happens at resonance of course, and you can see the increase on the scope shots.
The purpose of the disruptive discharge is to increase the rate of change.
If you want to build
the bigger coil pm me and I will give you the specs. (You also need 5nf caps in parallel with each receiver coil.)
So the first question : how much real input power ? pulsed P to P = ( UxZ)x(IxZ) = 25,6 mW ?I let my scope calculate the instantaneous power over the signals (voltage/current) it receives, should be OK.
Gyula
1. " My idea at that time was that I would disturb the electrical equilibrium in the nearby portions of the earth, and the equilibrium being disturbed, this could then be utilized to bring into operation in any way some instrument"
My understanding : my instrument should be able to disturb local Earth potential and make difference which can be utilized (power some other instruments) - the idea is to tap external energy
2. "I had already proved in my lecture at Columbia College that I could transmit energy through one wire; therefore, I was prepared to find that a current of considerable strength could be passed through this wire here [connecting the alternator to the elevated capacitor], although it was insulated. "
My understanding: the first part is utterly misleading (everybody thought he tried to move current inside the single wire ) but he is ONLY explaining that he can move charge in environment around because Earth is like single wire )of immense diameter) - the second part mach the previous text : "although it was insulated" - that part makes no sense if the charge is inside wire or insulated is elevated capacitor - because that is natural way to insulate electrical circuit to avoid looses. So why he mentioned this ? Because he was about to move charges from the ground to the elevated capacitance or rather to the antenna. Energy from outside flow around the circuit - that's the only explanation I could find.
Now maybe I'm wrong, Tesla notes are very subtle and the real meaning seems deep hidden below the simple explanation, but after reading a lot some parts just start to do not match this simple explanation.
Of Snakecoils and other thingsHi Vortex1,
....
In an air core transformer with multiple secondaries widely distanced from the
primary you cannot capture more power in the secondaries than is being input
regardless of the certainty of those who teach this. Because of the separation distance and low K,
much of the primary power will not be useful to the
secondaries, and this is normally termed leakage inductance by engineers.
...
Also being espoused by the new "teachers" is that you need to resonate the secondaries to get the voltage to
increase. You may do this, but when you then place on the secondaries a useful
load, you wind up collapsing the high voltage that was created in resonance, killing
the Q of the resonant tank. The high resonance voltage is greatly reduced due to the
fact that power is delivered out of the resonant system at the same rate it is being
input, so there is little to nothing left for the resonant system to work with to
store energy and build a high voltage.
....
Thank you Itsu, for your actual power measurement clearly demonstrates that the separation distance
that creates poor coupling (low K) greatly reduces power transfer in an ordinary air core transformer,
regardless of the resonant tuning of such. BTW, this fairly accurately agrees with simulations of the same.
...
FG is set to resonance (1.578Khz) square wave 50% duty cycle, pulsed DC (like a gate driver would) and the screenshot shows:
Vortex1,
Itsu made already a correction on the frequency in his post #349, line 4.
Vortex1 (all)
3) Does the the coupling factors or total energy transfer be different in this case maybe because we use a transmission (coupling) from
the coil part in a series resonance circuit (gen.) to a parallel resonance circuit
compared with (common radio) parallel resonance circuit coupled to a parallel resonance circuit(s) ??
My guess is that they are equivalent
Regards Arne
Heh... at that frequency you are most probably operating in a pure EM mode, so you don't have to worry about "real HV". You may find that you can achieve "supernova mode" close coupling that does not result in a 1/r2 falloff with distance (to a certain limit.) Your receivers seem to be essentially the same as used in my system. The main difference is that I use coils of much lower inductance (and hence less power-wasting in ohmic resistance) and autoresonating drivers, in this case a Royer oscillator:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x2YfA9LU5s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x2YfA9LU5s)
Instead of a gate gate driver it's possible to use an impedance transformer
I see some impedance mismatch at the secondary side too
see my suggestion
Regards Arne
Low power circuit device :
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963
Low power circuit device :Hi lancaIV.
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963 (https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963)
It turns out, each detector receiver consumes part of the transmitter power?
Will the ammeter switch on a large radio station, swing in a big way if I put on the headphones and adjust the variable capacitor to this frequency?
I understand that imperceptibly. But if there will be a million or more....Hi kolbacict,
Hi kolbacict,The same as Morey did the surroundings
What would you do if the man-made energy sources (i.e. radio and tv transmitters) would finish transmitting by any reason?
Where would you take energy from then?
Hi AlienGrey,The Moray device has been suspected to use radioactive material (I do not know). The Nelson circuit sounds to be harmful as per the mail you quoted.Have you ever come across some of these Most Haunted 'places' where torches and video cameras
So back to square one, as always. ?
Still doing some tests, but i cannot create more ouput in the receiver coils then stated earlier.Hi Itsu
What i did notice with my hall sensor probe is that the max. RF coming from the TX coil is at its bottom, so the inverse as from a tesla coil.
The receiver coils are wired up the same way, so i guess they "expect" this max. RF at their bottoms too.
At least when i turn around a receiver coil its output decreases compared with its normal position.
Itsu
Hi Vortex1,
thanks for your response, i would like to have your sim if possible so i can tune it to see if i can
improve upon it on the real thing.
Yes the result is kind of disappointing i think.
700mW input versus 100mW output (eff. 14%) is nothing to get enthusiastic over.
Anyway, i tried one last thing with this setup and that is replacing the 50 Ohm
load resistors by 10mm leds.
Perhaps when "seeing the light" will provoke a more enthusiastic response then those
chilling realitycheck input/output calculations did.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej9l0jCiYCE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej9l0jCiYCE)
Itsu
Thanks Arne,Here read this you might find this could help you if not already known or clear.
i see where you are coming from with those harmonics etc., it sounds logical to me.
But the square wave signal (rate of change) seems to be a vital part of this setup it seems (its not my idea by the way).
The resonant TX coil will produce a strong sine wave on the resonant frequency which will be picked up
by the RX coils on their (same) resonant frequeny and thus filtering that frequency out.
So i expect to see (Spectrum wise) only a resonant frequency signal on the RX's.
But i will see what i can do, it involves some modifications to the setup.
Regards Itsu
Here read this you might find this could help you if not already known or clear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferroresonance_in_electricity_networks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferroresonance_in_electricity_networks)
Itsu good craftmanship!
As this experiment is using a [almost] square wave input we can first estimate roughly a minimum of 15 -20 percent loss [ see your Spectrum Analyze ] only depending of wasted overtone energy that will never be sucked into the secondary coils if I'm right. The Secondary coils are only tuned to one tone, the first (over)tone.
To check if I'm right. Pls. make a spectrum reading at the point before the diode bridge. But without the diode bridge and with a 50 Ohm load. Strong first tone and weak (no) overtones.
If you see strong overtones there with similarity to the primary emission, then I'm wrong. Not enough filtering! Maybe good in your eyes.
See also my previous impedanse matching suggestions.
If you are able, make some efficiency tests with 3, 4, 5 sec. coils to see and evaluate, predikt if a much greater number of secoday coils maybe will improve the effectiveness.
In my eyes the main issues here are impedanse matching, the primary wave form and LED:s ::) .
If you still belive that the sharp square waveform is a must for the best result then the secondarys have to be constructed in a different way so they are able to take on, suck up All harmonics. Of course only valid if I'm right. Good filtering now.
Regards Arne
That article specifically addresses iron core transformers hence Ferro-resonance. Here we are talking about air core transformers which do not exhibit this effect.Err! don't be so quick to judge as that might be considered misleading information Mr. Vortex! as in the first section, that same none linear tactic is actually used in air spaced coils and works should anyone care to try it best results could be a pancake type coil or a tuned tank coil assembly.
Ferro-resonance is typically used in transformers to provide a degree of voltage regulation. (CVTs)
A slightly higher Q might be obtained if ferrite rods, Litz wire and low dissipation factor capacitors such as vacuum or mica types were used. The ferrite rods would allow fewer turns for the same inductance, thus cutting down on copper resistive losses. Nevertheless, the power coupling would still be less than 100%. The efficacy of the improvement would depend on frequency as ferrites also get lossy at higher frequencies so there would be an optimum frequency point where benefit could be achieved for a given ferrite material type.
Alternately the air core coils could be made of silver plated thin wall copper tubing as used in radio transmitters to keep losses low and Q high. Still, it will be less than 100% power transfer.
Regards
Err! don't be so quick to judge as that might be considered misleading information Mr. Vortex! as in the first section, that same none linear tactic is actually used in air spaced coils and works should anyone care to try it best results could be a pancake type coil or a tuned tank coil assembly.
I modified one of the RX coils by removing the FWBR and buffer cap so we have the LC circuit and a 51 Ohm load resistor.
The Spectrum analyzer was across this 51 Ohm load and still shows the harmonics present across this RX series LC, but way less then what the TX coil transmits
So it seems the RX coils also partly absorb that harmonic energy radiated by the TX coil and thus all is not lost.
Itsu
OK, I'm willing to learn AG. How do I make a non-linear air coil? Kindly show me the BH curves or any other data showing results of your non-linear air coil as I would like to make one and test it myself.A Tesla coil or nonlinear resonance is a type of series resonance in electric circuits which occurs when a circuit containing a nonlinear inductance is fed from a source that has series capacitance, and the circuit is subjected to a disturbance such as the opening of an electronic switch BEMF.
Kind Regards
A Tesla coil or nonlinear resonance is a type of series resonance in electric circuits which occurs when a circuit containing a nonlinear inductance is fed from a source that has series capacitance, and the circuit is subjected to a disturbance such as the opening of an electronic switch BEMF.
It can cause overvoltages and overcurrents in electrical or electronic circuitry and can pose a risk to equipment and to operational personnel in close proximity.
the same none linear tactic is actually used in air spaced coils and works should anyone care to try
...Hi Arne,
This is my interpretation of the test result.
...
AG;If you insist on faffing around disrupting this thread please create or select one as such to do so.
I agree that there is such a thing as a non-linear inductance, and such a device usually has some type of saturating the ferrous core.
I would be very interested in such a non-linear air core inductor that is constructed of an air core alone without ferrous material.
Your real world testing agrees with my simulations of your setup in LTSpice.Look, everyone has it...
This post is off topic, sorry for that.Thanks Gyula, but isn't this thread suppose to be about, Confirmation of OU devices and claims, therefore I was merely asking originally a question with some humor. Any way likewise and thanks for the input. I will file it in the black filing cabinet with all the other junk ;D ;D
Hi AlienGrey,
I kindly ask you to look into the mirror sometimes, mainly before writing certain messages. Otherwise the Trollmeter swings full scale for you.
If you look at what the guy is saying he wants to make an argument over my post and asks me for proof with photographs and input and output graphs and all sorts technical jargin, that's when it's Trolling I just don't have the time to wast. that is Trolling in my book.
See here for instance what you wrote to Itsu: "Hmm, hows your formula knowledge and maths?"
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg533756/#msg533756
And as it turns out from my reply to you, it was you who approached the resonance frequency calculation for an LC circuit from reactance calculations point of view for L and C which is also ok but a side step instead of using the Thomson formula directly. What is more, Itsu has shown his knowledge for years (also in LC circuits) so that you were rather unpolite to him by posing that question.
Was it, I certainly wasn't aware I had upset Itsu, if I have it was totally unintentional I can assure you and Itsu.
And when you answered to me, you then asked a totally off topic question, (post #274) which I did answer and you did not even thank the answer. (But this is no problem for me, not the reason I write this post.)
Yes, you did answer thank you, as I was after a quick cheap way of getting a 50/50 square wave which I made up, unfortunately, it did not produce a square wave something more like 40/60 which was of no use, I just didn't have the time as I had to keep searching and testing for an answer. Wich I did in the end of another unlikely user on another thread. Thanks anyway.
Here is another strange post from you #302:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg533836/#msg533836
"Hi, 3 pages back re Rick F and his fancy 50 dollar 157uhry coils one guy finds a junk RC calculator that ets a 100uf cap to resonate at 1 khz, is that a joke or what ?"
Yes I agree, that's it was originally pointed to it and why I queried it.
I went 3 pages back but found no posts that included 100 uF cap to resonate at 1 kHz so asked you to give reply number that included it.
As an answer, you highlighted this text from benfr's post #260:
" III. send a SQUARE frequency of 863 KHZ at 11 to 15 volts at x and y points.
the frequency can be approximately deduced from well-established formulas, for instance :
https://goodcalculators.com/resonant-frequency-calculator/ " and you added: you were trying to find out how Itsu got his 90 deg phase shift. Then found that and thought that can't be right. then tried to reverse logic what that Rick F was up to and got really confused. "
Well, there was no 100 uF cap and 1 kHz frequency written in benfr's post.
Well, thats strange as I can go straight to it with the pointer I gave you on my machine!
By the way, it is okay that originally you wanted to figure out from Itsu scope shot (shown in his post 289) why the 90 degree phase shift happened between the voltage waveforms (the answer is the voltage across a cap always leads 90 degrees wrt the generator voltage).
That only works on caps and resistance if you try it with caps and inductance you won't get the same result and I can't find any equation for such a setup.
No offense intended, and I will continue to answer your posts if I can if they are strictly technical and relevant to a given topic.
Gyula
Well, there was no 100 uF cap and 1 kHz frequency written in benfr's post.
Well, thats strange as I can go straight to it with the pointer I gave you on my machine!
That only works on caps and resistance if you try it with caps and inductance you won't get the same result and I can't find any equation for such a setup.
Please read up on series resonance circuits:
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/accircuits/series-resonance.html (https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/accircuits/series-resonance.html)
Under "Impedance in a Series Resonance Circuit"
We recall from the previous tutorial about series RLC circuits that the voltage across a series combination
is the phasor sum of VR, VL and VC. Then if at resonance the two reactances are equal and cancelling, the
two voltages representing VL and VC must also be opposite and equal in value thereby cancelling each other
out because with pure components the phasor voltages are drawn at +90o and -90o respectively.
Also before that, you show a square wave would that be created the same way?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY)
Interesting experiment indeed with the resonance impedance transformer. Have there been tests confirming lower losses in the primary circuit than in the secondary? If so, it is indeed a good way to free energy. Or is it the case that the V²/R losses in the primary balance those in the secondary?https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY)You can find explanations from the maker of the video, Tortuga0303 in the Comments section under the video. I collected the most relevant explanations:
...Hi benfr,
it is also possible to bring an oscillator in the game to see wonderful waveforms show what it does look like to observe directly energy multiplication.
....
From Rick Friedrich's Resonant Induction Coupler Kit, exercice 1.b.
Hi benfr,
Please understand the following comment from Tortuga0303, the maker of the video a.king referred to:
"The bulbs take some 3v 300ma to light up. The input is 12v. Therefore it is possible that the input be say 12 v @ 75ma. Then through the impedance matching quality of the transformer, the output is reduced to 3v 300ma. power going in and out is the same, but one is of the correct quality to light the bulb and the other is not. "
So there is no energy multiplication happening. In fact, there is no more output power in the secondary LC circuits than what was input to the primary (the transmitter) coil / circuit. Itsu's measurements clearly showed the facts.
Gyula
benfr : DC 3 Volt to 12 Volt = energy amplification, but does not indicate power amplification
Please rephrase your questions, I do not understand.
When you have " power amplification": which source becomes harvest ?
When you are beside : your body waves emission ?
So you mean you have a " power amplification concept":
based by a tension-source or current-source ?
Sincerely
OCWL
AG,Hi Itsu thanks for confirming that for me (i don't work well if too many choices) I tried something like that when
Gyula pointed (linked) in his above post to the specific post on page 20 you refer to.
All info on those 2 screenshots (1st one from the sim, 2th one from my real circuit/scope) are in that post.
Just picture the circuit drawn (see below), then for MY REAL CIRCUIT, picture the purple trace probe (CH3)
across V1 (FG and whole LRC), ground lead left (-), probe tip right (+).
I seem to have INVERTED the purple signal, so in real it should be flipped over (180°).
Then picture the blue trace probe (CH2) across C1 (series Cap), ground lead also left, probe tip right.
The reason for the voltages across the RLC (purple) and the C (blue) being 90° off is explained in a link i
presented a few post later to benfr (post # 295) where i wrote:
There it reads:
So (in resonance) compared to the "view" from across the whole RLC (purple), the signal across L and C are
resp. +90° and -90° (remember my purple trace is inverted) out of phase.
Hope this clears it up.
Concerning this question:
I guess you mean my post #271 on page 19.
There i refer to Benfr his setup, see sim circuit (cap, coil, cap, coil, cap, coil in series) with parallel
across it a load (R1) and the FG (V1).
The square wave signal in both the SIM (green) and in my screenshot (blue and white) are from across the FG (V1).
The green (sim) and blue signals are when NOT in resonance (nice squares), the white one is what happens when
IN resonance (the resonance signal loads the FG in such a way that it forms these troughs.
Regards Itsu
However, coil matching at resonance is a matter that is not explored in the video, in an explicit way, for it has several dimensions : wavelength, capacitance, inductance, rate of change, disruptive discharge, and others.
benfr, thank you for the trial to make it clear ( me not ! ??? )
Probably it will be a need to invest two hours of life for his view and description :
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ke4aqkrkh1o
So only after that I will ask you again for details. !
Happy disclosure wishing
OCWL
Hi benfr,
You wrote:
You mention "disruptive discharge". I do not think there is "disruptive discharge" happening and I wrote this to a.king in my post #339, Page 23 of this thread. However, he has not returned with an answer yet.
Would you mind explaining how you think it happens in Rick's setup when the series LC (i.e. the TX) circuit is driven by the output of the gate driver IC?
Gyula
Gyula, simply put - a SQUARE wave IS a disruptive discharge. YES you need this to trigger the resonance we are looking at. BUT you could not have it and still do useful observations - beyond my area of play, here, so I won't tell you to start this. The Gate driver is, merely, a disruptive discharge amplifier.
Hi Benfr,
Perhaps you could explain what a square wave is a discharging? Obviously something is being disruptively discharged but it is unclear as to exactly what this "something" is?
Regards,
Pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQqYs6O2MPwWalter Lewin a real 'fun guy' he must get it from the mushrooms he eats. ;D ;D
It seems bigger is better in this case.
So i build a big coil with what i have:
That's an awesome setup itsu. Congratulations. I can see you went for the big coil as presented by Rick on his video. It is looking like it.
1. Do you have voltage loads like bulbs/LEDs to light at resonance with the small input ?
2. Did you buy the gate driver somewhere or you built it ? I am interested to know about the schematics if you please.
2. I build the gate driver (IXDD614PI), data sheet link below, on page 6 its schematic (modified in red below).
The idea is to have more satellite coils (15 - 20) placed near to the big coil all lighting up such a 12V / 3.5W led bulb
while maintaining or even lowering the 18V / 250mA input (4.5W).
Itsu
http://www.spigellab.com/2016/07/12/basic-teslas-experiments-part-4-measuring-power-consumption-300w-motor-and-wireless-power/ (http://www.spigellab.com/2016/07/12/basic-teslas-experiments-part-4-measuring-power-consumption-300w-motor-and-wireless-power/)
Can anyone explain to me why LEDs are always used as load (resistors) in all these threads /discussion groups about OU through the years.Hi Arne,
Is it so that that is the best way to prolonge the threads duration (amount of words written) in an optimum way?
Whats wrong with resistors??
Arne
AlienGray,Hi yes something like this.
Could you show even a hand drawn schematic on your coils connection with their inductance values and capacitor values, this would greatly help giving a better answer. Include the frequency involved for your case.
I know there are several such circuit drawings shown in the actual threads but I do not want to wade through any of them and they may not show 'your version'.
Gyula
" ITSU:
When we roughly take this 60mW times 5 we get 300mW total consumed by the leds which is about 1/3 of the
power available at the input (COP = 0.3)."
Pls. compare the coils magnetic directions!
Arne
https://youtu.be/WWa81kmhVyc (https://youtu.be/WWa81kmhVyc)[/font]
This is a video of the generator I have built.
Dave
Hi Arne,
yes, seen that, but i don't think the right image is a working setup, just a show of of available parts.
Itsu
Is he selling a kit with parts mounted on nice "footboards" that will not operate correctly gathered together.
And people pays willingly for that?
Maybe the perpendicular way is the only way that cerates some good effects?
/ Arne
I don't know Arne, i tried the satellite coils (and big coil) in all possible positions and combinations, but the "all vertical" yields the best results.
Itsu
It is one important key point to learn in the kit, out of many, many more...
The resonance system is the first one or two stages of the Don Smith system. If proved then we can be confident of stages three to five. Stage three is the 1:4 or 4:1 quarter wave section, stages 4 and five are the frequency reduction and the final resonant transformer at mains frequency. So it's a complicated process of resonance all the way to the final stages. But you need a gauss meter to see the energy created. The initial stage of resonance is the first one Don Smith claims led him to his discoveries. But at last we now have clarity with the Don Smith process which is identical to the Kapanadze process if you take a look at Kapanadze's patent applications. In my opinion it's worth the effort to learn these processes anyway because the ultimate energy comes from the electrons in the earth grounding. Which is exactly what Tesla said.(And Eric Dollard and Rick Friedrich and Don Smith etc etc.) There is no "overunity" it is simply a method of agitating the ambient background using magnetic resonance and seeing the multiplication of magnetic energy by the resonant system. A scope is useless in this field. Then you return the agitated electrons back to the earth ground ready for re-use. So we are not talking Kirchhoff's loop law here. We are talking about Faraday's laws.In order for the system to work you need a sharp gradient ie a spike wave. Another name is Tesla's impulse technology.I entirly agree with you but 'Rick Friedrich' ;D doesn't he go on?
If you can sit through this video the process is explained here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVnAU1FmCsg&list=UUu1hNQsr9YnkIjFkMAc3Npw&index=35
PS You need a GAUSS METER to see the energy or you are electronically blind and see only Kirchhoff's laws using meters and scopes.
aking: What does this have to do with OU, or self running? Are we going to have free electricity in this way?
Hi a.king21,
No offense but what you wrote is a fantastic techno hodgepodge... sorry to say. Similar to your earlier mentioning of
"disruptive discharge" for a max 18 Vpp square wave (which drives a resonant LC circuit) or of "Heaviside magnetic output"
or the COP 144 claim.
The resonance system as the first one or two stages of the "DS system" have failed, it has not been proved to give
"energy multiplication". Correct measurements by Itsu clearly resulted in underunity while Rick F or benfr clearly claimed
COP > 1 performance for the resonance system.
Now you come along with measuring Gauss to "see the energy"... Let's suppose that the "ultimate energy comes from the electrons in the earth grounding" as you wrote. Then such excess energy should manifest in driving a useful load, right?
Why this excess energy is not demonstrated by Rick F or by benfr claiming that?
To light a NE-2 neon bulb with the help of a resonant system is NOT energy amplification, you can do it for instance with
a step-up auto or normal transformer or with a single transistor oscillator running from
a less than 1 V battery. Voltage amplification - yes, energy amplification - no.
Remember that Nikola Tesla claimed "energy amplification" (but not with these words) only when he used up the energy
from a charged capacitor within very short time, ok? http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm)
A Gauss meter measures magnetic flux intensity and it is okay that near to a resonant LC circuit it would display much stronger magnetic fields
than a non-resonant current would create in the same coil. BUT how do you utilize the stronger field?
The moment you load the resonant system the Q hence the field intensity reduces immediately and here it is totally
irrelevant whether input energy comes from your signal generator or from earth grounding or even from both.
Why this part of the story is not shown correctly from those claiming 'energy amplification' ?
Faraday's laws have never been shown to manifest excess energy, you cannot escape with it as you now attempt to
get rid of the Kirchoff's loop law... but in vain.
Everbody should show correct measurements to prove their claims.
Gyula
There is no "overunity" it is simply a method of agitating the ambient background using magnetic resonance and seeing the multiplication of magnetic energy by the resonant system.
If you can sit through this video the process is explained here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVnAU1FmCsg&list=UUu1hNQsr9YnkIjFkMAc3Npw&index=35
PS You need a GAUSS METER to see the energy or you are electronically blind and see only Kirchhoff's laws using meters and scopes.
The resonance system as the first one or two stages of the "DS system" have failed, it has not been proved to giveAnd by the quadratic dependence of the magnetic field energy on the current? W=I^2L/2 We have two identical coils on the same core connected in parallel. We supply current through them. When all the energy of the current goes into the energy of the magnetic field, we switch these coils from a parallel connection to serial ones using an ideal relay. What will happen?
"energy multiplication". Correct measurements by Itsu clearly resulted in underunity while Rick F or benfr clearly claimed
COP > 1 performance for the resonance system.
And by the quadratic dependence of the magnetic field energy on the current? W=I^2L/2 We have two identical coils on the same core connected in parallel. We supply current through them. When all the energy of the current goes into the energy of the magnetic field, we switch these coils from a parallel connection to serial ones using an ideal relay. What will happen?you would lose it into the environment like an aerial works.
But in an oscillating circuit, for example, all the energy of the magnetic field (well, almost all, except for the loss :( ) goes back into the current, and then into the charge of the capacitor. And so many times. Nowhere is it dissipated in the air. ;)Tesla used a cap a bemf coil and a cap and a bar to loop in a circle so as no dc current loop.
What is benf? is a benf coil a bifilar of Tesla?What is a BENF ? no it's BEMF it's any coil that can produce a back EMF if you don't know what that is get an old relay with a 12 or 24 volt coil and put a neon bulb across the coil then dab a battery across the coil and the neon will flash that's BEMF
"Hair pin" is alegory?
What is benf? is a benf coil a bifilar of Tesla?
"Hair pin" is alegory?
What is benf? is a benf coil a bifilar of Tesla?
"Hair pin" is alegory?
No wonder we do not accomplish anything on these forums :o
A further point on the Don SMith effect as per his patent. In a telephone conversation Don stated that there is a further process to his system to get OU. It's this process which needs to be proved or disproved and it requires some further understanding of the resonant process.Well if you have a gyrating magnetic field in the center it's bound to modulate
The initial resonant system is just the start of the process - I am only the messenger here trying to point the theory out.
The claim is that you have to reduce the frequency at resonance to useable frequency . In order to do that you need to correct the impulse resonant form into DC and then step down the frequency at resonance. The stepping down is claimed to work the same way as a transformer ie reducing the frequency increases the power.
So two choices. POh Pooh the whole concept or get on board and try it.
Simple.
Just stop shooting the messenger.
Don't take my word that conventional theory is wrong - take MIT as your bible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQN7Dke9pX8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQN7Dke9pX8)
Ha ha ha
Well if you have a gyrating magnetic field in the center it's bound to modulate
and induce energy into the circuit.
Ever get that feeling once in a while 8) :o
Hi AG,re A Kings demodulation into a lower frequency G2 but its just a block diagram
Can you tell more about this circuit?
I don't understand Russian.
Why the second FET is on the high side?
...Don Smith did not get a patent, he got a patent application number as member lancaIV explained the meaning of the suffix (A) in Don Smith's Mexican patent application number MXNL02000035(A). Link to the application is here:
Explain how Don Smith obtained a granted patent for the Don Smith Effect.
You need a gauss meter or you are electronically and electrically blind to see the DSE (Don Smith Effect)
A further point on the Don SMith effect as per his patent. In a telephone conversation Don stated that there is a further process to his system to get OU. It's this process which needs to be proved or disproved and it requires some further understanding of the resonant process....I wish you good luck to apply the further process needed to get OU.
Don said the following re the plasma tube device.(audio 2003) "First of all you have to change your radio frequency and you change it to pulsating DC. Once you've done that you can use it just like ordinary electricity.." The reason I am banging the drum about the frequency reduction component is that it features in Kapanadze's patent application in the L2 part of his device, so there is a comon thread to both Don SMith and Kapanadze. Rick also would not give me any details saying it's too dangerous because volts can become amps.2 ways i would have thought as Don did it charging up capacitors with timing RC circuit but you still have the voltage now and you have amps in your caps, with out some kind of feed back cut off circuit.
So come on guys (and gals) especially the EEs. How do you reduce frequency in an electrical circuit with a gain???
Even how to reduce the frequency without a loss would be good.
Funny how the silence about this subject on the internet is DEAFENING!
A.king21,
it is just too simple to hide behind the phrase "don't shoot the messenger".
If you are willing to spout claims which are not normally understood or even confusing, then you can expect all kind of comments and questions.
What do you mean by:
"you have to reduce the frequency at resonance to useable frequency"?
And:
"you need to correct the impulse resonant form into DC and then step down the frequency at resonance"?
# What is a "useable frequency"? 50Hz? 60Hz? 180Khz?
# Reducing a frequency (guess of an LC circuit) is easy, just increase the L or C, is that what you mean?
# what is "the impulse resonant form"? Do you mean the input signal into a resonant LC circuit?
Its pulsed DC in my case (gate driver).
# what do you mean by "and then step down the frequency at resonance"? How would one do that without disturbing resonance?
You (DS, RF) just cannot "think up" something that might work (step down the frequency at resonance) and then challence the EE's to come up with a solution.
Its no wonder to me why "the silence about this subject on the internet is DEAFENING!" an EE would not touch this.
The use of a resistor to pull the frequency down to suit the step-down transformer in one of DS famous contraptions using an ARRL table, see the PDF page 89 / bottom in this link: https://tinyurl.com/yymrqcsl (https://tinyurl.com/yymrqcsl) is already long debunked as nonsense.
I am still building, testing and measuring the Big and small coils, but all attempts up till now show the same results as in my previous tests.
Regards Itsu
I was hoping from help from the community not attacks.
citfta
May I ask two questions ?
1. Is it true that resistance in radio LC circuit will change Q factor and make resonant "point" wider ?2. Can you make LC circuit of high Q factor and then connect proper antenna and have standing wave inside it without radiating EM wave with the same amps and voltage rise as in LC circuit ?
Hi Itsu,
The part I highlighted in red is the very reason I decided Don Smith was either very confused or a scam artist. As I think you know I am a Ham so I was already pretty familiar with the ARRL handbook. I was also familiar with that chart that Don used very incorrectly to make his claim. Up until I saw that in one of his videos I thought he might actually have something. When I saw that I then became very skeptical and then the more I saw the more I realized he was spouting out a bunch of garbage. His claim that a neon sign transformer was already OU because the open output voltage times the shorted output current was more power than the input is also a false claim. You measure output power by measuring both the current and voltage while under load as anyone with any electronics training already knows. Those are only two of the red flags I saw while watching some of his videos.
As I have said before, I like Rick, but I am very sorry to see he has fallen for the baloney put out by Don Smith.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Hi Carroll,Yes Hmm I can already see a problem with this test that result in nothing being observed some how.
yes that claim that a neon sign transformer was already OU is another goof up of him that opened up the eyes of many.
Anyway, it don't look like i will get any answers on my questions, so i will await my gaussmeter to arrive
and do some tests with it to see if i can find some extra energy with it.
Itsu
Hi Carroll,
yes that claim that a neon sign transformer was already OU is another goof up of him that opened up the eyes of many.
Anyway, it don't look like i will get any answers on my questions, so i will await my gaussmeter to arrive
and do some tests with it to see if i can find some extra energy with it.
Itsu
Well firstly, in response to Rick's "phase conjugate mirror" claim. Yesterday I ran the kit for 3 hours and the voltage on the gate driver did not move - so something interesting was happening. (I had several extra coils). So I was lighting several leds and powering the gate driver without loss.The voltage does not change (at least easily noticeably) on the gate driver because most decent gate drivers have under 1 Ohm output resistance and behave as a voltage source like a battery.
....
The voltage does not change (at least easily noticeably) on the gate driver because most decent gate drivers have under 1 Ohm output resistance and behave as a voltage source like a battery.
So either the AC output current from the gate driver or the resonant AC voltage across the L or the C member of the series LC transmitter (TX) circuit should be checked how they change when you couple some extra receiver coils to the L member of the transmitter coil.
What should also be known here is that if the series TX circuit gets detuned from resonance or you start coupling receiver coils
(with LED lamp loads on them) to the TX coil, then even if you carefully retune both the TX and RX circuits to resonance, the impedance of the series LC circuit (that loads the output of the gate driver) increases.
This manifests in a smaller output current from the gate driver and a smaller voltage level across the L and C members of the transmitter. (This latter is shown by Itsu and can also be seen even in Rick F's video, on their oscilloscopes.)
So you did not power the gate driver without loss, unfortunately, you misguided yourself by voltage measurement on the gate driver. The "phase conjugate mirror" is a technical hodgepodge expression here, sorry to say.
By the way, from Itsu measurements and videos you should already have gathered guidance what to check and where.
Gyula
Yes you are right. It is an honor to be mentored by such a great experimenter like you. I would dearly like to see your builds. I think I would learn a lot. Anyway I have other projects to deal with now and will be leaving the experiments alone for a while.
And there are obviously no similarities between Don Smith and Kapanadze who are both probably frauds. And VAR is just an angle on a scope - nothing to see there - move on. And I am sure that Kirchhoff's laws are immutable and work on every single occasion.
You have won Gyula. Enjoy your victory. As you say there is no OU and no magnetic energy to speak of - it's all just a figment of Don Smith's imagination. And there is no increase of magnetic energy when you attach an earth ground, because the earth does not have any way of transmitting magnetic energy into a circuit. And you cannot have a light bulb filament made from bamboo cane either. Everyone knows that. After all the laws of physics are never wrong. On that we can be sure. And of course there is no increase in magnetic energy when you activate a neon sign transformer or a pulsating HV module- everyone knows that. After all you cannot get more out of a circuit than you put in because Kirchhoff's loop law is never wrong.
Enjoy your victory Gyula.
Itsu: One further point. When the phase conjugate mirror occured the coils went stone cold and the earth wire went stone cold. Also the big coil went stone cold.
Try this. Measure the gauss on your big coil at start up.
Tune the big coil in and out of resonance. What does the gauss meter show?
Then attach a ground wire to the negative of your big coil at resonance . what do you see?
Then attach the ground wire to the positive of your big coil - what do you see?
Turn on a plasma ball and compare the gauss measurement. What do you see?
Turn on a HV module and measure the gauss. What do you see?
Hi a.king21,
...
Itsu: One further point. When the phase conjugate mirror occured the coils went stone cold and the earth wire went stone cold. Also the big coil went stone cold.
Try this. Measure the gauss on your big coil at start up.
Tune the big coil in and out of resonance. What does the gauss meter show?
Then attach a ground wire to the negative of your big coil at resonance . what do you see?
Then attach the ground wire to the positive of your big coil - what do you see?
Turn on a plasma ball and compare the gauss measurement. What do you see?
Turn on a HV module and measure the gauss. What do you see?
a.king21,
Would you explain what exactly you mean on a "phase conjugate mirror"?
And you achieve such state by how?
Gyula
Itsu: Cannot understand why your wave is a sine wave. I have some screen shots from a dvd with the kit which shows "spike waves at various frequencies - (but using the small coils only). Unless your scope is affecting the wave form.A.king,
You have to mess around with the coils to get a phase conjugate mirror as everything affects the overall circuit. I used 7 small coils plus the big coil. You know when you are there because your gate driver voltage won't move. You can also use a Hv fast bridge rectifier between earth ground and negative of the big coil to help power the gate driver (ie charge the batteries of the gate driver). And you can use one of the satellite coils to power the frequency generator in the same fashion.
Itsu: One further point. When the phase conjugate mirror occured the coils went stone cold and the earth wire went stone cold. Also the big coil went stone cold.
Try this. Measure the gauss on your big coil at start up.
Tune the big coil in and out of resonance. What does the gauss meter show?
Then attach a ground wire to the negative of your big coil at resonance . what do you see?
Then attach the ground wire to the positive of your big coil - what do you see?
Turn on a plasma ball and compare the gauss measurement. What do you see?
Turn on a HV module and measure the gauss. What do you see?
Some quick test as mentioned above, still using the battery operated FG directly to the big coil LC, see circuit above.
Impressive, you certainly invested lots of time in that construct, and had result.
Cheers!
I got my gaussmeter, which is an el cheapo electromagnetic radiation tester (GM3120) and which i know is beingitsu, I bought that exact same gauss meter a while back. I don't know if it was a bad one but it was nearly worthless and could barely detect anything compared to two other meters I have. One is an older analog gauss and emf meter and one a newer one (digital) that was about $15 which does okay (but is still less sensitive than my old analog). Try opening up that Kmoon and see if what they are using for a detector looks like it would be useful for anything but the closest or strongest fields. It appears to be nothing but a piece of PCB with copper on both sides with both sides soldered together (electrically connected). There is also a resistor mounted up high off the circuit board behind that piece about 5/16" from the copper. ???
used in combination with this Big coil testing.
It can measure Electric fields in V/m and Magnetic fields in uT.
An overload led (flashing) and beeper warns when radiation levels are unsafe (very often!).
Anyway, here a short introduction, see video.
I will do some tests the next days including the ones mentione by A.King21 earlier.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgjEDVbfVJQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgjEDVbfVJQ)
Itsu
The power output obtained
is in direct proportion to the amount of hidden cables.
:) :) :)
Hi Rick,
Thanks for coming in this thread too.
I would like you to consider member Itsu's recent measurement results and comments on the input power
to the transmitter circuit and the output power the LED bulbs got from the receiver units.
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534383/#msg534383 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534383/#msg534383)
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534479/#msg534479 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534479/#msg534479)
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534479/#msg534479 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534479/#msg534479)
The point is: even though you can use quasi hundreds of receiver units loaded with red or white LEDs
you do not know what the actual power levels are that the LED bulbs really consume. Your hinting at
"bright 3W LED bulbs" is not enough at all, even for estimating roughly the actual power levels involved.
This is what you wrote in this respect:
"The loads off the 10 bigger coils (one not shown) were bright 3W LED bulbs, and another one was powered
below off a regular coil which isn't seen in the picture. So I had at least 11 of these big LEDs and almost 70 small
LEDs powered. I also added ferrite coils with these bigger bulbs that brought the input power down without
lowering the loads. So for 80ma at 12V that was an okay demonstration. It's the 1 watt challenge."
You also wrote: " These bigger coils naturally have higher Q which translates to higher actual gain.
And yes, resonance IS A GAIN. Don't let people fool you about that."
Yes I agree, bigger coils wound with thick wire and with favorable OD/length ratio can have higher Q .
But you need to clarify what you mean on gain: voltage, current, power, energy gain?
I would agree with voltage or current gain in resonant LC circuits.
If you claim power (or energy) gain too, then you would need to demonstrate it by measurements.
"Don't let people fool you about that."
You also wrote:
"Anyway, I'll post another video of all the coils running when I get caught up with other pressing matters."
Please, would you consider to measure only the 9 (or 10) big receiver coils output when they drive the bright
white LED bulbs at a measured input power to the gate driver? I do not know your actual receiver circuits, whether you use diode bridges to rectify the AC voltage and whether you drive the LEDs with DC.
This latter case would help much to check LED DC currents easily and the DC voltage levels across them.
I know these measurements are time consuming. Also, the use of diode bridges would cause inherent power
loss in the receiver units but this loss can be estimated if you already know the DC current via the LED bulbs.
Thanks,
Gyula
(Edited for a better text format)
The point of the kit is not to run after OU at the beginning, but first learn the lessons to prepare you for that. You first learn about resonance, and then the idea of many bodies in contrast to single body circuits. Also impedance in relation to fast rates of change. Without proper teaching you are just limiting yourself to the circle game and will never get anywhere.
Mr. Friedrich, well written as response !
Not to learn from the books, because to " new":
https://m.phys.org/news/2012-03-efficiency.html
The velocity amplification in Nano-tubes
............
Hi Rick
Extraordinary claims require evidence. The fact is you and the likes of Bedini certainly made outlandish claims for many decades and when folk asked for the smallest of evidence a self contained system (SO SIMPLE) that let's say has one battery running it and then constantly loops other batteries until you can charge 2 batteries for the price of one (example.....but showing clear excess of energy), nether of you ever did so. FORGET all measurements and gauss meters and fancy wave forms. They mean nothing just like in real life where long winded answers without showing the money means snake oil.
Nobody is asking you to give up your supposed secret but you have never even demonstrated with a black box OU. YOU SELL KITS. YOU WANT TO KEEP SELLING KITS. In order to do that you must never give anyone OU. You yourself have stated above that providing people with OU is not the purpose of the kit. JB also did the same thing and sold endless chargers at stupid prices.
Before you reply and say I do not understand what you talk about, forget about it. I have systems of my own design that are open and can do exactly what you state and more. Keep loading it and the input keeps dropping and not silly fluff loads of LEDs either.
Your posts are just as long winded as your youtube videos but sadly this does not equate to substance. So keep talking and keep selling but have the honesty to admit that is what your puprose is. In another 10 years only the foolish will keep buying from you.
Hi Itsu,
If you think it would be worth building a Gaussmeter, then you surely can:
http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magmeter.htm (http://www.coolmagnetman.com/magmeter.htm)
https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=gaussmeter (https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=gaussmeter)
https://web.archive.org/web/20070815103923/https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7834 (https://web.archive.org/web/20070815103923/https://www.modelbouwforum.nl/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7834)
and here is an integrated magnetic sensor IC (but probably there are some from other manufacturers):
http://www.ti.com/product/DRV425 (http://www.ti.com/product/DRV425)
Gyula
Hi Itsu,I have a linear hall like that i didn't bother with the voltmeter i just used 2 red leds some have an internal regulator.
If you use the UGN3503 type sensor from Allegro, its data sheet says it has a flat response up to 23 kHz.
You could check its response with a ferrite cored coil having at least some ten mH inductance what you could drive
by your function generator slightly below 23 kHz to see how the sensor operates within its specified range.
To limit current taken from your generator a series resistance surely helps when your coil inductance happens
to be low around 20 kHz range (to protect the FG). Place the sensor also close to any of the ends of the ferrite core.
Gyula
Endlessoceans: You have to remember that the world is full of people with different skills. I have looked at many attempted replications and they have all one thing in common. People do not follow the instructions!!You will be lucky the UK is not in the goldilocks zone. in the uk you will be lucky to get a third of that with all that spraying and rain! And Maplins were never cheep ! ;D any way how much is Rick selling the book and the disk for with out the coils as i don't think i'm interested in building the Newman Motor.
You should build your own resonance kit and experiment with it.
I for one am grateful that Rick has opened up on the free energy front.
In any case no-one is forcing you to buy his kits. For the record the book accompanying the kit is worth more than the kit itself.
And video 7 (which I have) is a gem of information.
However I will say this. The Free energy business has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. You can now buy a 250 watt solar panel for around £100 in the Uk (130 dollars) and that is a game changer.
Hi Rick,
Thanks for the long reply, you are a good writer and a persevering salesman as well. I appreciate your taking the time for the long typing but I am not yet convinced your setup with a certain number of receiver units gives an overall extra output versus the input, sorry.
In this situation, perhaps the best next step would be if you could mention the many mistakes you found in
Itsu's setup, we may all learn about your comments and Itsu may achieve extra output. He included the needed details on wire diameter, measured inductance for the coils, coil diameter etc so you could compare them to that of your coils. He also included the scope shots and the voltage amplitudes.
I hope you do not state that only your components / parts in your kit are able to give extra output.
I will return to some of your thoughts included in your answer later on.
Gyula
Endlessoceans: You have to remember that the world is full of people with different skills. I have looked at many attempted replications and they have all one thing in common. People do not follow the instructions!!
You should build your own resonance kit and experiment with it.
I for one am grateful that Rick has opened up on the free energy front.
In any case no-one is forcing you to buy his kits. For the record the book accompanying the kit is worth more than the kit itself.
And video 7 (which I have) is a gem of information.
However I will say this. The Free energy business has changed dramatically in the last 10 years. You can now buy a 250 watt solar panel for around £100 in the Uk (130 dollars) and that is a game changer.
AND THE REPLY TO THAT:
You will be lucky the UK is not in the goldilocks zone. in the uk you will be lucky to get a third of that with all that spraying and rain! And Maplins were never cheep ! any way how much is Rick selling the book and the disk for with out the coils as i don't think i'm interested in building the Newman Motor.
e2matrix,
i agree with you, and i knew upfront that, at most, i would be "a toy" as i saw this below review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BXoqb9LRZE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BXoqb9LRZE)
Not sure about the skills of that guy doing the teardown, as he was unable to "see" how the 9V battery
needed to be placed (only one way possible).
But yes, the electrical field detector seems to be a dual sided PCB and the magnetic field detector an
inductor (not a resistor) mounted up high off and next to that PCB.
Anyway, it indicates some differences in field strengths, but up till now did not reveal any extra energy
which otherwise would be missed using the scope.....
Itsu
Hi G, I guess you didn't read my main point: There is no reason for anyone to believe anyone's testimony on this or any forum. Why do you think I was trying to convince you? Now I can easily convince you on the non-testimony points whether you verbally admit that or not. But I would think anyone to be credulous to believe a mere statement even if I had pictures. Believing with supporting video may be a little less credulous, but it still is.
Now if we look carefully at your position in these matters with your insistence about measuring LEDs, and your questions to me in that respect, we find that you now show your skepticism bent. Notice I answered your point in that measurement is 0.5W each (it is sometimes 3W when I put the ferrite coil in the transmitter, which also brings down the input to 0.5W) with larger LEDs. There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at the top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input. All 18 people at the meeting could see that I could continue to add more and more coils with loads which only brought the input down. So now you are stuck here in your skepticism because I have explained what I have done in the pictures and you have decided to tell everyone that you refuse to believe this testimony that complies with your conditions of belief. The fact is that with skeptics like you no matter what you tell me or anyone to do you will always choose to disbelieve a claim.
Now I am saying that NO ONE should believe any claim or picture or video posted on this or any Forum. No one should believe anything without sufficient reason. You would be gullible to do so. However, I find you contradict yourself in that you APPEAR to propose to me the idea that you WOULD BE convinced of my statement that there was OU in the setup if I measured the bulbs and found them to total more than the input. I did just that and you respond that you "are not yet convinced" this "gives an overall extra output". I complied with your requests (measurements) and your response is blanket disbelief with no reasons given other than "sorry" (what is sorry but an emotional reason). I find that fascinating. What I am doing here is exposing the fundamental mistakes people are making here on the forums. People like you are sharing your disbelief of claims with the impression that if sufficient testing is revealed through (what???) pictures, video, and testimony with acceptable metering that you may be convinced. Is that not fair to say? Are you not telling everyone that you may be convinced of something here on this forum like that? Or is this all just word games with people?
My question is more fundamental: Why do you give the impression to anyone like me that you could be convinced of any OU claim if these kinds of conditions would be met? That sounds like a game to me. That also sounds credulous. Why would you believe any claim when no amount of pictures, videos, or testimony ought to be believed through an online forum when only real and live witnessing/experience can produce rational conviction. So you see I am not expecting you or anyone to believe my story even though you all think that I am doing that. (I merely offer it up as possible as I know my setup was a focus here, and at least one customer may especially benefit from the details).
Again, my points are:
1. No one should believe any testimony in the form of words, pictures, or videos coming from an online forum because such cannot be conclusively proven to be real. This is hard to accept but it is true.
2. You imply that that is not correct or reasonable. You suggest that if I provide something to this effect that you would believe the claim.
3. Once your conditions were fulfilled you still refused to believe a claim with the appearance of that being a mere refusal rather than for the reason of there being a non-fulfillment of your conditions.
So these are the games everyone is playing on these forums. You are all being too vague about what you are trying to accomplish by all this. Notice the title of this thread: Confirmation of OU devices and claims. Do you suppose there can be actual confirmation of such by one additional testimony? How about two? How many people would it take? What level or what kind of testimony is enough for others to have enough confirmation for it to be reasonable to believe something? You see there is never enough testimony for anyone to do that in this circumstance. You can only confirm for yourself. So the games going on here are merely evidence of credulity and incredulity.
Now it is perfectly fine to offer up schematics and show people what they can try for themselves. If that was the only suggestion that would be fine. But that is not only what is going on here. Most people assuming that sufficient evidences can be presented through pictures, video and words to convince themselves of claims, while certain others like you suggest the same but will never actually be convinced even if people fulfill your conditions. So this ends up being a needless tension game as one person has revealed to me.
You misunderstand me again in that I am not a salesman in what I said. I am not saying that people have to buy parts from me. I am just saying that I have zero ability to judge another persons work while not being there. Even with my own parts it is very hard to ensure people are doing things right. I have many years of experience with many people doing these kinds of experiments or otherwise electrical testing where I have spent hours with them over the phone troubleshooting. Just last week will be an example. I had customers bring in their setups of my systems. After talking with them for hours (and in some cases looking at their pictures and videos) I still did not discover mistakes made because of assumptions. When they brought in the setups (now in the real world) I then was able to carefully look them over to see some mistakes that more or less affected functionality. So I don't say these things without justification or many years of experience in technical troubleshooting and being owner and moderator of technology forums. I have done this fulltime for 15 years now.
To clarify my comments about finding mistakes in Itzu's setup. As he has done much more since when I examined his details I don't think it would be right to refer to my observations. It would be better for me to look at his latest work which I may not get the chance to do. My point in mentioning his mistakes is not to discredit his claims but to draw attention to the problem of the fundamentally wrong assumptions of these forums, and specifically in this case that you cannot confirm or disprove a claim of another, especially by changing the details (in this case the parts). And deeper than this, that the claim or counter-claim should not be believed anyway in this place. But if I did assume that a counter-claim should be believed with sufficient enough pictures and detailed testimony from Itzu, then I at least bring up the point that how do I know that he properly made his parts? If the parts are not the same how could that be a properly controlled experiment? How can I tell it is free from fakery? How can I tell he is able to properly measure or conduct the experiments? I recall him having significant differences and also assuming various errors. And because I have a lot of experience in trying to help people who are not in my presence I realized that it would be a fruitless effort to try and correct the matter. My point is not that you cannot make for yourself a resonance induction coupler system as many have done. But that you cannot evaluate a claim of another person or a kit without having the actual parts and understanding how to use them. Is that not reasonable???
Now I am not suggesting that the ideas presented in my kit have to be precisely made in a certain way. On the contrary, these processes have been used billions of times over the last 130 years. But someone's failure to understand how to make it work should not persuade anyone of anything, neither someone claiming that they have confirmed it. For are we basing our beliefs on popularity? Are there not stricter rules for producing rational conviction? This is the next step. This needs to be settled first. This is the first point in any forums otherwise we have this mass confusion that leads to what we find throughout the free energy community (and indeed throughout modern culture). And as part of that you need to come clean with everyone exactly what you are doing here in this respect. Again, you implied that claims could be believed through this medium but then when your conditions are met you refuse to believe and merely say sorry as your justification. You need to tell everyone that you will never have sufficient reasons to believe a claim on such forums (and that would be a good thing to do for the reasons I gave) or if you say otherwise you need to say exactly what conditions are sufficient. But if you are set to always disbelieve a claim, even when your conditions are met, then you merely play games with people as countless skeptics have done. So you need to explain yourself here.
You can see here that unless we start upon a solid foundation then our speculations will be just random and meaningless. All claims and information on forums are merely helpful to the individual to confirm matters for themselves. It is merely to give ideas to try. It cannot ever prove or disprove anything. Now I have suggested many things in my long posting that people can verify or disprove to themselves. And I have given many kits for people to play around with as a means for self-verification. This forum has hundreds of suggestions of the same nature. My focus has shifted away from a focus on specific parts (and hoping for magical results) to themes (where you understand key processes and then can make any parts dance for you). Again, it is important experimentally understand by experience resonance and related ideas. But even before that, unless the bias principle is forsaken, no matter what you do you will fail in this and any matter of investigation. And unless you can overcome the bias of mainstream restrictions (which is like seeing everything with 2 dimensional lenses rather than 3D) you will fail. You will not look where you do not expect to see. You will disbelieve even what you see if you are not willing to see it. And you will refuse to admit even what you know to be true. These are the foundations which you cannot bypass. All bypass is merely a foolish game wasting everyone's time.
On your end if you can somehow prove the vaguely implied claim that resonance is merely a transformer or accumulating process and that there cannot possibly be an environmental gain, then you will prove most of the chatter on this forum to be foolishness (as indeed many believe). Obviously those who are hoping to see OU or something beneficial in my setup have to believe otherwise, that resonance is a gain in some way. So this is a starting point. Which is it? Can it be proven that resonance is not a gain, that it is merely a distribution of volts and amps over time? If so, then what you go into this with is what you will come out with. And when you play the piano it will be with all dampers locked onto strings (and added dampers on the high strings that don't normally have them) so that even when you strike a key the damper will not lift. Oh, and you remove the soundboard and the environment itself! Welcome to the one dimensional world of mainstream college level electronics. But don't fool yourself or anyone into thinking that someone's failure to produce some result somehow can establish that resonance is not a gain for anyone else (especially through the means of an online forum).
Anyway, if resonance is a gain in the sense that a series tank circuit is actually a "multiplication" or "amplification of voltage" WHILE AMPERAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, or parallel tank circuits are a "multiplication" or "amplification of amperage" WHILE VOLTAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, then the gain is seen as the voltage or amperage divided by the input amount. So if I have 9V at 25ma input and 250V at 25ma circulating with the regular frequency generator I then have 27 times gain. And if I add the gate driver and have 1300V with the same 25ma then I have 144 times gain. This follows the idea of the gain in Q or quality factor for the both parts (cap and inductor) combined (if one of them has a low Q it brings down the combined as I deliberately did with the cap to keep things safe). So as some textbooks would imply without prejudice, the Q at a given frequency will determine your gain IF YOU LET IT DO THAT FOR YOU AND DON"T KILL IT WITH MAINSTREAM CIRCUITRY THAT DESTROYS THE PROCESS. So it can be seen here that what you go into this will be what you get out. If you expect this to be merely a transformer process then the word resonance and words like gain, are deceptions and meaningless. It would be better to say high point or tuned point. Again, the pianist playing the piano is merely science fiction as the piano cannot do such things that produce an excess of energy or that are non-conservative.
To create the proper organization for this study of experience surrounding my kit, which assume resonance is a gain, you need to settle these points FIRST. If you do not believe resonance is a gain then you need to state that is where you are coming from so that we can see that your goal is not to benefit from the research presented here but to merely try and show how mistaken people are in these matters. I suggest people start at the beginning rather than play the games that most play. Failure to do that has only resulted in all the uncertainty people on both sides live with. This is true in all other areas of life.
Now, the secondary point after the foundation has been developed and adhered to is addressing all the dampers mainstream practice puts on the piano to kill the resonance gains with specific limited and resistance loads so that they assume there is but a single body circuit, and Kirchhoff is a universal law, and gains in local environment are NOT to be considered. They take away the fullness of life and want us to believe in only the fundamental key, and urge us to ignore the affects in the real world. They will impulse a motor to create (magnetic) motor action and ignore the other half of the energy in the negative spike that could charge a battery as I have done for years. They will magnetically impulse an inductor to create electrical generation but ignore the magnetic energy produced by the inductor (and call that merely a reflection of the transmitter). They will ring a bell with a rubber band around the bell so that you only consider one dampened strike. They will load the transmitter so that it is out of resonance. They (MIT 2007) will judge the efficiency of resonance induction coupling by placing only one receiver coil in a small percentage of the transmitter's radiation and act like that represents a full transfer of energy when many more equal loads could be added all around the transmitter to show more energy production than what was input. This is my point in my pictures (and I have exposed this in my book). Again, if you assume there can only be one receiver coil then you limit the output by the percentage of the field you place the coil in, and by the square of the distance away from it. But if you are honest you will see that if you are only taking a small percentage of the output then you will consider it just that. In my pictures I am only taking a small percentage of the radiations, and yet I am not even cancelling out the radiations of the transmitter beyond the coils that are being influenced by such radiations passing beyond them. It's more complicated than that as you can directly capacitively couple to receiver coils as well.
The showing of the two pictures was merely a kind of follow up of what Don Smith envisioned with his first model with 4 extra coils off the transmitter where he said you could fill a room and duplicate the energy. The point is easily proven by anyone who is not afraid to try. This is not an attempt to prove to others but rather for encouragement for people to try it. But the naysayers lie to the public in presenting in such a way as to imply that only one receiver coil can benefit as if the total energy actually flows from one transmitter into the receiver coil when that is completely false.
Of course there will be no response to these critical and fundamental points I have addressed by those who want to continue playing the games on these forums. I say all this to demystify these games for those who have ears to here. Don't believe the diversions. And don't believe any claim for or against. Only believe that which has been sufficiently established to yourself. And only proceed after you establish a proper foundation (which is evident most people are lacking as observed by what is stated and assumed).
You don't need my parts to consider any of these things. I just made an AM transmitter coil with decent Q over 100 and focused on a medium frequency of 1.25MHz with 100pf standard cap (with low Q for safety). That works well for these experiments. You can see I made two larger coils that had the same inductance so that the same frequency and capacitance could be used (the 10 coils were slightly off however). These had higher Q and resulted in greater gains (I don't expect you to believe this). The kit, and these bigger coils, are not in a 1/4 wavelength relationship, so I did not make this kit all that it could be. Ideally there is one secondary closely coupled (but still loosely) to the transmitter so that all the flux passes through it before continuing on THROUGH external receiver coils as shown in the picture (which could represent powering the small input power like Don Smith's input wires from the battery that were a wavelength of the primary). That secondary in a quarter wave length, not considering the other receiver coils, would be influenced to experience the full extent of the primary fluxing in each turn of its windings so that when loaded you could more fully appreciate the gains produced by the primary resonance amplification of energy. But to claim to be estimating the transmitting energy gains by a distant receiver coil's output (that is only influenced by a small percentage of radiation) is misleading (as in the case of the MIT demonstration). So my demo was only to show more coils with a 360 rotation (still only a small angle of the total radiation). But this was also to show the relay effect (relay coils that were also loaded) indicating that the receiver coils now become transmitters (and thus the process can start all over again, and even power the initial transmitter when properly phased/placed). G, it doesn't take a whole lot of time for you to play around with this and drop the input power down to zero or almost zero. It's up to you to convince yourself. You ought not to be convinced by any of my pictures, videos, or words. Don't pretend that you should be and that I haven't provided enough evidence. There is no such things as evidence through online forums. No such thing. People, realize that just because someone says they disbelieve something it doesn't mean they are telling the truth to you, or even to themselves. Many skeptics do believe but are afraid to admit the truth. Many more are merely trying to draw out more information from you so that you can work for them for free as they actually are developing this technology. Of course there are also those who monitor people as well. These things are a lot more sophisticated than you would think. I have seen this face to face over the years.
I'm sure that might be the case but your not the only person offing the knowledge for instance there have been many of late and for free as well, if left to some most of the earth would or will be very soon under sea but many labeled as hostile from places like Russia China Lithuania and Korea have all given useful help of knowledge and technical knowhow advice with links on this forum perhaps not this thread though only look.
You don't need my parts to consider any of these things. I just made an AM transmitter coil with decent Q over 100 and focused on a medium frequency of 1.25MHz with 100pf standard cap (with low Q for safety). That works well for these experiments. You can see I made two larger coils that had the same inductance so that the same frequency and capacitance could be used (the 10 coils were slightly off however). These had higher Q and resulted in greater gains (I don't expect you to believe this). The kit, and these bigger coils, are not in a 1/4 wavelength relationship, so I did not make this kit all that it could be. Ideally there is one secondary closely coupled (but still loosely) to the transmitter so that all the flux passes through it before continuing on THROUGH external receiver coils as shown in the picture (which could represent powering the small input power like Don Smith's input wires from the battery that were a wavelength of the primary). That secondary in a quarter wave length, not considering the other receiver coils, would be influenced to experience the full extent of the primary fluxing in each turn of its windings so that when loaded you could more fully appreciate the gains produced by the primary resonance amplification of energy. But to claim to be estimating the transmitting energy gains by a distant receiver coil's output (that is only influenced by a small percentage of radiation) is misleading (as in the case of the MIT demonstration). So my demo was only to show more coils with a 360 rotation (still only a small angle of the total radiation). But this was also to show the relay effect (relay coils that were also loaded) indicating that the receiver coils now become transmitters (and thus the process can start all over again, and even power the initial transmitter when properly phased/placed). G, it doesn't take a whole lot of time for you to play around with this and drop the input power down to zero or almost zero. It's up to you to convince yourself. You ought not to be convinced by any of my pictures, videos, or words. Don't pretend that you should be and that I haven't provided enough evidence. There is no such things as evidence through online forums. No such thing. People, realize that just because someone says they disbelieve something it doesn't mean they are telling the truth to you, or even to themselves. Many skeptics do believe but are afraid to admit the truth. Many more are merely trying to draw out more information from you so that you can work for them for free as they actually are developing this technology. Of course there are also those who monitor people as well. These things are a lot more sophisticated than you would think. I have seen this face to face over the years.
....
Notice I answered your point in that measurement is 0.5W each (it is sometimes 3W when I put the ferrite coil
in the transmitter, which also brings down the input to 0.5W) with larger LEDs. There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller
coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at the top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on
a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power
with 0.75W or less input.
....
....
Anyway, would 0.5W on the bulbs be acceptable to you on those bigger bulbs? I know that may be problematic
considering the input was in the picture 1W and with more bulbs and coils 0.75W. Would 0.000A on the input be
acceptable to you? At that point would it matter that I had 1,000,000 little LEDs powered up,
or several thousand 3W bulbs at 0.5W each?
....
Rick,Hmm lighting leds isn't too difficult a task I had a device on my front door porch light 7 years running off mains transit noise through the night in the end some of the leds died and i got fed up with unsoldering the pcbs to replace them and ran out of that type of blue led. if I wanted fre energy led's i could just copy that circuit with out huge coils like Rick is offering. No disrespect intended. :)
I show scepticism with any extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice with measurements correctly, and
this latter is not the case yet with your setup. I never wrote that obtaining excess energy is not possible at all.
I do have an open mind and I believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy
compared to its input we feed in.
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output. Did you use your light meter for checking
LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people? Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC input
power to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?
Now you wrote this:
If you go back and read what you wrote yesterday, please show me where is the 'measurement' word or any
expression relevant in that part of your text from which I or anyone else should deduce you were writing about
measurements. This is what you wrote yesterday:
The measurements made by Itsu are clearly shown and report a COP of 0.3 or so if I recall correctly. This is a huge
difference versus your hints. He checked LED brightness by feeding in known DC power, etc.
You did not comply with my requests on correct measurements.
You hint at not less than you have achieved lossless energy transfer between magnetically coupled resonant LC circuits.
The labs all over the world seek for doing that but they have not managed to solve that problem.
You need to prove such energy transfer with correct measurements. Otherwise, only those people who do not have
as much area ofexpertise as you will believe they have a COP>1 setup.
If you disagree with this, then prove me wrong.
Gyula
Steel TPU
As a final note: I ordered stuff from Rick and it was duly delivered as ordered.
Everything was first class.
The coils were so well made you could use them as an ornament in your house.
The book is brilliant and informative.
The Don Smith book demystifies the process and is a perfect manual for this technology.
( I also have the Book).
Again the book is hard backed and first class re the information in it.
(some spelling errors - but nothing to detract from the meaning)
So I have learnt a lot and now understand the Kapanadze process.
Hello Rick,
I have tried to stay out of this discussion so as no to muddy the waters any more. But I feel like I need to make a couple of comments.
I am retired after working for many years as an industrial maintenance electrician. I have worked on almost any kind of industrial machine you can imagine. From very large industrial lathes and milling machines that were controlled by CNC systems to 15 KW industrial lasers. I also have an advanced Amateur Radio operators license (ham). I think I know a little about electronics.
I first got interested in the idea of OU or free energy shortly after I retired 12 years ago. I found some early information about John Bedini and saw information about the SSG on the internet. Because of that I got interested enough to attend the first energy conference in Idaho that I believe you and John and Aaron put on. I met you and the John and Aaron and Peter there. I saw you ride your electric powered riding mower into the conference room. I like you Rick. I liked you when I met you and I still like you. But I feel I need to say some things about your presentations.
You keep referring to Don Smith as some kind of OU guru. For those of us with real electronics training and experience that is a big RED flag. I have watched several of Don Smith's videos. He makes many statements that are just not true. He also uses information from the ARRL handbook for amateur radio operators in a way that is totally wrong. You can see comments in this thread from others who have seen the same thing. Claiming Don Smith as some kind of inspiration for your work does not give any credence to your claims. In fact it casts serious doubts on your claims without even looking further into you claims.
I also as some others have said believe that OU might be possible. I have seen some things that did make me scratch my head and wonder what was going on. When John B. and Mathew Jones and I were working on the so called Tesla switch, I for about a week was able to get mine tuned so that it ran a load for the entire week and the batteries voltages stayed the same for that entire time. I was never able to repeat that. I just got lucky for a short time I guess.
I want to finish with this bit of advice. I know from personal experience that using short pulses into a tuned circuit can give some interesting results. So I think you might possibly have discovered something. I think the jury is still out on that. But if you really have something then stop with the long winded posts and give us some real data to look at. I did watch your videos that A. King posted to OU.com. You could have easily made them half that long and still said the same things. Long videos and long posts don't prove claims. Clear data and accurate measurements prove claims.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Hi Itsu,
If you use the UGN3503 type sensor from Allegro, its data sheet says it has a flat response up to 23 kHz.
You could check its response with a ferrite cored coil having at least some ten mH inductance what you could drive
by your function generator slightly below 23 kHz to see how the sensor operates within its specified range.
To limit current taken from your generator a series resistance surely helps when your coil inductance happens
to be low around 20 kHz range (to protect the FG). Place the sensor also close to any of the ends of the ferrite core.
Gyula
That was rather sloppy of me to miss that was an inductor (which makes a lot more sense). I just took a very quick look without counting the bands or noticing the L3 printed on the circuit board. It just looked like a resistor at quick glance - my mistake. This meter is really odd though. I can hold it up against - in direct contact with an electronic device and it shows zero reading - no EMF or gauss reading whereas one of my other meters picks up EMF from that same device from at least 2 feet away. My other meter is screaming (audio output also) when it gets right up against it so in just that one test I assume this Kmoon is either defective or very insensitive.
If you are just interested mostly in magnetic field readings and have a smart phone most of them have a fairly sensitive magnetic field reading capability. There are a lot of Apps that will give you microTelsa (also gauss and milligauss) values like this one:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mreprogramming.ultimateemfdetector (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mreprogramming.ultimateemfdetector)
You might want to use a spare phone though in case you get some really strong fields that might damage a phone.
a.king21, you're a good researcher. glad your experience with rick was good and don't want too discourage you but he's got a long history that isn't good. seems EF forum isn't the only place he's seen as a snake oil salesman:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=jranml2m1nnjekn0oi3jgt2453&topic=3785.msg75248;topicseen#msg75248
Hmm lighting leds isn't too difficult a task I had a device on my front door porch light 7 years running off mains transit noise through the night in the end some of the leds died and i got fed up with unsoldering the pcbs to replace them and ran out of that type of blue led. if I wanted fre energy led's i could just copy that circuit with out huge coils like Rick is offering. No disrespect intended. :)
Rick,
I show scepticism with any extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice with measurements correctly, and this latter is not the case yet with your setup. I never wrote that obtaining excess energy is not possible at all. I do have an open mind and I believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy compared to its input we feed in.
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output. Did you use your light meter for checking LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people? Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC input power to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?
If you go back and read what you wrote yesterday, please show me where is the 'measurement' word or any expression relevant in that part of your text from which I or anyone else should deduce you were writing about measurements. This is what you wrote yesterday:
The measurements made by Itsu are clearly shown and report a COP of 0.3 or so if I recall correctly. This is a huge difference versus your hints. He checked LED brightness by feeding in known DC power, etc.
You did not comply with my requests on correct measurements.
You hint at not less than you have achieved lossless energy transfer between magnetically coupled resonant LC circuits. The labs all over the world seek for doing that but they have not managed to solve that problem. You need to prove such energy transfer with correct measurements. Otherwise, only those people who do not have as much area ofexpertise as you will believe they have a COP>1 setup.
If you disagree with this, then prove me wrong.
Gyula
G,
Just as I have said that you cannot prove or disprove any of these claims over the internet, in the same way we can never really prove people's motives. I guess time will tell if you honestly "believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy compared to its input we feed in." There are others here who do not believe that is an honest statement. I do not know you at all or your history. Maybe you can help them change their doubting of your "extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice" of your dealings upon subjects in this forum (as is the counter-claim). You see, the counter-claim has just as much to prove. Both are meaningless claims in this place. How can you prove it one way or another. You refuse to address this point because it completely destroys your method here.
Dear Rick,
The assertion and the counter-assertion are both useless, as long as there is no possibility at all to carry out any proof here.
In order to accomplish this, a factual analysis of the basic effect must first be generated, where a hypothesis is given about the properties and origin of the effect. Subsequently, the hypothesis is confirmed by the presentation of an experiment, either in theoretical nature or as a practical implementation. Then others can jump on this bandwagon and perform the experiments themselves to confirm or disprove the claim/hypothesis. This is simply a typical scientific approach.
I respect your work and the many hours you put into this project. But what is really missing between the many words you write here is a factual concise discussion of the physical conditions and the assumption of how the overunity effect arises. Also missing is the circuit diagram of a circuit that produces this effect. Why don't you just provide it? This would be valuable because then the discussion goes to a factual level. With the circuits that users Itsu have tried so far, the effect could not be proven. This only leads to the conclusion that they do not correspond to what you are using or that the experiment was not performed the way you are doing it.
Gyula: WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!!!
Ha ha ha ha
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpoOWs8SfVo
Dear Rick,
The assertion and the counter-assertion are both useless, as long as there is no possibility at all to carry out any proof here.
In order to accomplish this, a factual analysis of the basic effect must first be generated, where a hypothesis is given about the properties and origin of the effect. Subsequently, the hypothesis is confirmed by the presentation of an experiment, either in theoretical nature or as a practical implementation. Then others can jump on this bandwagon and perform the experiments themselves to confirm or disprove the claim/hypothesis. This is simply a typical scientific approach.
I respect your work and the many hours you put into this project. But what is really missing between the many words you write here is a factual concise discussion of the physical conditions and the assumption of how the overunity effect arises. Also missing is the circuit diagram of a circuit that produces this effect. Why don't you just provide it? This would be valuable because then the discussion goes to a factual level. With the circuits that users Itsu have tried so far, the effect could not be proven. This only leads to the conclusion that they do not correspond to what you are using or that the experiment was not performed the way you are doing it.
Hi Rick.
I'd like to thank you. In the last 15 months I followed all your videos and ordered Dons Book and also the Resonance kit. Struggled a long time with all the amazing informations (because of my lack of english language), but after some weeks I had the first success!!
No doubt anymore. It is all real and I can see it clearly directly on my table. 15 years of hope and failures again and again..and now success! I am very happy. Hope to overcome the next step and get a working Don device. Best regards..Markus
Hello ! :) I have the schematics. There are around (at least ) 50 different setup shematics that you will come to as following the several experiments the kit will drive you through. I paid 100 usd for them and I have already stated HOW GRATEFUL I am to Rick for the golden experiments packed inside. He knows that, as I'm sometimes asking him questions which he has ALWAYS taken the time to answer. So you see, what' s really missing is YOU helping him. Now if you read carefully the figures Rick is listing you will be able to start this research with a physical exercise...I have , at the beginning during this thread, mentionned the Resonant induction coupler kit with a few indications that allow one not having bought the kit to discover the effect. This is why I ws able to "rebuild from chinese cables and caps" several other competitor kits to Rick, and all demonstrated how to light a 3.8 V with an input between 0.78 and 2.2 V. , therefore indicating to me I have understood at least the first few methods Rick is teaching us. Notice the word : teaching. So yes, I have replicated the kit with several inductors and capacitors. I have at least 4 or 5 concurrent versions that work, of which one better than the kit ! (ie LED brighter with lesser input). And including one that never works with my FG (2000V 47 uF caps if I recall) topping at 60mhz. I guess the inductance doesn't "cross" capacitance at that frequency...(have to try more ?), to use such terminology.
WHEN I ASKED ITSU WHY HE WOULD NEVER LIGHT HIS SMALL LED AT 1,2 MHZ AT 2 V BUT THAT IT WOULD BE LIGHTED UP BRIGTHLY AT 1.25 MHZ WHEN I TRIED TO EXPLAIN HIM THIS IS THE VOLTAGE MULTIPLICATION EFFECT IN RESONANCE, MY QUESTION REMAINS STILL ...RESPONSELESS (including by "mr smart" Gyula). Too bad : I have offered here even without the consent of Rick, but in the total sharing of the spirit of his work to help the world, the object of a first exercise in his kit that many if not all of you are incapable of analyzing properly !. I am no EE, and do not even know the difference between AC and a frequency generator at 60 HZ ! So guys, before tauntering others like I saw so many times (too many...), just be humble and GO TO THE BENCH ON YOUR OWN !
Final word also for a few posts (they will recognize themselves) about Rick too long, too this, too mmh what is worth your contribution blah blah... To each of them : Before having the audacious yet lost approach to ask Rick what he has done, I ask you the question : have you done the millionth of what he did for free in free energy ? Yes ? Spell your name, that I may run a google-compare with Your name !
To this other guy out tbere telling Rick he has gone farther than him in this research : if you have done better and are interjecting about this right now in this forum it is the proof you have never shared anything in comparison to Rick. Which amounts a massive underuniy system ! Zero sharing ie zero value ie zero gift (to me they are the same thing). Continue the same stuff : you will be able to take it with you to a much more useful place !...
Rick
Within plenty of your long videos ,which one is the best to watch to understand concept ? English is not my native language and watching few 1hour long videos is too much for me
Can you explain how you move the phase angle between voltage and current in output resonant circuit to get output power independent of input resonance ?
Hi all:
I have to chime in here as I was one of them in attendance. I went to Lodi, Ca for his two day work shop. I went to see one thing and found another as well. I sat there in disbelief as he added more and more output coils drawing a load and the input stayed the same. Just the output wattage was going up.
What is in the book is what was setup. He had to stop adding more output coils due to not wanting to blow the scope used for the readings.
Not much more I can say. No video, no pictures other than the ones I took, just live right in front of all of us.
thay
Rick,........
.... This is what I suggested to RomeroUK years ago and he then showed a video
in which he carried his running mot-gen setup looped via a DC/DC converter with himself while walking...
I wonder whether you are going to consider my looping suggestion or write about again my scepticism or about
bent scepticism :) . You can say a self running setup can also be faked and this is true but if you show a certain
start-up procedure we could agree on in advance, openly on this forum, then faking could be minimized at least.
I would kindly suggest building this self running setup for members a.king and benfr because they have the original coils set.
Gyula
Hi all:
I have to chime in here as I was one of them in attendance. I went to Lodi, Ca for his two day work shop. I went to see one thing and found another as well. I sat there in disbelief as he added more and more output coils drawing a load and the input stayed the same. Just the output wattage was going up.
What is in the book is what was setup. He had to stop adding more output coils due to not wanting to blow the scope used for the readings.
Not much more I can say. No video, no pictures other than the ones I took, just live right in front of all of us.
thay
Carol:
The scope was used as a meter to read the high voltage probe. Had he kept going, the output would have exceeded what the scope is capable of. Like what I did to my Tek scope. Very nice scope but not any more.
I have a very serious point to make sir....
What happened to Romerouk after he showed that self runner? Do you remember?
I'll remind you....he was visited by MIB and threatened with his life and he was too ill to work for months after that.
What happened to Tinman after he showed OU on youtube? His videos were taken down and he was visited by MIB.
What happened to Dave Lawton after he replicated Stan Meyer and disclosed you had to charge the capacitors for over 12 hours to condition them? He was visited by MIB who seized all his documents.
What happened to Thane Heinz students after they replicated his trafo and showed it on youtube? I rang them up in Canada and they were terrified and denied OU (they didn't know who I was ie if I was a government agent).
I also spoke to Lutec years ago and they were terrified and denied OU to me.
If Rick shows me a circuit - I will build it but you will never get a video. PERIOD.
This is not a game and Rick knows the line not to cross. Re-read his posts. He says so.
So please devise a test where the line is not crossed but satisfies the EE in you. If me and benfr replicating but not showing a video is fine, then I am OK with that.
Kind regards...
EDIT: How could I forget... What happened to Wesley (Stivep) and Kapanadze when they were together on a plane? Both were poisoned on the plane and nearly died........ There is even a video Wesley took of kapanadze in an ill state.
Rick,
I do not participate in your game you are playing here. You try to create a situation which would make it impossible for the forum members to ascertain what is the truth on the COP of your setup. And you try to ridicule any member here who dare to ask about the real performance of your setup.
Of course you did neglect my point from my Reply #568 when I wrote you had not written measured results in your text but a conditional question ("would 0.5W on the bulbs be acceptable to me on these bigger bulbs"?).
And then on the following day you already referred to your own conditional question as a fact that you had already answered my measurement request, as if you had already stated the 0.5W as measured. Yes, 0.5W for 8 bulbs would be very good for you because 4W is already gives COP>1 BUT what if the brightness involved is less than 0.5W for each bigger bulb? If you do not measure it at each bulbs, then you simply do not know.
You wrote this on gain for your setup:
"Anyway, if resonance is a gain in the sense that a series tank circuit is actually a "multiplication" or
"amplification of voltage" WHILE AMPERAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, or parallel tank circuits are a "multiplication" or "amplification of amperage" WHILE VOLTAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, then the gain is seen as the voltage or amperage divided by the input amount. So if I have 9V at 25ma input and 250V at 25ma circulating with the regular frequency generator I then have 27 times gain. And if I add the gate driver and have 1300V with the same 25ma then I have 144 times gain. This follows the idea of the gain in Q or quality factor for the both parts (cap and inductor) combined (if one of them has a low Q it brings down the combined as I deliberately did with the cap to keep things safe)."
The problem is you do not consider the phase angle between the 1300V coil voltage and the coil current: In a resonant LC circuit they never happen simultaneously but nearly with 90 degree phase difference, coil current lags coil voltage. So the real or average power is nowhere near what you imply in your text. There is no any instant when the current has a high peak amplitude whenever the 1300V peak to peak voltage is also present across the coil. You have a voltage gain and voltage is not power or energy in itself.
And when you consider the phase angle, then power should be estimated by P=VxIxcos(phi) where V and I the RMS values and phi is the phase angle. And when the loaded Q remains relatively high then the phase angle may remain close to 90 degree so its cos(phi) value will reduce the power value significantly. (i.e. suppose phi=88° then cos88°=0.0348 will be the multiplier in the power formula). Of course you will not care about this fact. But the phase angle in AC power estimation is one of the key factors. This is why careful power measurements should be done. Obviously the measurements at 1.15 MHz can be very difficult, this is why I mentioned DC current and voltage measurements for the LED bulbs after a full wave rectifier. Power loss in the diodebridges can be easily estimated.
Of course any setup shown in a video can be faked, this can be true. How about to minimize this possibility?
How about rectifying the output of all the 8 (or your choice) bigger receiver units (omit the LED bulbs from their output) and collect the 8 (or any you choose) DC outputs into a common puffer capacitor of say 10 milliF or more as desired? Then this DC voltage could feed your gate driver IC and also a low power square wave generator to drive the input of the gate driver. The 8 (or more) receiver units should be able to maintain the charge level in the puffer capacitor the gate driver IC and the square wave generator is consuming because you hinted at a COP of at least over 10. (Based on your text: "So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input.")
This claimed COP value would surely serve the use of a DC/DC converter to have a stable DC supply available from its output to fully replace your regulated power supply. Even one single 3W LED bulb could be run off one of the bigger receiver coils separately to show certain brightness. The input of this converter would receive energy from the big puffer capacitor, closing the loop. This is what I suggested to RomeroUK years ago and he then showed a video in which he carried his running mot-gen setup looped via a DC/DC converter with himself while walking...
I wonder whether you are going to consider my looping suggestion or write about again my scepticism or about bent scepticism :) . You can say a self running setup can also be faked and this is true but if you show a certain start-up procedure we could agree on in advance, openly on this forum, then faking could be minimized at least.
I would kindly suggest building this self running setup for members a.king and benfr because they have the original coils set.
Gyula
I have a very serious point to make sir....
What happened to Romerouk after he showed that self runner? Do you remember?
I'll remind you....he was visited by MIB and threatened with his life and he was too ill to work for months after that.
What happened to Tinman after he showed OU on youtube? His videos were taken down and he was visited by MIB.
What happened to Dave Lawton after he replicated Stan Meyer and disclosed you had to charge the capacitors for over 12 hours to condition them? He was visited by MIB who seized all his documents.
What happened to Thane Heinz students after they replicated his trafo and showed it on youtube? I rang them up in Canada and they were terrified and denied OU (they didn't know who I was ie if I was a government agent).
I also spoke to Lutec years ago and they were terrified and denied OU to me.
If Rick shows me a circuit - I will build it but you will never get a video. PERIOD.
This is not a game and Rick knows the line not to cross. Re-read his posts. He says so.
So please devise a test where the line is not crossed but satisfies the EE in you. If me and benfr replicating but not showing a video is fine, then I am OK with that.
Kind regards...
EDIT: How could I forget... What happened to Wesley (Stivep) and Kapanadze when they were together on a plane? Both were poisoned on the plane and nearly died........ There is even a video Wesley took of kapanadze in an ill state.
Carol:
The scope was used as a meter to read the high voltage probe. Had he kept going, the output would have exceeded what the scope is capable of. Like what I did to my Tek scope. Very nice scope but not any more.
Now I am even more confused. What high voltage? I thought he was lighting up LEDs? And you and he both have said the power input to the primary coil was going down. So where was he measuring high voltage?
Respectfully,
Carroll
A.king,
Yes I also remember what happened to Romero like you (but with small modification: he got ill when he was tinkering extensively with Kapanedze-like setups and close to high voltage like Nelson). …
Gyula
What I remember is that he took in too much ozone at one point when he was doing spark gaps. I can imagine if he got ill from that his wife would have had something to say about his experiments. Like I said, we generally cause our own problems and people are over-inclined to believe foul play. Same thing happened with Bedini when Gary Bedini died. Immediate some guy posts a video that there had to be something bad if John died 3 hours later. They were both very unhealthy guys, so it was only a matter of time. John certainly was not any kind of threat that needed to be taken out.Well, I'd like a kit for the 4th and 5th stage in the Don Smith process. So that's something to do.
The other thing is that many people tire of this scene. They have all they need and just have to get on with life. That's kind of where I am at. I have completed all my goals and will move on shortly. Will always supervise teams of people doing this stuff, but there isn't anything more for me to do...
Well, I'd like a kit for the 4th and 5th stage in the Don Smith process. So that's something to do.
Also a better video of Bedini's video 7 showing some examples of shuttling the energy around would be useful. (I am actually trying it out as I post ie using the extra energy to power the input as an experiment) Thinking aloud that might work in the RICK hmm..
So there's 2 things to do and I am sure the forum can ask for more that would help.
Yes I agree about the motor thing. "They" don't like to see motors running with no input. If you have a battery in there or something plugged into the wall, I guess that's ok.
Rick,
I already wrote I do not participate in your games. You are the actor on a stage you create in your posts and you play your role you think as best fit for a goal.
But I remain in the audience (here the reader) section and will thank and applaud you if you show extra output with measurements. If you do not show it, then I will not applaud you and would say it was a bad performance and will certainly not be interested in your kits.
Gyula
Itsu:
2 points immediately spring to mind. By using supercaps you are missing the Heavyside component I would first try it with batteries and analyse the result over several hours if not days.
Secondly you are not getting the energy from the electrons in the ground. It is a hard concept to understand that the ground can replicate to and add to some extent the energy you already have.
Then we have to exclude mains bleed, because these circuits can pick up energy from your house mains wiring.
You also have to mess with the positioning of the coils because the magnetic fields emanating from the coils can reduce the input draw as I have experienced.
Anyway I will look at your video in due course.
Additionally you should move your coils away from the tX coil. The way I understand it is like this:
If the satellite coils are almost touching the TX coil then it acts like a normal transformer.
If you move them out say 5 to 10 cm out then the device acts like the Don Smith setup and you can duplicate the energy.
Also adding an earth ground amplifies the energy.
This is what we are trying to prove.
Dr Hans:So Viziv is working checked, proven and financed now - at this very moment.
Who you want to tell it? Who is willing to act upon?
A house wife?
A construction guy?
A car mechanic?
An electrician?
The last one, if he emigrated from eastern Europe, where education was not unidirectional like in EU or USA ..yes he is the right guy.
So no surprise that most of these guys are experimenting out there.
The key to success is deficit.
Wealth and comfort is only making people to buy and replace.
The title is misleading.
There is no OVERUNITY never existed and will never exist.
apart from effect of refrigeration systems where we can go "over unity"
https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-cop-of-refrigerator-is-greater-than-1 (https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-cop-of-refrigerator-is-greater-than-1)
that is nothing out there.
That is why theory is needed for any practical device showing energy on output grater than energy delivered.
The statement here is that such systems dont exists and never existed.
Yes....
You see it in the device ...
But that is the energy that is coupled to the device and converted to form of energy that you are able to observe.
The lack of understanding but all of that< seek to attain > or accomplish practical designs, comes from believe not from scientific facts .
I was in freedom to share 80% of information about energy extraction of Schumann Waveguide
another 20% belongs to dr Hans. and he may agree to share it with the audience.
However I was ask to prove, that Dr. Hans skepticism is unfounded.
And till now he was right.
Crowd is not interested even in working concept if it drives them to unfamiliar area.
In the same time Viziv is going well with its billions dollars from Chevron.
It's a shame but to seek to attain or accomplish, or trying to beat the bushes over public interest ...one must have
at least some crowd near by "brain ready" to act.
So Viziv is working checked, proven and financed now - at this very moment.
Viziv is the key to understand not only phenomena of using earth to send electrical energy from point A to B.
Viziv technology is the key to your real Free Energy.
Surface wave in the Interface is basic knowledge for you to go than ... to Schuman Waveguide energy extraction .
And that energy is manifested in the interface in form of Zenneck Wave .
That energy comes from natural energy fluctuation inside of the Schumann Waveguide, but by its properties it does not differ from
man made surface wave
The very much disappointing fact :
That what I'm talking you about,
is the most proven - both scientifically and practically
and yet nobody is willing to check it out.
Wesley
Remark#2
It is crucial to understand this video before part 2 is published.
I suggest to watch it few times -(portion with graphical explanation of it.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE4GjB1cWLQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE4GjB1cWLQ)
You absolutely right.
My English is perfectly good
Wesley
Can you give me (and us) an overview of where you and associated people are at with all this?Nothing of that.
Are you powering anything?
Making products?
Where are you going with this?
Are you looking for confirmation of these things on this tread?
All coils are tuned to 180Khz resonance frequency.
Hi Jeg,So lets get this right your trying to replicate DS's system ? :o 8) ;D so what are you using for his SG and ramp circuit ?
yes, i think looking at that DS fantasy device it probably was doing something in that 5 to 30Mhz range if
doing anything at all.
But the device or setup i am trying to replicate here seems to be working around 180Khz, so thats the frequency
i am tuning my coils to.
Itsu
Free energy exists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtJhI4Cx5oc&list=PL_cJ8k_C3XEWi9IrA7dKse0vo8SE6J1oJ&index=5
While I have promoted Dr. Judy Wood as someone who has made some very good observations about what really happened structurally to the towers on 9/11, I feel that her zeal to equate it with this free energy research does none of us in this research any good. Hey look everyone, there is nothing different in getting free energy and turning 1,000,000 tons of buildings into dust! I think the linking of these two unpopular ideas doesn't help us, and was beyond the scope of her book. That will only be making a case why this research should be forbidden. This is really a mistake to use free energy claims in the context of such evil destruction when the idea of free energy is some kind of a useful gain.Well thank you Meredith. First i'm not sure you really know all the facts and unless you do I would suggest you don't as your out of your depth on this one, and this is really getting off topic, perhaps we should also discus extermination and genocide of the native americans and the controlling few that deliberately infected a large portion of its people with a sexualy transmited disease, don't you think. America isn't a country it's a militarized barbaric privately owned junta that needs to change it's ways.
You are not recommending we do a replication of that for confirmation are you???
My other concern with Wood's is her promotion of John Hutchison considering his work with the government with the Hutchison effect. She explains that it was this process that dustified the towers and created the effect that could melt metal while not burning paper (as seen in the world trade center Bible with melted metal around it on display--google image to see). The promotion of that specific work seems to be the same kind of error of the madness of Tesla in supposing a death ray machine could somehow be better for mankind because, of course, it would end all wars rather than destroy the world (because everyone in the world really loves each other and only wants the best for each other--especially those of the war machine and who profit from it).
Well thank you Meredith. First i'm not sure you really know all the facts and unless you do I would suggest you don't as your out of your depth on this one, and this is really getting off topic, perhaps we should also discus extermination and genocide of the native americans and the controlling few that deliberately infected a large portion of its people with a sexualy transmited disease, don't you think. America isn't a country it's a militarized barbaric privately owned junta that needs to change it's ways.
G feel free to erase this rant post
Sorry for apparently going off topic. The only reason I brought it up is to remind us that there are obvious ways to see that excess energy can be seen. So if experimenters have not seen excess energy yet it does not mean that it is not there. It just means that the experiment is not right.Well there must be a good few who do in Lithuania and a good few of the Russian speaking countries in fact there is a guy the 'master' who demonstrates it, alas he offers no circuit diagrams but explains any wire with current flowing in it can produce a 'pinch' effect' when driven by a pulse, he also says while your generating your magnetic field it kills the effect Nick Z talks about.
If my understanding is correct I think you need about 10 coils correctly positioned to get a phase lock using Rick's kt with the 180 khz design. The OU would not come from electrical connections the conventional way, but from the magnetic fields interacting in a resonant way.
This is why it is sometimes inappropriate to follow the directions of people who do not do these experiments and quote from EE books.
Conventional electrical science knows nothing about magnetic resonance as Walter Lewin of MIT has proved.
a.king21 wrote: "Sorry for apparently going off topic. The only reason I brought it up is to remind us that there are obvious ways to see that excess energy can be seen. So if experimenters have not seen excess energy yet it does not mean that it is not there. It just means that the experiment is not right.
If my understanding is correct I think you need about 10 coils correctly positioned to get a phase lock using Rick's kt with the 180 khz design. The OU would not come from electrical connections the conventional way, but from the magnetic fields interacting in a resonant way.
This is why it is sometimes inappropriate to follow the directions of people who do not do these experiments and quote from EE books.
Conventional electrical science knows nothing about magnetic resonance as Walter Lewin of MIT has proved."
AG response:
Well there must be a good few who do in Lithuania and a good few of the Russian speaking countries in fact there is a guy the 'master' who demonstrates it, alas he offers no circuit diagrams but explains any wire with current flowing in it can produce a 'pinch' effect' when driven by a pulse, he also says while your generating your magnetic field it kills the effect Nick Z talks about.
So sounds like you need to experiment, in some of the DS vids he shows a tiny neon spark gap, does that really work ??
The reply editing window is so small it’s useless when editing Rick’s manuscripts!
As for my 180Khz bigger coil demo, this was just me making a random coil that was almost equal lengthwise with width which results in good Q.
I don’t know if you have noticed but some frequencies yield different amplitudes and are more audio pleasing and are considered in tune with the planet and universe or is it to just some humans I say this as the Nazis didn’t like bas 9 ie 432 and changed it to 440hz witch is base 8 witch is demonically oppressive. You might have noticed DS device he said he used 31kh5 this is a base 9 frequency.
=======
Yeah, it isn't wise to follow people who are in cyberland and could be anyone. Who makes anyone an authority? What science authority is someone we should absolutely trust?
Well that depends some what if they are a ‘cyber-man or not, aren’t you in cyberland?
And it realy depends on if that some one in cyberland is in sync with what’s going on about what’s missing and then there is always experimentation.
As for AG, I'm still not really understanding your context from your words. Maybe take a little more time to specify what you are staying. While it is true that you can get excess energy out of the external environment around any wire passing any current, it may not be worth the effort in parts/collectors/converters to process that gain. On the other hand it is worthy of doing with any high frequency transmission line, or any transmission line that is being impulsed very sharply. The former is the idea I often demonstrate at my meetings as showing the Don Smith dipole system where we tap the Heaviside flow. The latter is where we deal with the Tesla one wire system as partly illustrated with the wrongly called hairpin circuit but which is more fully expanded upon in figure 5 in The True Wireless paper. This I have been showing in my third stage process (black box) for many years now, and which Bedini taught about rightly in DVD7.
Yes some of these processes the magnetic kills the effect.
So I guess people need to experiment and learn these things. Lots of talk. Plenty of sensational videos and claims, but unless we personally experience these things then what does it matter?
Because it does matter, is it the fact that a capacitor is charged with dielectric energy It takes time known as the rise time, but dielectric energy is fast perhaps even longitudinal energy.
AG
The reply editing window is so small it’s useless when editing Rick’s manuscripts!
As for my 180Khz bigger coil demo, this was just me making a random coil that was almost equal lengthwise with width which results in good Q.
I don’t know if you have noticed but some frequencies yield different amplitudes and are more audio pleasing and are considered in tune with the planet and universe or is it to just some humans I say this as the Nazis didn’t like bas 9 ie 432 and changed it to 440hz witch is base 8 witch is demonically oppressive. You might have noticed DS device he said he used 31kh5 this is a base 9 frequency.
=======
Yeah, it isn't wise to follow people who are in cyberland and could be anyone. Who makes anyone an authority? What science authority is someone we should absolutely trust?
Well that depends some what if they are a ‘cyber-man or not, aren’t you in cyberland?
And it realy depends on if that some one in cyberland is in sync with what’s going on about what’s missing and then there is always experimentation.
As for AG, I'm still not really understanding your context from your words. Maybe take a little more time to specify what you are staying. While it is true that you can get excess energy out of the external environment around any wire passing any current, it may not be worth the effort in parts/collectors/converters to process that gain. On the other hand it is worthy of doing with any high frequency transmission line, or any transmission line that is being impulsed very sharply. The former is the idea I often demonstrate at my meetings as showing the Don Smith dipole system where we tap the Heaviside flow. The latter is where we deal with the Tesla one wire system as partly illustrated with the wrongly called hairpin circuit but which is more fully expanded upon in figure 5 in The True Wireless paper. This I have been showing in my third stage process (black box) for many years now, and which Bedini taught about rightly in DVD7.
Yes some of these processes the magnetic kills the effect.
So I guess people need to experiment and learn these things. Lots of talk. Plenty of sensational videos and claims, but unless we personally experience these things then what does it matter?
Because it does matter, is it the fact that a capacitor is charged with dielectric energy It takes time known as the rise time, but dielectric energy is fast perhaps even longitudinal energy.
AG
Hello Rick,
I did pay attention to DVD7 when it came out and did quite a few experiments with solid state SG's and coils in series but didn't have much success back then, then I went on to work on other things. But resonance has always fascinated me.
In such a one wire setup, isn't there a limit as to how many resonant coils you can put in series? I mean, say you have HV cap as a source dipole and you switch it with abrupt impulses to your line with the correct frequency to resonate all the series coils in the line. Say the caps voltage is 1000V. This voltage would get divided by the number of resonant series coils in the line. So, if you have 10 coils, each would be a resonating node at 100V max, right? But maybe you could put more resonant coils in parallel with each series coil?
Also, to get the power out of each coil, I don't think the way shown in DVD7 is a good method since putting the load (lamp or FWBR to cap) in parallel with the resonant coil as shown would hinder or greatly reduce resonance. Wouldn't a resonant coil with a step down secondary be much better? Or a series bifilar resonant coil with a low impedance load in the middle (the coils internal series connection). These are just some thoughts as I wouldn't mind give it another go, but I was wondering what your opinion is about these points.
thanks,
Mario
Thanks Mario,So don't under stand fig trees with monkeys in them cus we know what they are full off.
You have to take some time to properly understand what Tesla was doing. Unless we understand his system as completely different than AC and DC we will misunderstand how to do what he did.
When done right then you can keep on adding as John said. Again, I point you to the first three lectures and figure 5 of The True Wireless. Don't assume it is merely a coil in series. I show running many coils that were not even matched or in resonance (last meeting I showed 11 such random parts from my products) and yet they still substantially increase the output as well as send energy back to the input. You watch as each module with it's load causes the voltage across the transistor or fet to rise (until it exceeds the maximum SOA). I once saw that go as high as 5000V.
Now if you take the time to understand how Tesla's processes actually work in the single wire transfer then you will learn of all your options and that you can create many branches or single wire outputs from one prime mover. There is no limit to the network that can be associated. So maybe their start up another thread on the other forum Nick Tesla too good to be True. Or John Bedini too good to be true or to be noticed. Now in regards to what Bedini was doing, it was a negative impulse so it is not a mass thing. You are assuming otherwise that is why you think there has to be a limit. Those assumptions are why people didn't want to do negative energy engineering. So we only really gave out the battery as a load. Not me, as I gave it all to you over many years. I showed it with the batteries, and how you could get more out with bigger batteries. I showed it with transformers and inductors and all kinds of lights. I even showed this also on the trigger side. But I found that people didn't care, or at least they got what they needed and moved on. But the true negative unidirectional wave impulse tech was not really taught on these groups. As I mentioned, even Aaron's SSG 3 part manual had nothing of this because he either didn't know anything (which seems manifest, but I don't really know him to say), or he didn't want you all to know it. Tell me, could you really call anything else advanced SSG teaching? This is unlimited in output. What was advanced or intermediate in those books? There is one short thread on this DVD7 and you see they missed the teaching and also the sentence where John claims you can add as many as you want. Yet I think this was all just a game with John. Even with EFTV book, these kinds of things were only for inhouse people. For John it was that you had to earn it.
Your second paragraph misunderstands this process. You have to get beyond looking at Tesla one wire as some current thing with positive impedances.
Third paragraph again assumes same things. I think one thing these forums have shown after all these years is that you look at unique free energy processes with mainstream assumptions that you will dampen them and not get anything. Your understanding about these processes is all wrong. For example, if you do not have a load, and the right load, you will blow out the input. "Everything has to be in balance."
There are many different things you can do once you understand Tesla. Remember, Tesla's one wire was the entire globe (or disc if you are flat earther :o ) in some cases. Size is not a problem.
You do not have to have high frequency either. You can do very low frequency so long as you have a very fast rate of change. Then you have understand what matching impedances mean, along with matching loads. Not necessary but understanding the variety of options is helpful (which I have mentioned).
Now what we have been talking about with the resonance kits also is similar to this. Don Smith said that at radio frequency and above (say above 20cps) in resonance we have no resistive losses. So we can do the same sort of things with a series of parallel tank circuits rightly coupled. Some of my students have posted videos of doing just that with the coils in a similar way as I did with many coils without wire connections. Chapter 1 is two wire connections. Chapter 2 is Tesla's 1 wire (which is what I am referring to here) and chapter 3 is wireless transmission. So with suitable tuned circuits you can do the same sort of thing as we do with the motors with the negative impulsing.
Now I'm not telling you to revisit this. It just so happens to be the most important thing that Bedini ever taught on and which all the present forums have missed. It just so happens that is the most important thing that Tesla taught on and is the key theme with many free energy systems. I have observed that people studied Tesla's work with AC and then they skip over the one wire work as if it is unnecessary because of his wireless work. But without the one wire teaching you will not understand his wireless.
Now this also relates to Don Smith's DSE or Don Smith Effect. He gave a very poorly written two pages on the subject years ago and made a comment at the end that it was "moron level" of understanding required. So it was funny the other day when two of my students had these things finally click and they boasted that they had finally arrived to the moron level ::) ;D You see, they superficially understood the idea but all of a sudden it sank in and the "got it". And that's how it will be for everyone who finally gets it. It will not be a gradual learning more about it. It will just suddenly click as you realize how you have been looking at all this completely wrong. You have to remove your classes and all the assumption lenses and make one have a dielectric filter and the other have a magnetic filter so you can behold all this as it really is and not the way you have been trained to limit reality to be. Like all of a sudden seeing color when you only saw shades of grey. Like seeing 3D when you only understood 2D.
So don't under stand fig trees with monkeys in them cus we know what they are full off.
AG instead of writing hieroglyphics and sideways insults perhaps you should allow those who are spending much time and effort here....the opportunity to continue...WITH OUT PREJUDICE
insults and derogatory comments do nothing but drive people away...
but you already know that ??
Chet K
WITH OUT PREJUDICE
Chet why would i want to do that Chet when Rick is already doing a perfectly respectable job him self with out my help.
Perhaps if Rick could explain what his agenda actually is here in this thread with out him telling us indirectly that we are dangerously irresponsible unless we invest in his kit? or is that one of the conditions of accessing this thread ?
and with out him coming back saying i'm delusional ;D
and it wasn't me who described Rick as Jesus handing out free fishes and loves :'(
Jesus didn't exist before 1603 by King James.Instead of Yahsha
Kind regards AG
Hi ever one,I understand where you are coming from. However I have watched Rick's videos on more than one occasion and he explains everything thoroughly. I even sometimes find it tedious as he goes over points I know. But that is the whole point - he is thorough. You have built the window motor apparently. Well if you watch Rick's vids he tells you that it could do more than originally revealed. He explains how the Heavyside component is trapped by the battery plates acting as capacitor capturing plates of the Don Smith effect. That immediately calls into question the physical placement of your batteries and associated leads ie are they cancelling out the magnetic field?
Rick' I don't watch much tv these days as once the adverts come on I like to wind the box on, if i haven't fallen asleep. Do you see my point here ? i'm not insulting you i'm just asking if you could highlight your useful points if it's not too much trouble.
Has any one got or produced a short form interpretation of Rick's useful info on here, i'm sure we would all be interested i know i would be.
kind regards AG
PS about 7 or 8 years back I made a Newman motor with 2 fan cases amd a pile of Neo's it's not all that brilliant but it amuses the cat watching the tape fly round on the brass fly wheel.
Hi ever one,???
Rick' I don't watch much tv these days as once the adverts come on I like to wind the box on, if i haven't fallen asleep. Do you see my point here ? i'm not insulting you i'm just asking if you could highlight your useful points if it's not too much trouble.
Has any one got or produced a short form interpretation of Rick's useful info on here, i'm sure we would all be interested i know i would be.
kind regards AG
PS about 7 or 8 years back I made a Newman motor with 2 fan cases amd a pile of Neo's it's not all that brilliant but it amuses the cat watching the tape fly round on the brass fly wheel.
…. I even sometimes find it tedious as he goes over points I know. ….
Believe me, no one finds my videos more irritating than I do (at least most of the time). They are very poor quality because I don't have time to do them. I just throw them up there and hopefully they will serve a purpose. I'm not offended with the criticisms, but I have everyone beat there. I may delete all of them soon when I get more time to properly do them. The idea has been to do something rather than nothing. The content is not bad, just the delivery is not appealing. Not spiced up enough. In truth, it doesn't matter what is true or false anymore, all that matters is how entertaining it is. When I do something to make people laugh I get likes and compliments.
I understand where you are coming from. However I have watched Rick's videos on more than one occasion and he explains everything thoroughly. I even sometimes find it tedious as he goes over points I know. But that is the whole point - he is thorough. You have built the window motor apparently. Well if you watch Rick's vids he tells you that it could do more than originally revealed. He explains how the Heavyside component is trapped by the battery plates acting as capacitor capturing plates of the Don Smith effect. That immediately calls into question the physical placement of your batteries and associated leads ie are they cancelling out the magnetic field?Here is a better picture of the device it has two coils one either side but it's got no trigger coil what it does have is 2 hall 3 pin devices to detect where the Neo's are, it will run ok but it's not a self runner the armature has two stacks of neo's along it's length N and S depending where it is in rotation I need to make it a full wave bridge when i get time. the circuity is different to the Badini as it has a pnp to invert the low side NPN so it's on the same time as the PNP high side transistor.
So I suggest you do some research on Rick's videos.
As I understand from Rick's videos and he's talks that rate of change (on/off time) is essence of Bedini.
It is not clear to me how Bedini can do that with PNP and NPN, because, mosfets are speed kings for that.
Even a cheap IRF540 can out speed any NPN for a lot... in a terms of on/off speed, which is must be, for Bedini system?
By the way, nice work AG!
At least once, most of us tried to harvest back emf or use it somehow, but nobody found efficient way to do it.
You are right when you say that important thing is rate of change which produce more spikes. And then repetition, frequency.
With those two perfected it is possible to make only spikes very fast before current starts to flow and harvest only spikes.
That system would spend only little to drive.
But the question is will the spikes provide more power then input. In spikes could be hundreds of wats, but their transient is very short, so at the end, is there more power in spikes only than input?
Or if you feedback it, and use it at same time, it needs to be same or less than input (losses), for efficient system.
Any way I found your videos interesting.
Thanks!
Secondly, the spikes are not current so they amount to zero watts.Now, in your post you stated there is no power in spikes. I will not comment that because if you look only voltage with probe and not current you can not claim that. For that claim you have to look voltage and current transient and math will do the rest. I recommend LT Spice so you don't have to bench.
So then how can a 300V battery be charged at all with a 12V input? Yet it can and does.Battery of 300V can be charged that moment when your input is above 300V. Input can be 300,1V and it will charge 300V battery.
But in fact tens of thousands of people, perhaps hundreds of thousands how "found efficient way to do it." Who is this "nobody" you refer to?I was wrong about that. Anyone who found efficient system did not return here to tell. So, word "nobody" is wrong.
3. Add impedance matching for advanced unlimited output.From this statement, I can only assume that you have achieved unlimited output. Only you know if this is true.
2. Add Resonance for intermediate level.What is resonance to you? Can you explain?
This is a true negative resistance process, but you are thinking it as a positive resistance.What is true negative resistance for you? Please explain this also. So, I can compare my findings with somebody who is more experienced like you. And don't talk about Kron, your words only.
Hi WhatIsIt,
I am still curious about your experience with Bedini and others and what you all accomplished over the years. I am still looking for that and did not found one promising too much.
So, it is interesting subject.
Hi WhatIsIt,
I worked on Bedini tech for several years and built several electro-mechanical and fully solid state energisers. It became a cult with much time and money being expended by many in the search for free energy manifested in the battery bank by the actions of the energiser - a definitely not OU device in itself, as pointed out many times by John. So we were all looking for a free energy gain in our LA battery banks after having completed many charge / discharge cycles. Not forgetting the 'mechanical' gain by virtue of the torque available from revolving bike wheel, which John also reminded us many times was free, if of course and only if we built the energiser properly and not just the way that we wanted to build it. In the meantime, John was publishing books with riddles to the building and secrets of the various energisers and more exotic devices like the 'Window Motor'.
Confusion mounted as time went on, as battery load testing appeared to be carried out in different ways, until a load testing guideline was produced by SG forum members. I hit an apparent gain on many occassions, especially during the first few load testing cycles, until I realised why. The 'why' held the secret as to why my batteries appeared to be gaining real capacity. Interestingly, when I reached around the 8th and then subsequent cycles load testing cycles, I noticed a slow reduction in gain in the form of a flatlining data curve. What was causing this I thought to myself. Well, I know that other experimenters know why and I think Rick does but to my knowledge the answer was never openly acknowledged by those leading the cult, as it exposed the myth of free energy from LA batteries.
Towards the end of those cult years, John made an astounding admission, that all our battery 'spiking' with energisers without the use of cap pulsers, was damaging our batteries!!. I'd had enough of it by then and moved into what has become a new cult - Kapanadze free energy devices.
Thanks for your analysis of John's character which I generally but not entirely concur with.
The second point to consider is building upon the first point. The first point is that the primary battery is not charging the second battery. They are in series with each other and there can be no current flow from a battery in series with another battery. This is especially understood by everyone when the input battery is 12V and the charging battery is higher like 24, 36, 48, or 300 volts. How can you charge a higher potential battery from another one that is in series? Again, this is not an amplifier circuit. Battery 1 or A is not charging battery 2 or B. The battery is being charged as a negative resistor directly from the environment. The energy converges into it at that point. It is not current flow from the input battery. If that was the case, as people assume, then you would merely be dividing the energy in the coil and the motor would run at half power while the battery only half charged. That is how you would have to apply Kirchhoff to all the branches of circuit loops. But the battery is not in parallel with the primary and is therefore backwards. And if I am running motors for years then obviously this is a mistake. So the first point is clearly established by experience that we are not talking about current charging of the secondary battery and that something else is taking place. This brings us to the second point:
Rick,
In your videos you stated "There is thousands of wats in that spikes", I don't wanna bother to watch them again to find in which one.
My post is comment to your statement from your video, and I didn't use word "thousand" like you do, it seems to me, too much overrated, so I used word hundreds.
And my post is answer to your statement. It still is. Transient of spikes are too short to be usable for large amounts of power in your system with input 12V, 4A.
Now, in your post you stated there is no power in spikes. I will not comment that because if you look only voltage with probe and not current you can not claim that. For that claim you have to look voltage and current transient and math will do the rest. I recommend LT Spice so you don't have to bench.
Battery of 300V can be charged that moment when your input is above 300V. Input can be 300,1V and it will charge 300V battery.
Any spike above 300V will start to charge that battery. How efficient, that is...??
Battery will recharge chemically also, so you gain here also.
Replace your batteries with capacitors and you will see how long your system will work. Batteries are not relevant for measuring. You can cheat on them, they are chemically compounds. They will charge without your intervention for a period and then collapse after a while of doing that. One of your cells will fry and then it is over.
With electrical impulses you can stimulate chemical process even more, that is cheating.
What is relevant is in/out transient math.
You can charge the earth, it has more capacity than battery.
You stated "the bigger load will charge more". Earth is bigger load than battery. You can try that, but true measurement with whole earth can not be done.
In your videos you measure input 4A. You never showed how much is going back and charge your battery. I doubt that is 4A. Maybe in mA.
I was wrong about that. Anyone who found efficient system did not return here to tell. So, word "nobody" is wrong.
I was interested in your term "negative energy" because I worked on negative but not energy system so I was curious to hear how much you know about it?
I am also interested in your terms "resonance" and "negative resistance".
From this statement, I can only assume that you have achieved unlimited output. Only you know if this is true.
What is resonance to you? Can you explain?
What is true negative resistance for you? Please explain this also. So, I can compare my findings with somebody who is more experienced like you. And don't talk about Kron, your words only.
Now, you will say this guy attacking me!
I don't. It is not my intention. If I does, this post will look very different than this.
I am still curious about your experience with Bedini and others and what you all accomplished over the years. I am still looking for that and did not found one promising too much.
So, it is interesting subject.
RICK interesting development: By intercepting the led on the satellite coil with a bridge rectifier I was able to get over 17 volts and 9 ma. This was enough to the charge the gate driver battery. So the whole set up was stuck on 10.8 volts for hours. I also attached an earth ground to the negative terminal of the output of the bridge and it increased the output by 1/2 volt and approximately 0.4 ma .
I kept the led in the circuit for tuning purposes. Why the led doesn't blow beats me- (although I have had one go bang the other day) The frequency gen was powered separately.
The thing in the centre of some of some of the coils is a ferrite rod used for additional tuning purposes. Another development of the RICK. (Resonance induction coupler kit)
So here you have a direct example of why EEs very rarely discover anything. Everyone knows that an led needs about 3.7 volts. Everyone knows an led will blow at 6 volts. AND EVERYONE IS WRONG. Try it.lol
And yes it will power another 4 watt 12 volt bulb. Figure that one out, lol
RICK interesting development: By intercepting the led on the satellite coil with a bridge rectifier I was able to get over 17 volts and 9 ma. This was enough to the charge the gate driver battery. So the whole set up was stuck on 10.8 volts for hours. I also attached an earth ground to the negative terminal of the output of the bridge and it increased the output by 1/2 volt and approximately 0.4 ma .
I kept the led in the circuit for tuning purposes. Why the led doesn't blow beats me- (although I have had one go bang the other day) The frequency gen was powered separately.
The thing in the centre of some of some of the coils is a ferrite rod used for additional tuning purposes. Another development of the RICK. (Resonance induction coupler kit)
So here you have a direct example of why EEs very rarely discover anything. Everyone knows that an led needs about 3.7 volts. Everyone knows an led will blow at 6 volts. AND EVERYONE IS WRONG. Try it.lol
And yes it will power another 4 watt 12 volt bulb. Figure that one out, lol
I don't know Arne, i tried the satellite coils (and big coil) in all possible positions and combinations, but the "all vertical" yields the best results.
Itsu
Hi Hoppy,OK understood. I agree that the 'spiking' issue needs clarification.
yes sorry, yours wasn't a question. It came from your statement:
Towards the end of those cult years, John made an astounding admission, that all our battery 'spiking' with energisers without the use of cap pulsers, was damaging our batteries!!. I'd had enough of it by then and moved into what has become a new cult - Kapanadze free energy devices.
Unless I missed it I felt Rick didn't really address this issue, as it's part of the things that need to be clarified, in my opinion.
cheers,
Mario
Hi Hoppy,
yes sorry, yours wasn't a question. It came from your statement:
Towards the end of those cult years, John made an astounding admission, that all our battery 'spiking' with energisers without the use of cap pulsers, was damaging our batteries!!. I'd had enough of it by then and moved into what has become a new cult - Kapanadze free energy devices.
Unless I missed it I felt Rick didn't really address this issue, as it's part of the things that need to be clarified, in my opinion.
cheers,
Mario
Hi Rick,
I think I get what Tesla was doing and explaining in the true wireless lecture. His magnifying transmitter (and receiver) is basically the same principle of a. in Fig.5. The earth is the same as the wire and the capacities of sender and receiver are acting like the expanding and contracting bag analogy of Fig.4., but the main transfer goes through the wire, or the earth. So, in a sense his wireless is a one wire system.
His method is superior to the hertzian method because he used a one wire connection (earth) and used resonance for maximising power sent, while the hertzian method only sends waves through the air which decay rapidly after short distance.
Tesla was using/sending high freq. sinusoidal signals in this case, so no short impulses (except for the cap discharge into the primary of his magnifier but only to get more oscillations, not to send impulses), so I don't know why the association of the one method and short impulses, although impulses can of course trigger resonance just as well.
Tesla's one wire system has no return, The output of the SG in dvd7 are yes impulses but it has a return (to the main SG coil), this is why I see a limit in as how many series coils can be placed in the line, as opposed to an open wire. What John showed with added series coil and FWBR is an analogy to b. in Fig.5. but in John's case the coil is part of the wire to create a node, while the FWBR across it basically represents b. But still, the wire has a return.
Anyway, my goal is to charge as many batteries as possible from as little input as possible, and I wouldn't mind using the one wire technique.
thanks,
Mario
Hi Rick,
I appreciate your long reply to Hoppy, and I appreciate you trying to explain how things really were. But I would appreciate even more if you could be more precise technically, else the confusion will go on forever.
1. I am not writing the following to contradict what you say about negative energy, and I DO understand the negative spikes with a fast change rate and that they are a trigger for converging a different form of energy to batteries, and that lower impedance in both, batteries and output wires help things a lot. BUT, if you keep saying that a) there is no current on the output, and b) that you can't charge a battery that's at a higher voltage than the primary you are not being precise and this keeps confusing people. Any DC-DC converter relies on buck-boost coil collapse (flyback) technology to convert lower to higher or higher to lower voltage, so charging a battery from another battery at any voltage is really not a special feature. Now about the current on the output, if you connect the scope to the switching device you see the typical h wave of an SG or the wave of a solid state oscillator. What we see below the zero line is the coil being powered from the primary battery, immediately followed by the neg. spike we see on the positive side on the scope (because of how we connect the scope) which results from the coil being switched off but not wanting to invert its current flow, immediately followed by the current starting to flow from the resulting collapsing magnetic field of the coil. So, depending on what we connect to the output we will see an according discharge of current also. If we discharge into a 12V battery the current discharge pulse will be almost as wide in time and amplitude (on the scope) as the power pulse, depending on coil resistance, device efficiency, SG or solid state, etc... If we discharge into a 48V battery we will see a much narrower discharge puls after the spike, because the discharging coil automatically adapts to the load voltage and in this case gives higher voltage but less current. This is just to be precise. There definitely is the negative spike which triggers another event we end up finding in the battery, but to say there is NO current and a battery should not charge is not right in my view. The amount of current can vary a lot depending on load voltage, tuning, etc... but there is some.
2. I am not a person of many words, but I like clarity and precision. I couldn't find a straight answer to Hoppy's question whether negative charging damages batteries or not. Would you suggest charging directly or use cap discharge? Also, on the output, would you suggest putting the batteries in series rather than in parallel (even if the impedance would be higher in series)?
3. To rotate negatively charged batteries, why not simply put a big capacitor across the input, since it converts to positive and is what inverters have on the input which we can use?
4. You said you've used SCR cap discharge triggered by a 1n4007 diode, that would dump the cap at 1V above the battery right? What cap size did you use mostly and what aprox. rate? I know it depends on many things. Do you recommend dumping a cap with a neon triggered SCR dump at 90V? I've built probably 40 or 50 variations of circuits from HV small caps to low voltage big caps and everything in between, so I'm kind of curious among all the confusion that's around what you would finally suggest as the best cap dump voltage from your experience.
5. I suppose you missed my post 643?
thanks,
Mario
Rick,
Thanks for your reply on the spiking damage issue. I may have misunderstood but that was the nature of things back then amongst all the confusion. :( However. I'm not confused and have not misunderstood how the secondary battery is getting charged by the energiser.
Rick,
thanks for explaining, but don't be so hard on me man! :D I admit I need to study Tesla more in depth. I know in the "hairpin" circuit he used impulses, but in the True wireless lecture he also wrote oscillations, that's probably why I misunderstood, It certainly isn't my intention to mislead anyone. Ok, I will dive into new experiments with the info you just kindly shared.
thanks,
Mario
Mario,Mr Rick Friedrich,can you fill us in on this device please
You all can see that I treat A the same way as I do you. My response to you is according to your own words and also in the context of everything people like G have posted over the last week or so (and the whole history of this forum to some extent). I deal with thousands of people all over the world, so this isn't about what you wrote and what I replied to. I'm speaking to everyone here as people are reading and will read in the future. When you had pointed out the second (b) image and yet claimed this was not about impulsing, what was I to think. There is a pattern here with several people really pushing for mainstream theory here that makes OU impossible and denies the possibility of gains, and limits everyone to power meters. Also, none of you are willing to admit anything I have said. This is incredible. Out of all the things I have shared you guys find nothing to agree with or appreciate. So this comes across like you guys have an agenda, as clearly many people have on these forums. I am not new to this and have seen this right from the beginning of the internet in the 90s. Regular people don't do those things. They politely converse with give and take exchanges. But here I offer you guys so many points and you all know I have demonstrated many OU systems over the years, so why the silence? I guess this posting from you is the first acknowledgement of any point I have made so far from those of you who give all appearance of not believing OU to be possible, and/or being locked out from it by your assumptions.
Anyway, the relevant point for you to consider while you read Tesla, is as Dollard points out, that there really is 4 different types of energy in our circuit systems that we need to distinguish from each other and not confuse: AC, DC, Oscillatory, and Impulse. AC must be distinguished from Oscillatory energy, and DC is not Impulse as the use of the words "pulsed DC" confuses people. The assumptions are most relevant in relation to OU considerations. Again, DC is fundamentally different than impulse because YOU DON'T CONSIDER THE TURNING ON AND OFF OF DC WHEN YOU MEASURE DC. And Impulse is not what follows from the impulse. Impulse is the moment of the switch and the nature of what happens at the moment. Just like people are not what results from their actions. Again, when you measure DC you never bother to measure the turning on and off of the circuit, and how it effects the whole environment. So even DC is never just DC. There is always an impulse at the beginning and end. It is only those who want to oversimplify things that ignore such details. And that discussion brings everyone back to the true of what Walter Lewin demonstrated and pointed out.
And while AC and oscillatory energy are also similar they also need to be contrasted in these studies. These four things need to be separated into their own categories when studying Tesla, what I say, and in all OU studies. Glossing them together helps no one.
Mr Rick Friedrich,can you fill us in on this device please
re tinman link=topic=12736.msg480799#msg480799 date=1460730080]
http://energyfromthevacuum.com/Disc14/index.html
Rick's latest video: and they're getting longer -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiK0IktPWe4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiK0IktPWe4)
And they are free -
I haven't watched it yet.....................................................
Rick, ... slow down! I haven't been posting for a long time on this forum so please don't jump at me like this... Don't know what others here are up to, but you don't need to be on the defensive side and slap back at me as I'm surely not trying to insult you or not admit anything or acknowledge what you say. I accidentally checked the threads here and saw your post about DVD7 which is something that I had spent quite some time on years back because I was very interested in the one wire subject.
I think this time it's you who didn't read everything I wrote because I never said that I believe OU is impossible and that all I see or measure is about current, not at all! I believe in negative energy and that it converges to the loads and is different from our normal current. OK? Clear? I JUST said that after the negative event the coil also discharges some current, ok? That's it. There's no need to shout that I'm not admitting anything and that I may have an agenda... I perfectly know that the primary charges the coil which then becomes the source that charges the secondary, You may think I'm a complete beginner in building these circuits. I'm not, I've built them for the last 10 or more years, my circuits have rise/fall times of about 30 nanoseconds.
After the "big confusion" I quietly kept working on my own (and other projects) to figure things out by actually doing the experiments, but I never really had a chance to compare notes and ask someone with more experience in the SG matter the questions I asked you. Not everyone can invest as much time on this as you do. I'm not here to contradict you, I'm actually all ears, trying to learn more.
Mario
.. Once you see my Free energy Cheat Sheet
Rick... where?
Rick,With out prejudice.
With respect please ease up. you are in some of your text coming across to some of us as attacking our intelligence and almost branding us as idiots. You need to respect that like you, some of us have developed fairly rigid beliefs on this subject. I've already stated my view on how the energiser works and your very long and detailed posts are not going to convince me that I'm wrong. I would not dare posting repeatedly in the same way as you, almost trying to coerce folk by words into my way of thinking. I appreciate that you are sincere and only wish to do good but you must realise that your method of communication tends to raise one's hackles! I'm not saying that you are plain wrong in your understanding, just that through my many years of experimenting with energisers and the like, I have experienced nothing out of convention in regards to its modus-opwerandi. I do not wish to enter into an in depth technical debate with you, as I did with John way back in time, as this would clearly be a futile exercise. You have well and truly stated your case for folk to consider. Now is the time to ease up.
AG//quote //Chet could you or Nick please highlight and point to us the useful technical points of importance you are referring to other wise they appear to be lost in the confusional side tracking issues.
But here is just not the place!//end quote
//Things related to the FE community its history [unknown ?] etc etc
are of course important to readers here .
// Chet
Ultimately the most important thing is the truth // especially as it applies to energy harvesting.
Rick,
With respect please ease up. you are in some of your text coming across to some of us as attacking our intelligence and almost branding us as idiots. You need to respect that like you, some of us have developed fairly rigid beliefs on this subject. I've already stated my view on how the energiser works and your very long and detailed posts are not going to convince me that I'm wrong. I would not dare posting repeatedly in the same way as you, almost trying to coerce folk by words into my way of thinking. I appreciate that you are sincere and only wish to do good but you must realise that your method of communication tends to raise one's hackles! I'm not saying that you are plain wrong in your understanding, just that through my many years of experimenting with energisers and the like, I have experienced nothing out of convention in regards to its modus-opwerandi. I do not wish to enter into an in depth technical debate with you, as I did with John way back in time, as this would clearly be a futile exercise. You have well and truly stated your case for folk to consider. Now is the time to ease up.
With out prejudice.
I agree Rick does appear to have some 'baggage' problems he 'needs to come to terms with' or sort out for his own good perhaps shut him self of from and move on.
Kind regards AG
What mistakes would those be then ? :)
Again Question for nick, in the newman device Mr newman obviously had a different set up to the window JB device
in that Mr Newman used a 'contact breaker switch interrupter' per revolution. Well to be exact didn't the energy
he spoke of coming from his spinning magnetic pump effect and his contact breaking com/slip ring mechanism
so in effect if one was to replace the ferromagnets with Neo's the effect would me some what spectacular ?
If that is so why don't all your devices exploited this phenomena but use a semiconductor that incurs losses
instead as the short resistance impedance would require about 10 x irf640's in parallel to acquire the correct
impedance however the BEMF might pose a problem, if one did the job correctly and before some one suggests
using an SCR it has a resistance in the 5 ohm region witch makes it useless along with any bipolar device ;D
AG: Sorry, but I'm not looking into Newman's noisy spinning moving devices. Nor any others like it. Nor am I trying to reinvent the wheel.
Rick: I feel sorry for what you are going through. But, what we really need here is more proof that adding more and more coils, (hundreds), does not affect the input. And more importantly, does not affect the total brightness in a negative way. If there really is more output than input, then this needs to be recycled, to self run the device. Until this is shown and proven, the negative speculation will continue. No amount of words and long explanations from you will change that.
So, please SHOW it self running itself. Not everyone believes that every OU device that are shown HERE are faked.
Hopefully, Nelson's devices are not faked, and do self run. Although he won't admit it. Good call, for him. Better safe than sorry.
Is it Ricks channel? indeed well well news travels!
Question for nick, in the newman device Mr newman obviously had a different set up to the window JB device in that Mr Newman used a 'contact breaker switch interrupter' per revolution. Well to be exact didn't the energy he spoke of coming from his spinning magnetic pump effect and his contact breaking com/slip ring mechanism so in effect if one was to replace the ferromagnets with Neo's the effect would me some what spectacular ? If that is so why don't all your devices exploited this phenomena but use a semiconductor that incurs losses instead as the short resistance impedance would require about 10 x irf640's in parallel to acquire the correct impedance however the BEMF might pose a problem, if one did the job correctly and before some one suggests using an SCR it has a resistance in the 5 ohm region witch makes it useless along with any bipolar device ;D
PS thanks for the advice.
AG
What mistakes would those be then ? :)
I will get my religious bud'y to pray for you.
Rick: I feel sorry for what you are going through. But, what we really need here is more proof that adding more and more coils, (hundreds), does not affect the input. And more importantly, does not affect the total brightness in a negative way. If there really is more output than input, then this needs to be recycled, to self run the device. Until this is shown and proven, the negative speculation will continue. No amount of words and long explanations from you will change that.
So, please SHOW it self running itself. Not everyone believes that every OU device that are shown HERE are faked.
Hopefully, Nelson's devices are not faked, and do self run. Although he won't admit it. Good call, for him. Better safe than sorry.
Rick: Thanks for the reply. Like I said, for people like me, who is are builders, and not just a speculating armchair forum posters, we need more proof in order to do what itsu is doing now. He is one of our best replicators, and if he can't show and replicate your circuit, then most likely none of us can. Is he doing something wrong, or what? Can you provide the needed info so that he can achieve what you say is possible? No need to post long essays, just some critical technical info, and just avoid getting into any personal issues. They only distract from what we are trying to do. I am on your side, and not trying to antagonize you or anyone else, at all.
BTW: The only reason I mention "Nelson" and his devices, is because, he is the only one on this forum that has shown a self running device. The ONLY one...
In any case, I'm not here to discuss fakes, I'm here to replicate, and to build a working self running device.
I worked on Bedini tech for several years and built several electro-mechanical and fully solid state energisers. It became a cult with much time and money being expended by many in the search for free energy manifested in the battery bank by the actions of the energiser - a definitely not OU device in itself, as pointed out many times by John. So we were all looking for a free energy gain in our LA battery banks after having completed many charge / discharge cycles. Not forgetting the 'mechanical' gain by virtue of the torque available from revolving bike wheel, which John also reminded us many times was free, if of course and only if we built the energiser properly and not just the way that we wanted to build it. In the meantime, John was publishing books with riddles to the building and secrets of the various energisers and more exotic devices like the 'Window Motor'.
Confusion mounted as time went on, as battery load testing appeared to be carried out in different ways, until a load testing guideline was produced by SG forum members. I hit an apparent gain on many occassions, especially during the first few load testing cycles, until I realised why. The 'why' held the secret as to why my batteries appeared to be gaining real capacity. Interestingly, when I reached around the 8th and then subsequent cycles load testing cycles, I noticed a slow reduction in gain in the form of a flatlining data curve. What was causing this I thought to myself. Well, I know that other experimenters know why and I think Rick does but to my knowledge the answer was never openly acknowledged by those leading the cult, as it exposed the myth of free energy from LA batteries.
Towards the end of those cult years, John made an astounding admission, that all our battery 'spiking' with energisers without the use of cap pulsers, was damaging our batteries!!. I'd had enough of it by then and moved into what has become a new cult - Kapanadze free energy devices.
Re Rick:
My comments on some of the comments.
Yes I am guilty for highlighting Rick on this and another forum - but not BEFORE I had checked him out. I listened and watched and analysed over 50 hours of Rick's videos and spoke to him extensively on the phone before I came to my conclusions.
Specifically he had done the Benitez experiments as I had. I was talking about Benitez 5 or 6 years ago on these forums and the posts are still there.
I checked out Rick's information about the Bedini and derivative systems. I will post the new information at the end.
Then I saw he had replicated much of Don Smith. I talked with him extensively about the Don Smith process and book. He told me repeatedly that I did not have to buy the book - all the info was already on line ( mostly). I then realized that he knew what he was talking about - and from a practical not theoretical point of view.
I bought the book and am glad I did. He has demystified Don Smith.
I checked Rick out on the Energetic forum and read all the vile personal criticism - but not one contradiction that was viable of an electrical nature. I phoned Rick up extensively to double check him out. I even found out he had a convention in Canada and rang him there. I knew positively then that Rick was being lied about and defamed. (They claimed he was an illegal)
I checked out the products for sale on that forum: Only books and dvds. Benfr started a forum on Rick's Resonance induction kits on Energetic. Vitriol followed - so I posted a sarcastic comment that I would love to buy a Don Smith kit from them. Obviously they were incapable of anything like that. The only 2 people worth following on that forum are Peter Lindeman and Eric Dollard.
I started a thread on Overuityresearch about Rick's kit. Vile vitriol followed. It was so bad I had to close the thread down. It got so bad that 2 members resigned.
So here is a summary of what Rick has taught me through personal contact and his extensive videos online.
1 There are 4 types of electricity: Dc, Ac, oscillatory and impulse.
2 Impulse technology is Tesla's technology and is the one to be considered for OU
3 The Heavyside component: Impulse technology in the Bedini systems makes extensive use of the Heavyside component. This calls into question your battery placement and connecting wires. You can easily mess up the magnetic fields by sloppy arrangement of the components.
4 Don Smith patented this effect and called it the Don Smith effect.
5 The Bedini SG and other systems and derivatives use Tesla's impulse technology and can charge a bank of batteries from one input (Who knew that?). (BTW I had already done this over 5 years ago)
6 Tesla's one wire system creating nodes. (Video 7). Of course I knew about it - just never realized it's significance.
7 Resonance is a gain.
7 b Rick's use of the gate driver without the transistor to mimic somewhat Tesla's impulse technology.
7c Using this impulse technology at Resonance (EEs vehemently disagree with this even though they know virtually noting about impulse technology at resonance)
7d Seeing the power draw REDUCE as more loads are added. ( phase mirroring effect).
8 Don Smith: The Kapanadze system and the Don Smith system are the same principle. Don Smith 1994 - Kapanadze 2004. Don Smith was talking to the Russian academy of sciences - Kapanadze also (I have been told Kapanadze bribed an official of the Russian academy).
8 Back to Bedini: Solid state SSG. We all put welding rods or iron insulated garden wire in our trifilar coils. Guess what? Doesn't work at 27 khz. You need a ferrite core. Nice sneaky trick by Bedini fooling us all.
Don Smith:
1st process HV HF impulse technology.
Next 1/4 wave up or down.(Resonance process)
Next pulsed DC through High speed High voltage rectifiers
Now the tricky bit which people don't get: FREQUENCY REDUCTION TO 120 HZ in the US. (60 up 60 down)
This is the most critical part where each reduction in frequency is an increase in power.
Those who criticise this process because they are radio hams don't understand the following: Radio is AC with a superimposed signal on the carrier wave. This is Tesla impulse tech at resonance. It is also converted to pulsed DC. The use of the US radio league nomograph to get the frequency reduction is a Don Smith discovery that works. ( I have not tested this yet).
Kapanadze also uses frequency reduction in a different way. He uses a 50hz 220 volts generator to superimpose the mains frequency on top of his resonant Don Smith frequency to power his loads. This is done in the grenade coil.
There is obvioulsy much more in the detail re the different set ups in Rick's videos and and online comments.
So in conclusion I have one request: Treat the resource of having Rick converse with us on this forum as a treasure which no-one else on the planet has . Engage your brain before typing nasty comments. Ask reasonable technical questions and get your soldering iron out and DO SOME EXPERIMENTS and contribute something instead of just taking.
I have done my bit. I have brought you aquarium 2 and I have shown you some results of experiments.
Please do as much as I have tried to do and be nice to Rick.
Please.
Any mistakes in life and technology. I am sharing many of my mistakes and those of others so that others need not fall into any traps and waste time, money, and their faith.Rich, thanks for the reply :) i can see whats wrong my old device (newman motor). It will need some work doing on it for sure.
I always appreciate prayer, even if people think I am in the wrong. I learn from other people's criticisms as well.
Re Rick:Hi have you got any info on this 60/up 60/down thing please ?
Next pulsed DC through High speed High voltage rectifiers
Now the tricky bit which people don't get: FREQUENCY REDUCTION TO 120 HZ in the US. (60 up 60 down)
This is the most critical part where each reduction in frequency is an increase in power.
Those who criticise this process because they are radio hams don't understand the following: Radio is AC with a superimposed signal on the carrier wave. This is Tesla impulse tech at resonance. It is also converted to pulsed DC. The use of the US radio league nomograph to get the frequency reduction is a Don Smith discovery that works. ( I have not tested this yet).
Kapanadze also uses frequency reduction in a different way. He uses a 50hz 220 volts generator to superimpose the mains frequency on top of his resonant Don Smith frequency to power his loads. This is done in the grenade coil.
There is obvioulsy much more in the detail re the different set ups in Rick's videos and and online comments.
Rick,
You are right. It is difficult or impossible to prove anything to anyone over the internet.
Over the net we can only talk, which we do. How much of youtube FE devices are true you already pointed, video is not prove.
We can only believe and that could be painful at the end.
You mentioned importance of Tesla's one wire system. Can you point on some of your videos where you touched the subject, if you did such video.
Or can you talk more about it from your point of view?
Thanks!
Hoppy, thanks for the explanation!
And, Kapanadze impressed me as well. Still does.
Rich, thanks for the reply :) i can see whats wrong my old device (newman motor). It will need some work doing on it for sure.
regards AG
Hi have you got any info on this 60/up 60/down thing please ?
Hi Rick,
You said nobody valued the info you are sharing, that is not true at all, in my case at least. I merely pointed out that fact that when the coil discharges, after the radiant event we still find a bit of current also, even though I totally agree on the fact that without the neg impulses we're tied to finding classic results only and won't find OU. But you misunderstood and overreacted and things went south.
I totally agree that nothing can be demonstrated or proven on the net. Info can be shared and then everyone who replicates on the bench can only prove it to himself and who's physically around.
Just so you know why I'm here, my goal is to be able to have a solar system with no solar panels ;) , where I'm either rotating 2 battery banks to run an inverter (or one bank that doesn't run down while powering the inverter.) While I understand your point about making the coil a motor, although I have done that, at the moment I'm interested in a solid state energizer with added one wire loads, that charge caps for battery pulse charging. I have been trying that years ago when dvd 7 came out, but back then I din't understand Tesla the way I do now (I know you don't think I do lol...) even though I still have a lot to read and learn. But the principle about fast and sharp impulses to trigger another type of inrushing energy is perfectly clear in my mind and is what I have been working on for quite some time. I built SG's more than 10 years ago and then moved to solid state, then after JB's riddles I got frustrated and moved to other projects such as delayed lenz generators, SERPS and other stuff, spending a lot of time and money. But I always knew there had to be a way to make the solid state SG do want I want it to do, that's why I jumped aboard when I saw your posts about dvd7 and the one wire, as I need direction from someone with the correct info. That's why I'm actually grateful for you being here and sharing, like someone else wrote, I'm on your side too... and ready to learn.
thanks,
Mario
Guys:
I looked at that last video posted by Rick. Sorry but, that noisy thing lighting up a couple of little led bulbs, was not impressive, as it was offensively loud, instead. I remember why I could never could fully view any of his posted videos before.
I would not want something like that running in my house. I hope that he can show something better, and quite.
Otherwise, solar panels would blow something like that away. Without any noise, easier to set up, and probably cheaper per watt output than what they are showing there. Sorry but I could not handle the noise, nor could view the whole video.
Rick: We are not all idiots here. We already know about what we should or should not trust, in video or forum discussions, and don't really need you reminding up of the obvious. Even though you think that we do need your guidance on that, we don't.
Then afterwards, you show us more videos to look at. But, say that the real deal will not be shown, as it's a secret, and proprietary. Ok, I get it now...
There is something I have been thinking about for several days now I just still don't understand. Some comments have been made that have said the voltage across the input coil keeps going up when more secondary coils are added. And Rick has confirmed this. Also comments have been made that the input current keeps going down as more secondary coils are added. And the claim has been made that the power keeps going down as secondary coils are added. But if the voltage is going up while the current is going down that does NOT mean the power is going down when secondary coils are added. That only means the circuit is becoming more inductive which is increasing the inductive reactance.Yes, agreed.
Respectfully,
Carroll
There is something I have been thinking about for several days now I just still don't understand. Some comments have been made that have said the voltage across the input coil keeps going up when more secondary coils are added. And Rick has confirmed this. Also comments have been made that the input current keeps going down as more secondary coils are added. And the claim has been made that the power keeps going down as secondary coils are added. But if the voltage is going up while the current is going down that does NOT mean the power is going down when secondary coils are added. That only means the circuit is becoming more inductive which is increasing the inductive reactance.
The other question or puzzle for me is how is the voltage across the primary coil going up? The only schematic I have seen in this thread is the one posted by Itsu. And if i recall correctly the primary was being fed by a power supply so the voltage to the coil would be fixed and thus not able to go up. So something just doesn't add up there.
And the last thing that is puzzling me is what is meant by the term "Gate Driver". I keep hearing that term used in the videos and by others as if it is some secret circuit that is making all this magic possible. I know what a gate driver is in real electronics. It is just a simple chip with a circuit built into it that supplies the proper signal to drive either a mosfet or IGBT. I have used them for years. But what is the "gate driver" referred to in this thread?
Respectfully,
Carroll
At The Renaissance Charge, LLC. Hollywood Florida Convention.
March 22, 2015
"It's not what is in the box but what is around the box!"
http://potentialtec.com/Box.jpg (shows first German demo) Notice wave.
This special video is the first time this was demonstrated in the US. We demonstrated this first in Hamburg Germany and England in 2014 as you see in the above picture link.
It is not easy to hear every word shared because people were talking, and because his English was limited. I do not agree with everything he teaches or necessarily with the words "zero point," "quantum," etc.
Sorry, but that's it for me on this thread. I don't need all the BS. NickZ, over and out
There is something I have been thinking about for several days now I just still don't understand. Some comments have been made that have said the voltage across the input coil keeps going up when more secondary coils are added. And Rick has confirmed this. Also comments have been made that the input current keeps going down as more secondary coils are added. And the claim has been made that the power keeps going down as secondary coils are added. But if the voltage is going up while the current is going down that does NOT mean the power is going down when secondary coils are added. That only means the circuit is becoming more inductive which is increasing the inductive reactance.
The other question or puzzle for me is how is the voltage across the primary coil going up? The only schematic I have seen in this thread is the one posted by Itsu. And if i recall correctly the primary was being fed by a power supply so the voltage to the coil would be fixed and thus not able to go up. So something just doesn't add up there.
And the last thing that is puzzling me is what is meant by the term "Gate Driver". I keep hearing that term used in the videos and by others as if it is some secret circuit that is making all this magic possible. I know what a gate driver is in real electronics. It is just a simple chip with a circuit built into it that supplies the proper signal to drive either a mosfet or IGBT. I have used them for years. But what is the "gate driver" referred to in this thread?
Respectfully,
Carroll
Hi Rick,
thanks for sharing this video, very interesting. There is something I'm trying to figure out. Let's say that out of the receivers in fig.5 or fig. 12 of the true wireless I choose a coil. In Tesla's example the coil is placed across the one wire transmission line (in parallel), without interrupting the one wire, which in my opinion means that the frequency has to be very high in order to get a node across these two connection points of the wire. Now, in dvd7 the inductor is inserted into the one wire, not in parallel, but in series, and the reason for that I suppose is to "slow down" or allow for a lower frequency to produce a node across the coil with the correct rate. So, in a sense in this case the coil is not the actual receiving device but replaces a piece of wire to allow for lower frequencies. The receiving device then would be the FWBR and cap. Am I seeing this correctly?
thanks,
Mario
Guys:
I looked at that last video posted by Rick. Sorry but, that noisy thing lighting up a couple of little led bulbs, was not impressive, as it was offensively loud, instead. I remember why I could never could fully view any of his posted videos before.
I would not want something like that running in my house. I hope that he can show something better, and quiet.
Otherwise, solar panels would blow something like that away. Without any noise, easier to set up, and probably cheaper per watt output than what they are showing there. Sorry but I could not handle the noise, nor could view the whole video.
Rick: We are not all idiots here. We already know about what we should or should not trust, in video or forum discussions, and don't really need you reminding us of the obvious. Even though you think that we do need your guidance on that, we don't.
Then afterwards, you show us more videos to look at. But, say that the real deal will not be shown, as it's a secret, and proprietary. Ok, I get it now...
Hi NickZ,
Rick has shown what is in the box. Look at Loving Path Series (Zero Voltage Process).
It is to noisy..haha.. Where is a problem, to build a small box that dampen it. You can also do it with one Wire. All Informations about how to do you can find in this discussion.
What is the next problem? It is to big? it looks like not supercool? I can not believe it.
There is something I have been thinking about for several days now I just still don't understand. Some comments have been made that have said the voltage across the input coil keeps going up when more secondary coils are added. And Rick has confirmed this. Also comments have been made that the input current keeps going down as more secondary coils are added. And the claim has been made that the power keeps going down as secondary coils are added. But if the voltage is going up while the current is going down that does NOT mean the power is going down when secondary coils are added. That only means the circuit is becoming more inductive which is increasing the inductive reactance.
The other question or puzzle for me is how is the voltage across the primary coil going up? The only schematic I have seen in this thread is the one posted by Itsu. And if i recall correctly the primary was being fed by a power supply so the voltage to the coil would be fixed and thus not able to go up. So something just doesn't add up there.
And the last thing that is puzzling me is what is meant by the term "Gate Driver". I keep hearing that term used in the videos and by others as if it is some secret circuit that is making all this magic possible. I know what a gate driver is in real electronics. It is just a simple chip with a circuit built into it that supplies the proper signal to drive either a mosfet or IGBT. I have used them for years. But what is the "gate driver" referred to in this thread?
Respectfully,
Carroll
Should be fun to see if somebody will ansver to citftas questions. Adding my two previous questions also;
How is it possibe to lit the LEDs with the coils coupled in two absolutely different directions/ situations pic1, pic2, but they are all shining fine in both cases.
Regards Arne
Yes, agreed.
Another thought provoking thing is Rick's motor / charger video. My experiences using this type of setup, both solid state and electro-mechanical, was that initially and for fairly long periods of time, some 'exciting' rising voltage readings resulted, both on charge and source batteries. However, at a certain point in the run, a fairly quick primary terminal voltage fall and a stabilising charging voltage would commence. I deduced that this effect was most likely due to the effects of de-sulfation. This effect was most noticeable on brand new LA batteries (both SLAB's and wet cell) and batteries that had been sitting unused for a considerable time. Perhaps Rick could comment on this. The length of the video demonstration would in my opinion from experience, be quite suitable to demonstrate the 'exciting' effects, without necessarily seeing the downturn.It should also be appreciated that 'Peukerts Law' also operates in reverse, that is with battery loads considerably lower than the C20 rate.
Convention? There were about 20 ragtag retirees at that thing none of whom had a technical clue about what is going on. All amazed and talking silliness about "not normal electricity". What was the point of dropping the LED in the glass of water and in the end it did not light anyway hahaha
Whats going on around the box?? I know exactly what you mean so when I say in light hearted fashion that the biggest thing going on around that box is two whopping batteries (THAT ARE STILL DECREASING IN VOLTAGE) AND SOME VERY DIMLY LIT bogus load LEDS, don't think I do not know what you mean. There are several hairpin type Tesla setups that can excite the environment and do what you demonstrate. PLEASE!!!.....that Indian looking pot belly guy was an embarrassment talking nonsense.
STOP implying OU when there is none. YES you can keep adding loads on these type circuits and in SOME cases the main driver will decrease in consumption. YES you have to match impedances and you cannot over work the circuit with infinite output. However, Rick you still talk too much and post lengthy winded nonsense.
The only people buying your garbage that flows from your mouth are the uneducated.
A couple brave retirees in that video kept pointing out that the battery voltages were falling. There is no OU in THAT system. Anyone with skills and versed in the art can brightly light LEDS and replicate but how bout you just put as many coils as you want around the main driver, RECTIFY properly and then charge a battery/s. What you are doing there is not even 90% efficient.
Your kit with those miniscule red leds…...put a real load on it
My thoughts exactly. Its an advertisement thread for kits anyway
Rick: Sorry for offending you. But, I expected your answer.
You are so full of it... Show the device running a 1000w load. You want us to believe you. Prove your point. I'm not into your game. YOU have shown nothing. No schematic. SHOW the device running the 200w load, leave the device running for days... SHOW it running a 1000w watt load. YOU WON'T. You get a comment and review saying that the battery running your kit drains, you ignore that.
Really!
I've had enough of your insults.
NickZ That's it, over and out...
Rick
I'm not just thinking about this, but before I throw a circuit together there are some things I need to visualise in my mind.
you said: "BTW, some of the nodes in the box are what I have shown already. But the ones with the big 100W LEDs are other arrangements." Maybe theses arrangements are the transverse ones, air-grounded by "what surrounds the box"... ;)
Say I run a solid state SG as my one wire impulse generator, do you see a problem if it is run from a grounded power supply to make these experiments, or even run by a battery but the fet driving circuit is run from a little 15V power supply? Does this create problems to be connected to the ground on the input? Else I just run everything from the battery.
Also, from the video you posted, I see it doesn't matter if the energizer coils are small, but you said that the first coil on the one wire transmission determines the output of the following ones, so, at least the first one better have some mass, correct? It's probably best to make them all equal to get them resonant at the same frequency...
So the impedances give the best results when in resonance, and you also said impedance matched. Do you mean matching the impedance of the tanks to get resonance, or matched impedance from the resonating impedance to the load, like a step down secondary?
thanks,
Mario
You really have to go back and look at Tesla's circuits and read what he said about how this works. Until you get the idea you will be looking for certain parts arrangements to hopefully stumble upon something. That just will never work. "throwing a circuit together" just doesn't work. It first clicks in the mind and then you can make it work many ways.
There are more than several options there. The transverse gives you the option to expand the network.
Grounded input supply is different. That is not what we are doing here. It is not impossible to do but is not this. The idea is that you don't need a supply once it is set up. Grounding is a very significant influence, especially where grounded...
What I said about the first coil is only the basic level testing not tuned/resonance.
Equal or balance is important and remains to be understood.
There is matching impedance with the load and matching with the input--two different things.
FWIW, i am still working on this and build myself 6 new coils.
The picture shows the 6 new coils compared to the 5 older smaller ones.
The new ones measure:
6cm diameter
52 turns 0.71mm (AWG 21)
144uH @ 100Khz
0.4 Ohm.
Different compared to the old coils is that the 5nF capacitor is parallel, so we have a parallel LC instead
of a series LC we had. (the big drive coil still is a series LC).
Resonance frequency stays around 180Khz.
Looks like this parallel LC (high impedance, high voltage, low current @ resonance) gives a better match as
the 3W led (after FWB rectification by 4x Bat 46 and buffer cap 220uF) looks stronger.
Seems like i have to build 4 more of those coils to see any effect.
Itsu
This is not a disputed point. The radiation goes out and covers about 70% of the area around the coil. This is a common thing which you can see in tuning coils. Again, you just have to play around with the coils and see for yourself. That is one reason for the kit ;)
Rick
I'm not just thinking about this, but before I throw a circuit together there are some things I need to visualise in my mind.
you said: "BTW, some of the nodes in the box are what I have shown already. But the ones with the big 100W LEDs are other arrangements." Maybe theses arrangements are the transverse ones, air-grounded by "what surrounds the box"... ;)
Say I run a solid state SG as my one wire impulse generator, do you see a problem if it is run from a grounded power supply to make these experiments, or even run by a battery but the fet driving circuit is run from a little 15V power supply? Does this create problems to be connected to the ground on the input? Else I just run everything from the battery.
Also, from the video you posted, I see it doesn't matter if the energizer coils are small, but you said that the first coil on the one wire transmission determines the output of the following ones, so, at least the first one better have some mass, correct? It's probably best to make them all equal to get them resonant at the same frequency...
So the impedances give the best results when in resonance, and you also said impedance matched. Do you mean matching the impedance of the tanks to get resonance, or matched impedance from the resonating impedance to the load, like a step down secondary?
thanks,
Mario
Carrol that would be more than puzzling indeed. I remember correcting someone on that. So unless I wrote directly opposite then I don't know why you think I confirmed that.
Let's be clear here:
1. The input voltage stays the same on my power supply.
2. The amperage goes down when we load it down most of the time. It can go up under certain circumstances as well.
3. I don't recall saying the coil voltage goes up with added coils, but it can (WHILE THE INPUT VOLTAGE STAYS THE SAME) if you are in a phase mirroring situation and so the coil is also a receiver.
4. Itsu is doing something else, not my setups.
5. Yes, gate driver means just that. It is not driving a gate however, but merely switching directly. It is 12A so it is capable. But the significance is that it creates a fast rate of change. We see the circulating voltage go from 250V without it to 1300V in the kit. The Impulse energy is what we are focusing on besides the oscillating energy gains from resonance. Both are amplifying energy process. Obviously yet to be proved to most people here who haven't yet experimented and are looking to others to confirm such things for them.
You know Rick, you really have a gift in trying to make people look like idiots. Do you do this to always have a feeling of superiority or what?
I didn't mean I'll just throw whatever circuit together, ok? I'm trying to articulate precise questions like:
Can having a ground (input power supply) hinder the basic one wire experiment I'm trying to do? Should I better avoid it??? Yes, no??
You wrote: "there is matching impedance with the load and matching with the input--two different things". Yes I know that. My question is which one were you referring to when you mentioned it earlier?
But I'll probably always just be a fool to you no matter what I do or write, so I may just stop begging for your guidance and go back working on my own.
Mario
This was just showing what could be done with the motor. It doesn't need to be a motor.
Anyway, as I said, this was used to power all his lights in his shop while the battery did not discharge. It is a small setup for producing over 1000W of continuous running while self-running. This is what all of you have been demanding for years. Now I have unlocked this mystery and what do I get. Insults from Nick. Shows who he really is. He doesn't want anyone to know how to do this. This is a desperate attempt to get people to disbelieve anything to do with me. So what are you here for Nick?
This IS a disputed point when it comes to the mutual angles of the input and output coils!
Not the cover of radiation.
My picture below shows the principal of coil couplings in old days radios.
Regards Arne
Rick, someone who saw one of your demonstrations said that in your demonstration you had to remove your scope because you were afraid of blowing it because the voltage being measured was getting up to 5000 volts. When I asked you about that you said the probe was measuring the voltage on the primary coil. That is why I asked about it again. How can you get 5000 volts across the primary if it is being powered by 12 volts? So what circuit were you using that would do that? And the second part of the high-lighted sentence doesn't even make sense. How can the voltage go up on the primary coil while the input voltage remains the same?
What are you calling circulating voltage? And where are you measuring it? A simple schematic of your circuit would help explain a lot. Or does someone have to buy your kit to see the circuit?
EDIT: Itsu was kind enough to PM me with information explaining the high voltage. I was confused about how the gate driver was driving the coil. Thanks Itsu for the clarification.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Rick
Thanks a lot for sharing your valuable experience here. Also many thanks to A.King for his dedication and his great idea to invite Rick Frederic himself to this forum.
Looks like that you have already covered a lot of things for someone to start this journey. What it needs now I guess is the active personal involvement from the part of the experimenter.
There are many questions yet but as time passes everything finds its place.
Many people just watching quietly not because there is no appreciation of what is being presented, but more as a respect to you and to what you are trying to do. But I am sure you already know, that many people right now are already trying with real bench work to apply the new ideas that have been brought here by you.
Just continue your fascinating work.
Best Regards
Jeg
Hi Rick,
you ask me if I am here because of NickZ (hope translater had worked correctly). No, I am not here, for this people, that against everyone that really wants to help others to find a direction. I will be happy, if he can make a cognitive shift :) but my answer did not have the goal to convince him.
I have seen this Game here - I think - since 2014. What they do with people like Wesley, T-1000 and all the other friendly people here. I have seen it for years what they have done with my very good friend, that has lost neary everything because of his device (it is not practical, but here you can see a simple experiment from him, if you want: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAtqPL_maeg ).
Nearly in every forum or group and also in real life: always the same procedures to distract people from real results.
So why I am here? I hope that everyone that search for answers and reads all this comments can clearly see what is going on here. Hope that they also wake up, and can see a direction, before they lost to much lifetime and faith. Every troll was a wakeup pill for me. I had only to follow all this honest people, that were mostly attacked from this guys. Thank you for that :)
What I also often see in the last years was that "good" people -for exsample- like Thomas from A. (you know him) show his customers how they overload Li-Ion batteries, but doesn't show any of this important things.
The most is 180° out of phase in this area. When you see all this, eventually you came to a point, that you realize you have to do something and this is the reason why I posted here some comments.
P.S.: thank you for your last video. Amazing! I was able to replicate the zero voltage process with my small bedini, but didn't realize the enormous potential and the importance to keep both sides in balance at this time. I had this strange moment, where the whole system stands still in the same Voltages for round about half a hour, after I added some bad tuned LC Parts and LEDs in the secondary side. The secondary battery was not rise significant in Voltage, because it was not the best and not fully converted I think. After your Video, I realized that was not important to load the second battery, because my additional lights were on and the bedini was running the whole time.
Rick keep on ...
Your posts are very good.. I like to read them as I have been a study of Bedini for many years..
Nick demanding proof is a non matter here as his failure is evident..
I give you my support here..
Acca..
Doing some tests with the 6 new coils, not using the gate driver, just the FG (signal passing through the gate driver).So i hooked up all the 6 new coils DC outputs parallel to each other and hooked it up the a 15F supercap stack.
Trying to find out when the coils pick up the highest amount of energy.
Seems either in the middle when parallel to the big coil, or top and bottom when perpendicular to the big coil.
Big coil was loaded with my P5100 HV probe (2.75pF/10Mohm = @ 180Khz 312Kohm load).
Q seems 3.5Vpp in, 138Vpp out = 39
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtiTYHEehBw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtiTYHEehBw)
Next things would be to:
# hook up all 6 satellite coils in a ring and charge the supercap stack (with a 5W lamp load) to
see if they are capable of supplying at least the same amount of current as being inputted into the big coil (at
same 12V voltage).
# Play with severall coils "coupled" to each other to see if that could increase output without extra loading the input.
So building an extra 4 coils.
Itsu
Carrol,
I thought that everyone commenting knew what the circuit was from the context of A's initial posting on my kit (not sure what that was however as I came in way after that). The starting point of the kit is to have a frequency generator send a square wave to a fast mosfet driver. It's output will have the red wire go to the inductor which is in series with a capacitor, whose other leg is attached to the common ground (which is many times earth ground). That is a series tank resonant circuit when tuned to the right frequency.
So out of resonance you would have 9V circulating voltage while you have 9V input. But in resonance you can have 1300V while the input and circulating current is maybe 25ma. Without the gate driver the circulating voltage between the cap and the inductor can be around 250V. Yes this is a gain when in resonance. The circulating energy can produce real results at a distance over what it can do out of resonance. It can produce real results in itself under some conditions as well.
As for the 5000V circulating voltage, when we were doing 180,000 CPS we were running the input at 18V and higher amperage (200ma something). Yes the circulating voltage in the coil was very high, and the 100 times probe was only rated for 2500V, and I had just damaged another one doing the same thing. This is common knowledge even though people don't want to admit that it is real gain. Some suppose the circulating amperage is correspondingly lower, but that is a huge mistake and obviously not the case. There is some serious radiation under that condition.
The how is called resonance.
Hi Rick,
ok, I think it finally clicked. This is actually much easier than I thought and very similar to what I have tried countless times over the last years. I just had not understood that with series resonant setups there will be zero voltage across them, and thus is why kirchoff doesn't apply and why you can multiply many setups in series... It's resonance pure at its finest.
There is only one arrangement that gives you zero voltage across it, and as Bearden wrote in one of his papers describing the one wire: "...this i why Tesla so favored series resonance..."
Question: can the load (low impedance) be inserted directly in the middle of each series arrangement, or is a loosely coupled secondary coil more suitable in order to not ruin resonance?
thanks,
Mario
So i hooked up all the 6 new coils DC outputs parallel to each other and hooked it up the a 15F supercap stack.
No load on this supercap for now.
Gate driver is running on a 12V battery (12.43V) and pulls 112ma when in resonance and loaded with the 6 coils about 5cm away.
Voltage across the big coil when in resonance and loaded this way is about 2800V (@ 12V square wave input), see screenshot.
The (increasing) voltage on the supercap is about 9.6V and current around 69mA (using the current probe and confirmed by a temporary inserted 1 ohm 1% inductionfree resistor).
Putting the 6 coils closer to the big coil decreases the input current (88mA), but also less current is left for charging the supercap (59mA).
This looks like the same effect as seen earlier with my smaller coils.
Doing some more tests......
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lht-NuijLoM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lht-NuijLoM)
Itsu
I did some tests looking for sympathetic resonance (sorry for he pronunciation in the video) between 3 new coils setup in line with the big coil.
12.4V on the gate driver, 3700V on the big coil in resonance (180Khz).
The 3 coils in line with the big coil each have a 3W led attached which it lit according to their distance to the big coil.
Changing the distance inbetween the 3 new coils does not influence the last not lit led.
Only when putting the middle coil ontop of the last coil its led comes on dimly.
Not sure this is sympathetic resonance or plain transformer action, i guess the latter.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8pl1KxBq90
Itsu
I did some tests looking for sympathetic resonance (sorry for he pronunciation in the video) between 3 new coils setup in line with the big coil.
12.4V on the gate driver, 3700V on the big coil in resonance (180Khz).
The 3 coils in line with the big coil each have a 3W led attached which it lit according to their distance to the big coil.
Changing the distance inbetween the 3 new coils does not influence the last not lit led.
Only when putting the middle coil ontop of the last coil its led comes on dimly.
Not sure this is sympathetic resonance or plain transformer action, i guess the latter.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8pl1KxBq90
Itsu
Itsu: Try experimenting with an earth ground.Yes we all like to play in the sand with our little one's, wile we have the time here.
Thanks for the responses guys.Yes Itsu the 50% could be misleading the point pay attention, I made a 1mhz8 tesla coil, I pulse it with a 56 usec pulse
AG,
i use 50% duty cycle on the input square wave as that is what is being used in the original setup/kit.
i see what you mean.
Benfr,
My coils are very similar, they all measure very close to 144uH.
Concerning the variable cap, this is more difficult as we need 5nF to get in resonance on 180KHz with the 144uH.
I can do the hand thing to influence the resonance point of the satellite coils though.
And i do not see any variable caps in the original setup/kit
Itsu
Notice also that the top coil gets into a physically higher position with respect to its place when it was in the middle between the innermost and the outermost coils, I mention this because earlier you showed field strength around the TX coil by a small probe coil with a indicator LED and you had a situation when there was stronger field at the top
Yes we all like to play in the sand with our little one's, wile we have the time here.Stop being such an insulting *@*(*(@@ Why not show us YOUR OU device.
but that's not the trick 'really' is it! You talk about DVD7 energy from vacuum series.
And yet you play with squiggly lines in a wire you call a sine wave, and i'm the idiot wasting space.
I ask you this, how the hell did tesla get access to HF ? cus your ignoring something he did your not.
You need to get back the Tesla's basics.
AG
And i do not see any variable caps in the original setup/kit
Itsu
Yes we all like to play in the sand with our little one's, wile we have the time here.
but that's not the trick 'really' is it! You talk about DVD7 energy from vacuum series.
And yet you play with squiggly lines in a wire you call a sine wave, and i'm the idiot wasting space.
I ask you this, how the hell did tesla get access to HF ? cus your ignoring something he did your not.
You need to get back the Tesla's basics.
AG
Sorry lads but i'm sure lots of you have fridges and on those fridges you must have magnets, have you ever given it a thought where the energy comes from for that to happen ? imagine if you could turn that energy on and off ;D
AG
Dear Rick,
Today you are the undisputable master of this thread and I don't see this go away for a loooong time !
100% of the fellas on this forum are learning from you. Some people behave badly, but has not been Jesus in the same situation while savings live and couteracting suffering ? So be our modest Light ans keep the good laughs going on.
I would love to see you show or describe a few Ateliers around the RICK. Please note i live very far, so can not attend your europe or USA or Canada meetings... :
- how to set up a stan Meyer fuel cell in place of a capacitor in one of the kit's tanks
- how To set up a small 1v DC (or AC) motor powered by a tank in resonance in the kit,
- how To set up a magnet pushed by the coil in one of the kit's tank, (To recreate an energizer with negative electricity )
- how To light Bulbs and LEDs from one of the resonant tanks (DONE!)
- how to get heat from one of the resonant tanks...
- a practical exercice of impedance matching in one of the kit's tank (ie what is that ? How to do that ?)
...That's the kind of things i would luuuuuve to learn to do from a teacher like You, but too newbie to know. (And not confident to build a massive HV Don Smith device !)
Please enrich your kit with these Ateliers !!!
Stop being such an insulting *@*(*(@@ Why not show us YOUR OU device.Mr king your a young whipper snapper jumping to conclusions and you really don't know anything about me at all ;D
We all know why and so do you.
AG,What i'm saying is how will an earth connected to a sine wave change anything in or on a 'positive electricity' JB says that in countless videos the answer is it wont.
I don't understand any of your points made here to A. Not one thing you say makes any sense here or even resembles the quote you give about grounding. All of Tesla's systems were grounded so what are you talking about?
Yes, that is a big discussion many have had over the years. You do not turn it off but gate it the right way to work for you. Or you tap the very high frequency. Or there are other things you can do. It is good to at least start thinking about these things. Once you properly understand what is going on you can design several different kinds of systems. There are many that have been made over hundreds of years...Further discussion might well be interesting if Rick could explain to relieve my and possibly others confusion
Hi Arne,
It is good you show the behaviour of magnetically coupled resonant LC circuits, these characteristics are fully valid for such setups discussed here. The best energy transfer can happen when all the LC circuits mutually have the critical coupling between any and each LC circuit present in the setup, all tuned to resonance. This situation is very hard to achieve because any adjustment on any of the LC circuits influence all the others, a slow and arduous process.
Gyula
Perhaps a kind of PLL system is needed on the big coil to keep it at resonance by automatically moving the frequency.
Thanks, Itsu
Very good to hear this from you.
Yes, the key is "balance".
There are bunch of options here, and I leave this for people to learn the full way for themselves. I have shown the basic way that gets people started.
Yes, the object is not to charge the batteries but to keep them basically in the same place so that you don't have to rotate them and then you just have the true self-runner. For people really don't want to mess with batteries anyway. It actually is an pain to have to deal with a charging battery just as much as having to charge up an input battery. So we have to start with a discharged battery on the charge side and a charged battery on the input side. Then they will have their minor rise and drops at start up and then just hold out the same. If you unbalance the load and make it too much you can send back more energy to the front and the input charges up. You can drop the charging rate as well if it becomes unbalanced. Someone was trying to suggest that the battery charging was sometimes discharging. But that never was the case. The charging battery started at low voltage and rose up under charge, and merely dropped a little at times due to specific changes in the tuning. It was always charging. But the object is not to charge that battery but to be merely a potential or more like Tesla's end point "P" in his schematics. A terminal point or capacitance.
It think people will finally get this now. It is a whole different day.
What i'm saying is how will an earth connected to a sine wave change anything in or on a 'positive electricity' JB says that in countless videos the answer is it wont.
What I couldn't figure out was what is missing from 'negative electricity' ? ? ?
Well AG, I already gave you a lot of detail about how grounding affects things.Rick my friend could you please remove all the pre assumptions you have supposed of me you recognise as insults and please leave me with the facts if you wouldn't mind, if that's not to much trouble or do you do it so you don't have to answer my questions ?
Secondly, I don't know what JB you are talking about because John Bedini certainly talked and we did experiments with grounding in the early years. John even posted much information on Stubblefield. So you look silly now making these statements about JB. It shows you were not around or didn't know John's teaching at all. Maybe you found some quote you misunderstood, or maybe he changed that history as well as he did with the big 1971 lie. But we did even ground the SSG monopole which allowed for gains. This is something I may get back to showing as we did 15 years ago.
Anyway, Bedini has proven to be a liar so nothing he said can be trusted. Obviously many things he said were true, like anyone. But he can no longer be quoted as some authority. What you are doing here is railing upon A like he is a kid, which he isn't actually. You needlessly insult him for merely suggesting to try grounding. You even do it in reference to getting back to Tesla. This shows you have never even read Tesla. I mean, have you ever seen one of his patents or circuits? They are all grounded or implied grounds. Did you not realize that The True Wireless article, which was one of his last major articles, which gives a history of his works and a rejection of the Hertzian system is actually a through the ground transmission. This is grounding in the extreme!! ::) So now you have lost all credibility here. That was why I was confused. I wondered if it was a mere joke. But then I see your response to A and now to me. You are just digging yourself deeper and deeper into folly. I don't get how you could have said any of those sentences about grounding being nothing, about Tesla, and now about Bedini.
Maybe you are confused about what is positive energy and in relation to oscillating energy that we are dealing with in resonance tank circuits. I don't know but it is a matter of fact that you can have benefits from grounding in these processes. Certain Bedini and Tesla taught that.
Not even sure what you mean by the last question either. Negative electricity is really not something. It is more of a way to try and communicate that energy is converging into a negative resistor along a certain path. It is not traveling down a path like current. That is the theory. Current dissipates along a path and the meter measures the rate of dissipation in A and V and W. But negative processes are not measured as they appear directly from the Aether into the negative resistors without time delay at all, instantly. That is the theory. It would seem like magic to mainstream people who assume it is just current flow. So I guess what is missing from negative electricity is current flow. It is opposite phenomena/characteristics/results. But certainly grounding has a major influence upon such processes.
Rick my friend could you please remove all the pre assumptions you have supposed of me you recognise as insults and please leave me with the facts if you wouldn't mind, if that's not to much trouble or do you do it so you don't have to answer my questions ?You obviously have not seen the video. If you did then you would see his name come up. For the record it is Rick Friedrich. Now I know you have never watched video 7 - no wonder you are confused
By the way so who is the guy stood behind J Bedini in video 7, he does look alot like your self. Also it's well known good advice not to earth devices such as this type of experimental device in order to avoid lethal shock in some instances.
A word of advice it's not a good idea slagging people off who can no longer defend them self especially if they are deceased.
The starting point of the kit is to have a frequency generator send a square wave to a fast mosfet driver. It's output will have the red wire go to the inductor which is in series with a capacitor, whose other leg is attached to the common ground (which is many times earth ground). That is a series tank resonant circuit when tuned to the right frequency.
You obviously have not seen the video. If you did then you would see his name come up. For the record it is Rick Friedrich. Now I know you have never watched video 7 - no wonder you are confusedNow we are playing kids games games, what is wrong with you don't you want to get a device working ?
Showing a still from a video is not illegal AG. Troll troll trollNo but Cyber stalking and harassment is when you have bean asked to cease hostilities!
AG: Well it's official now, you are just a AI bot. And in the early stages of becoming a full on troll, like me.
Welcome to the club...
Rick, yes, I lied. I'll be around... no place to go. This forum has been like home to me, so... However, I do appreciate your various replies to all of us, concerning your ideas.
And just a reminder, that it's best to keep personal issues, at bay. And focus on the technical aspects.
I do apologies to you for asking for proof of anything, previously, I'll try to avoid that. Have a good day. NickZ
INTRODUCING THE MORON LEVEL OF COMPREHENSION..taken from the yahoo group
https://energyevo.com/2015/01/18/updated-compilation-of-important-info-don-smith-shared-to-nuenergy-yahoo-group/
However I will argue that Don Smith did not invent the effect. It was invented by Carlos Benitez. Benitez stated that when pulsing one plate of a capacitor, the other plate automatically charges up from the ground.( Benitez then switches the ground on and off mechanically creating an energy pump.
To the EE's present who have not been taught correctly - it iis called "Electrostatic induction" - Look it up.
It is usually glossed over as unimportant. Nothing to see here - move on (lol).
However I will argue that Don Smith did not invent the effect.
You guys might be interested in this John Badini video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4tO0kBOzqk&t=116s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4
Haha ::) I'm not worried about you guys. I know this is also a places to have some fun and not get too serious. My British friend may not agree in relation to that. For me, I call everyone out on things, including myself. I don't worry when people attack or make major mistakes because we can all learn from such things. FYI, I have never talked to a hard skeptic that I talked to for any length of time without them shaking my hand once they got to know me. I always win the debates because winning not concurring but actually making sure we all benefit and improve in the process. And of course I don't debate about things I haven't thoroughly investigated and felt compelled to press. All other things I have everything to learn, even things I have mastered I always have more to learn. And we learn also about human nature. Haha, so even if people hate me they at least find me interesting. ;D
As for AG, I think he may be a little ambiguous with his words because I am not sure at times the exact meaning. So I don't take the words seriously then. So what about this then What do you make of these kind words then ? and i quote
Offline a.king21 Stop being such an insulting *@*(*(@@ Why not show us YOUR OU device. Now it just seems like he's sitting back having a beer and laughing maybe. That could be possible and I leave room for that. Maybe he'll wake up and realize that didn't make sense what I said yesterday. But my last response to him showed that he didn't know Tesla or John at all, or how all this works. And I really didn't expect that from him. Not even sure of what he was exactly saying to me in his last response. Was the questioning about my picture one of sarcasm, or was he asking if I was the same guy? Or was he trying to make a point that because I was beside Bedini that therefore that was a bad thing? I really don't know. People need to be a little more clear because they end up being misunderstood. When people are ambiguous I just ignore what they say because what can I do about? Judge their intentions but what I guess? No. So maybe he is just really sloppy with his words. Certain by insulting A that was not good. What was the point of that?
As for sticking to the tech side, well that really isn't what all this is about. 90-95% of this is psychological, games, fun, diversions, fallacies, assumptions, unverifiable facts, etc. There is no purely factual context in cyberland. That is why I have burst this bubble of deception. There is no way to prove or disprove OU on the internet. Come to grips with it people. Wow, there should be a big load off people's backs now. All this is just information gathering, and otherwise fun and games. While this can have very serious implications it doesn't have to be boring either. It should be civil but it never has been when there is no moderation. So you make do within that.
Again, I don't worry what people say because I really am not trying to prove anything. No I can point to some things that can prove a point, but they are only in the real world.
Strange that profile you invented of me considering I asked you about the difference between positive energy and negative energy is it just the impulses or do the impulses have to be negative with respect to earth on a scope ?
You also referred to a sentence of mine concerning 'A.', later Mr king started trolling my self I assume he made an unintentional connection I was referring to with my self and kids when we installed and buried our ground rod the word paranoia or bipolar ..springs to mind. Re your pic nothing intended I assure you I just don;t have time for double remote meanings, sorry to disappoint but there is no malice a forethought as far as I am concerned,
I point to historical facts that you can verify for yourself. I pointed out DVD7 when I could have kept that to myself. This was a big revelation both in regards to the teaching and the fact that Aaron never mentioned it (especially in the Advanced book advertised on every screen in this forum) and that John is quoted as absolutely contradicting what he published on the front of the book several years later about his big 1971 lie claim. So no one else pointed such significant things out online. And everyone would have been deceived unless I showed this very good and very bad thing from this DVD. So that is now two significant things I have proven by means of the internet, but which merely drew attention to the real world facts that you can all verify for yourselves. So I am proving things to you that are very relevant. I don't do this to gain trust but people trust me for such reasons. And as you say that I do take the time to try and help. I am not emotionally reactionary either. In person you would all give me a hug if you knew me. :) But online I can be unsparing. You can interpret my words according to the tone you want to hear. But I say many things in jest as you can see and I don't take things as personally as people would think. Even Aaron, I can laugh about his picture of me, and I can still point out some good things he has done. I am not reactional to people. I react to illogic and fallacy. As for motives, who really knows why people say and do what they do? There is no reason to trust people over the internet. I have probably only met a few of you guys on this thread but I still don't know you. I don't think you even know each other. But you foolishly believe each other so easily, and disbelieve just as much. And I just shake my head ::)
Anyway, there is nothing more to say. You guys have everything now. If you start with what I wrote yesterday then you can proceed with caution. But if you continue to ignore that and play the chasing after circuits in hope of finding gold game then you are just running around in mainstream circuit loops that you will always pay for. Yes it is addicting to just spend your time making efficiency improvement circuits. It is a hobby that none of you can really justify to your wives. Is it really worth it to hang out for years on forums and have nothing to show for it? I don't have time for that. I've taken time to share all this in hope that it will do someone good. But I must go back to the real world and help real people where I can. So I can't help you guys if you are not willing to read and apply that foundational starting point. It may be too much to expect people to change their foundations and actually do some work rather than just copy what someone else has made in a circuit. I will never do that because I want you guys to really learn how to make all the free energy systems. Just build your house upon the rock and not the sand (which is what you guys are doing, and every year the water washes everything away).
Strange that profile you invented of me considering I asked you about the difference between positive energy and negative energy is it just the impulses or do the impulses have to be negative with respect to earth on a scope ?
You also referred to a sentence of mine concerning 'A.', later Mr king started trolling my self I assume he made an unintentional connection I was referring to with my self and kids when we installed and buried our ground rod the word paranoia or bipolar ..springs to mind. Re your pic nothing intended I assure you I just don;t have time for double remote meanings, sorry to disappoint but there is no malice a forethought as far as I am concerned,
You guys might be interested in this John Badini video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4
Hi Rick,
I did read your reply after I said it clicked, I haven't replied yet because I first wanted to be able able apply it on my circuit to see if I've actually reached the moron level ;D .
In an earlier post (quote below) you explained how to power the primary of your wireless kit. Sorry for this stupid question, but some people say series tank when they actually mean a parallel tank, because the coil and capacitor are actually in series closed upon themselves. But just to be sure, did you mean A or B of the attached schematic?
thanks,
Mario
You guys might be interested in this John Badini video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4tO0kBOzqk&t=116s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4
Just found this online. I should sue the guy for copyright infringement. lol. It's from several years ago.......
Now surely you get it... don't you??
(https://overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/dlattach/attach/129271/image// (https://overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/dlattach/attach/129271/image//))
Not following your point here? Get what? that he copied your page or what the circuit is showing?The copyright is just a joke. I did this so long ago that I was surprised to find it.
AG,Hmm it's a worry what I mean by confusion is this >should I be asking this stuff, you had better let me know and I can erase it 8)
Ok looking back at that comment I can see this is another case in point that I read it the opposite way than you intended. I thought you were saying JB was saying no grounding. Anyway, the case in point is that you are not taking the time to write clearly. Even in the rest of the statement you made I didn't really understand what you were meaning. We can't be and don't want to be inside your head man! :o The reason I thought you were speaking against grounding was because of your previous attack against A.King when he just made a small point about grounding. Then you attacked in with a bunch of statements that made no sense. I think you either need to take more time to type a little longer or get some help if you can't see this problem. To say A.king is trolling you also makes no sense. What was that about? You were the one that attacked him for no reason. I just don't get what is going on here.Struth talk about paranoia your both very hard work, read A.kings posts to me ! I don't mention A. king in connection of any earth directly WHATSOEVER in the context as your suggesting. If you want to profile me your not very good at it. As I said I asked you a question AND you still haven't answered it yet.
As for the question, what do you mean by "in respect to the earth on a scope?" ( the zero line goes below zero assuming EARTH is connected to this line) J Bedini refers to it in the no 7 video when he is scoping the wave form the black odd looking square looking wheel and i think your stood behind him as in a.kings photo ) The scope shot clearly shows a ground Zero line with the impulses going negative as spikes below it.
Not following here what the question is. Difference between positive and negative energy is it just the impulses? The impulse creates a negative experience prior to the current flow at switch turn on and after switch turn off (which is like another switch on as the inductor becomes a source charge itself). The negative is not the spike but the spike is the result after the event(s). Oh, I thought you were referring to the negative probe and connection to the earth/ground. So maybe you were asking about the scope wave going negative? Yes
Rick: I've just looked back at AGs posts. He started in April 2014 and it seems he was very optimistic then. He then seemed to follow the ususal "gurus" and it would appear AG became thoroughly annoyed by the time wasting and failed replications - and I believe this has led him into confusion. I think he is testing you because he is disillusioned - (like many others).Wrong ! I don't get disillusioned I get optimistic don't read into what i'm not saying I'm merely asking Rick about the impulse it appears to be the key is it going negative below the earth line hundreds of volts ? or what and whats it's width in micro or nano seconds or does it depend on the frequency relationship ?
Not following your point here? Get what? that he copied your page or what the circuit is showing?It's difficult to comprehend this page for me as it's in dead small print and it's blurry and are the parallel looking resisters actually a pair of coil windings and are the interlocking E block be a battery or a capacitor ?
AG,
Why did you tell us that we may be interested in the Bedini video and then include a disinfo video before it? Both of these are revealing major lies. BS that's a lie in it self I could equally say your stealing the innocence from the sincerity the links were given to the thread, works both ways! !One that lies about my fan kit and the other is Bedini lying.is he, how would we know that ? Those are very strong accusations that are insulting and aggressively abusive! any one looking at both circuits would consider they were identical and you keep saying nothing can be proved on here so whats the problem and where do i say as fact what your implying, calm down and relax not every one is out to get you.
you should count your blessings not every one can drink alcohol beverages as you previously suggested :'(
Is this inclusion of the first video an attempt to try and discredit me? No of course not it was for your amusement only Your starting the video at 116s shows where the guy is showing the voltage of one coil output of 1-2V. This is normal. This guy is a liar because the circuit does not ever use the coils as generator outputs as that point in the video implies. No one on the forums would even try to say that. Everyone can see a huge spike, but he lies and says it is only 2V output. The output is in relation to the motor action and not a generator action. The electrical impulsing of the coils is what causes the output charging of cap or light or battery. The magnet impulsing of the coils as he shows does not cause the charging, and results only in producing 1-2V. This is what in fact is used to create the trigger coil turn on only. But once the motor starts then the trigger coil in a bifilar arrangement (which is a more advanced option with resulting higher output but more difficult to wind/assemble) becomes a much higher voltage (which is another place where free energy is produced in the circuit--which this video does not do).
The Great Scott guy he is quite a character along with others like that Australian guy who poo poo's zero point energy, but in saying that since you appear to be the be the only guy on here who is prepared to what looks like being prepared to rip things apart and state whats wrong with them whats wrong with letting you rip apart and explain whats wrong with stuff ? It's how we all can learn from you! !
Secondly, the cap being charged in the video is also a lie because the kit capacitor charges up to high voltage very fast. And when we pulse the cap we charge the battery about as fast as the input battery discharges. He doesn't show either a battery running the fan or charging. It is impossible for the capacitor to stay at 1V or less. It goes up past 200V very fast. The cap pulser actually pulses the battery about 1V average above battery voltage.
Of course this disinformation agent correctly calculated that people would just trust what he says without verifying anything. So you can see that 6 times as many people liked his fake news video. And this is what happens right here on this forum and all the forums. This is exactly why I say you cannot prove anything over the internet and with video or pictures. So why would someone do this? They knew they were lying and misleading everyone. What does that tell everyone here? Why would someone go to the trouble to try and deceive 4 million people? So why are you promoting this video that is obviously disinformation? Are you trying to discredit my claim about the fan kits or me because I mentioned it? Instead now people can see this is an obvious disinfo video as at least 7600 people could see there. These attacks are old news. I won these debates the first 2 years of doing this and I answered every question and objection. Eventually the skeptics changed their level of objection and requirements and merely insisted that there be at least 3 times the output. So I showed that with bigger batteries being charged and another form of the third stage process. After that we really didn't find anyone disbelieving these claims because thousands of people all around the world were doing this. And the fan kit was so popular several others took the credit for my kit. One student of mine even sells it in violation of my friendship.
This is what I wrote in his comments: "If you look at my actual instructions on this you will see that you did not connect the wires right. Everyone knows that the output will be at least 300V and the capacitor will charge up to high voltage very fast. The battery will also charge up around the rate of the discharging battery. I have swapped the two batteries around for years. You have not even used batteries. This video is a lie therefore."
This setup in this video, which is misrepresented and purposely not showing it running the way it runs, is one of about 5 common ways. The first was to make two coils motor coils and two trigger coils. This is what Bedini did with the tape motor drive which is similar to the brushless fan motors. This was not a good use of the coils. So at first I made the all four of the coils motor coils and I unwound one coil and rewound it bifilar with a smaller trigger wire with it. It was rather hard to do that. Then I had 4 transistors so that the motor was about the same as original instead of wasting the two coils as trigger coils. This gives the true results of my claims just like the other kits with the trigger coil. The third way was to merely replace one motor coil and make it a trigger coil while you had three motor coils with transistors. With all these ways you have to realize that every other coil is reversed from the ones beside it. The guy in the video did not do the proper coil arrangement. The next way is to use the actual circuit and merely change around the one diode and add two diodes on the collector terminals of the two transistors. These go to the charging battery. Now the motor runs exactly like it always runs but charges a battery also. This doesn't give as good results because the rate of change is slow. So the fifth way is to change out the transistors to one mosfet and add the fast gate driver and use the existing hall (which sometimes needs to be replace as it often is a latching hall). Now the circuit is more efficient and the charging is much better, and more like my dualpole energizers. In all these cases the bigger the battery the more the output over time. You can also do the third stage of the Loving Paths process with this as well.
Rick is quoted:
"AG,
Ok looking back at that comment I can see this is another case in point that I read it the opposite way than you intended. I thought you were saying JB was saying no grounding. Anyway, the case in point is that you are not taking the time to write clearly. Even in the rest of the statement you made I didn't really understand what you were meaning. We can't be and don't want to be inside your head man! The reason I thought you were speaking against grounding was because of your previous attack against A.King when he just made a small point about grounding. Then you attacked in with a bunch of statements that made no sense. I think you either need to take more time to type a little longer or get some help if you can't see this problem. To say A.king is trolling you also makes no sense. What was that about? You were the one that attacked him for no reason. I just don't get what is going on here."
AG you later respond within the quote with more confusion that doesn't address my points here. What on earth do these first words mean? Why do you deny the above context of earth/grounding? Profile you??? You deny your very quoted response to a simple suggestion to try grounding! Then you divert from this to say you asked a question:
"Struth talk about paranoia your both very hard work, read A.kings posts to me ! I don't mention A. king in connection of any earth directly WHATSOEVER in the context as your suggesting. If you want to profile me your not very good at it. As I said I asked you a question AND you still haven't answered it yet."
AG then you respond outside the quote with more unclear words:
"Hmm it's a worry what I mean by confusion is this >should I be asking this stuff, you had better let me know and I can erase it 8)"
You continue quoting me as asking:
As for the question, what do you mean by "in respect to the earth on a scope?"
Then you, AG state:
"( the zero line goes below zero assuming EARTH is connected to this line) J Bedini refers to it in the no 7 video when he is scoping the wave form the black odd looking square looking wheel and i think your stood behind him as in a.kings photo ) The scope shot clearly shows a ground Zero line with the impulses going negative as spikes below it."
Then you continue quoting me as:
"Not following here what the question is. Difference between positive and negative energy is it just the impulses? The impulse creates a negative experience prior to the current flow at switch turn on and after switch turn off (which is like another switch on as the inductor becomes a source charge itself). The negative is not the spike but the spike is the result after the event(s). Oh, I thought you were referring to the negative probe and connection to the earth/ground. So maybe you were asking about the scope wave going negative?"
Then you, AG respond with:
"Yes"
Followed outside the quote with:
"Hmm it's a worry what I mean by confusion is this >should I be asking this stuff, you had better let me know and I can erase it 8)"
Hi Rick,
ok, we are clear on the series/parallel issue. I have done many circuits with impulses and parallel resonant tanks, with series arrangements only with ac. The parallel setup is very easy to understand once one looks at all the energy exchange sequences between cap and coil. The series arrangement with pulsing is a bit more difficult to understand. I supposed since you called it zero voltage process, your arrangement on the SG output is a series arrangement, since across the series arrangement there's no voltage to measure (due to 180 degrees cancelling effect). After trying that on the circuit I'm not so sure anymore if that's what you're doing. Inserting a parallel tank on the output is very easy, but why would that be zero voltage?
thanks,
Mario
ok, we are clear on the series/parallel issue.
Have you been on here and seen this ?It is worth studying: Here is Rick's response to that video on the site.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Flj1i0zQ-8&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Flj1i0zQ-8&feature=youtu.be)
Rick,
As I said before, don't pay attention to attacking, which you did and I am glad, so now you speak normally without anger.
People who "attack" don't want to hurt you, it is just difference in view and opinion.
Lots of people here were mislead in the past, with 1000+ systems which did not work and they just wasted money and time chasing ghosts.
So, it is normal that lots of them have a hard time to believe again and ask for a prove, which is normal reaction.
You can not blame them for that.
That's why I need Hoopy and Itsu just as I need you.
I need someone to put me on the ground when I am lost and can not explain something.
It saves me a lot of time of benching in vain.
Hope you understand? No need to reply and make things worse! Just my opinion, which is right, no matter what you say or anybody else.
Good work!
It is worth studying: Here is Rick's response to that video on the site.
No it is not worth studying. See my other comments. I was trying to be polite but the video actually reveals that he doesn't understand these things. It just confuses everything. He showed that he didn't understand what that circuit was doing at all. And other comments show that someone else gave the information to him and he is claiming the opposite there. You can even see him asking people questions on other videos. So this is an example of someone claiming to be an originator of an idea when he was not. Those of you who have been on these forums long enough know the discussions that we have had in those matters over the years. So two points:
1. He didn't even understand the point of Tesla's circuit.
2. He falsely claimed that he was the first one to show something that obviously he was not.
Rick,
I don't want parts numbers, I want to understand the principle. I want to see a basic schematic, then I can understand how it's supposed to work. I find it confusing the way you present things. In b. Tesla has a series arrangement which is not in the one wire but parallel to it (longitudinal). Kron shows parallel arrangements, not in a one wire but between a potential source and each arrangement separated by a coil. What is your setup? I mean the one that is not perfect but works. Is it parallel or series? Series I have tried on the solid state SG output and can't see how it would work. Inserting a parallel arrangement instead is very easy to get tuned. Is this what you're doing? Although I can't see how you would get 0 voltage across a load. What do you see on the scope? Pulses? From the video I can't understand why it would show 0 volts. I know across a SERIES arrangement you read 0 volts, but a series arrangement doesn't seem to work on the SG output.
Please do not play the game of I know it all and you guys are never gonna find out. I've spent over 10 years of efforts, time, money and discipline in this quest and I'm sick and tired of people dangling the carrot in front of others. I was just about to quit it all and definitely, when I by accident stumbled upon this thread. I don't want to be spoon fed, I don't want a parts list. What do you want?? Do you REALLY want to share something or just amuse yourself watching us? Why not show a simple basic schematic with no values, just the principle, instead of dozens of long posts, do you want to teach us the method OR NOT? Do you want to change the world? I do, it's about time!
Mario
Let me come in here with a comment. When I watched the video some time back I did not understand it. Because Rick made a positive comment I assumed that there was something I missed, so I thought to myself "Well I'd better have another look at it".
I made the mistake of an assumption and I was wrong. I am glad Rick verified my original impression as he has saved us a lot of confusion. So apologies to everyone. I got it wrong. (ouch)
Rick: It's funny because the link you just posted was what I had typed out from your circuit diagram so I could find the video. Anyway I was going to post the circuit diagram because some people want to look at a circuit.
So here is Rick's circuit which is basically Tesla. A flat hairpin circuit maybe??
I assume that the motor can be replaced with a solid state ssg type circuit which I would like a kit for......
Anyhow if I'm wrong I am sure I will get a rebuke from Rick. But some of us do like solid state.....
The diagram takes a lot of study and I suggest you watch Rick's vid.
.
I did some tests looking for sympathetic resonance (sorry for he pronunciation in the video) between 3 new coils setup in line with the big coil.
12.4V on the gate driver, 3700V on the big coil in resonance (180Khz).
The 3 coils in line with the big coil each have a 3W led attached which it lit according to their distance to the big coil.
Changing the distance inbetween the 3 new coils does not influence the last not lit led.
Only when putting the middle coil ontop of the last coil its led comes on dimly.
Not sure this is sympathetic resonance or plain transformer action, i guess the latter.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8pl1KxBq90 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8pl1KxBq90)
Itsu
Hi !PLL Phase Locked Loop perhaps, abbreviations annoying for the unfamiliar and should really be declared celavive (such is life)
Can someone telle what is referred to as PLL ?
Rick, an Atelier is a workshop, and I mean a video workshop, on the themes that I have enumerated. (One for each theme). I have not precised this but was thinking with off the shelf parts. It is not spoonfeeding...in certain categories of trainings, when the area covered is far somehow from the expected knowledge basis and experience of the trainees, a straightforward method is provided, which may include very precise specifications on parts. In such case, the example and practice come first, the understanding after. That is how I have been trained by Zdenko Domancic on Bioenergy Domancic method, a first class method of hands-on healing adressing very popular said incurable affections. That is also exactly what you have created with the Rick kit , ie specific parts coming with specific instructions delivered with the theory. So I see more of the same with sort of kit extensions, which I named Ateliers...
PLL Phase Locked Loop perhaps, abbreviations annoying for the unfamiliar and should really be declared celavive (such is life)
Thanks AG. You mean "c'est la vie" ;Dyes I do Thanks (so es das leben)
Itsu Hi this device your Researching and Developing there is another Don Smith
An upfront sorry for the possible off topic and/or boring contents of the next post / video's.
I was trying to dive into this effect i had (see quote) which shows the led going on on the 3th satellite coil
when the 2th coil was ontop of it, NOT when it was close together to it.
I thought that it would be the coupling which could be stronger that way, so i did some tests with 2 of these coils.
First test is with my Spectrum Analyzer and Tracking Generator.
Feeding 1 coil with the TG (sweeping from 9KHz (minimum) to 400KHz (so the 193KHz resonance frequency in the middle)
and "listening" on the other coil with the SA.
The coupling between these 2 coils can be monitored that way.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbK8U_CmsJE
Second test was a similar one, now using the FG on one coil (sweeping) and the scope on the both.
The screenshot below shows the overcoupled situation (yellow the driven coil, blue the receiving coil.)
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI6JszIDG4Q
It seems that we both overcouple the coils in a similar way, so no or very little difference in coupling strength
when putting the both coils side by side or ontop of each other.
So why the led on the 3th coil in the quoted setup did light up only when the 2th coil was ontop is still unanswered to me.
Next i will try to follow Gyula's comment to see if the top coil receives more power because of its elevated position.
Itsu
yes I do Thanks (so es das leben)"That is life" or " so ist das Leben" !
Very interesting tests your are performing ITSU.Hi Arne,
Now I look forward to a test where you insert the (sweeping) signal to the big coil (serial resonanse) and make signal detecting with the scope or else on the two Satellite coils besides or on top of each other. In the same way as before. Parallel and 10kOhm.
About the puzzling question about the LEDs:
Is that refering maybe to some LEDs voltage threshold level (knee) that you come just above when putting the coils on top of each other?
Regarda Arne
Hi Rick,
thanks for posting your schematic, see for me now everything's clear. It's what I did as my first option, the parallel resonant option I mean. Now that's why there's hardly any voltage to see, the load is inserted in series inside the parallel tank, where there's only oscillating current, the only voltage is the one developed by the load itself, across it's own impedance. What are those led modules rated for anyway? Your drawing of the resonant setup (on the right) is a bit confusing, is it supposed to be two distinct coils? One with core? Or one coil with a secondary? I know different ways to extract the energy from a parallel tank, I'm just not sure which one you're referring to with that drawing.
When at resonance the tank just looks like an almost infinite impedance to the SG coil output, so since the SG coil discharge adapts to the load impedance we get very narrow HV spikes. We could actually remove the output battery and replace it by a wire if we wanted to, just have to be careful not to fry the components :) . It's actually a 2 wire system pulsing a resonant tank which we extract some power off of the resonant reactive oscillations. Yes, we could put more tanks in series, but wouldn't it be much better putting more (infinite) parallel tanks in parallel? I think this is what Kron is showing, right? I'm not sure yet about the added series coils he shows between each tank, but I suppose it's a way to separate them from each other while all of them still keep having the same effect on the generator as just one tank: depending on frequency we can get to a point where the generator current becomes (almost) zero, but all the tanks are at full oscillating power! Am I seeing this correctly? In the end it's all about hitting as many tuning forks as possible with one trigger.
As for me getting emotional, yes sometimes it can happen. Like I wrote earlier, I've been at this for quite awhile now. There comes a moment where you say ok, now I either get something working, or I get back to having a life... Oh, and I agree with what you said in your last paragraph, I'm well aware, when I meant change the world I meant from the bottom up...
@Whatisit: I hope you can see what I was talking about earlier now that Rick has posted a schematic.
thanks,
Mario
Hi !
Can someone telle what is referred to as PLL ?
Rick, an Atelier is a workshop, and I mean a video workshop, on the themes that I have enumerated. (One for each theme). I have not precised this but was thinking with off the shelf parts. It is not spoonfeeding...in certain categories of trainings, when the area covered is far somehow from the expected knowledge basis and experience of the trainees, a straightforward method is provided, which may include very precise specifications on parts. In such case, the example and practice come first, the understanding after. That is how I have been trained by Zdenko Domancic on Bioenergy Domancic method, a first class method of hands-on healing adressing very popular said incurable affections. That is also exactly what you have created with the Rick kit , ie specific parts coming with specific instructions delivered with the theory. So I see more of the same with sort of kit extensions, which I named Ateliers...
Rick,
are you saying that it's not just about hitting tanks with the negative spike and take some power of the resulting resonant current? I get that depending on tuning we can either send back power to the input or send more to the charge battery, or neither and have the system in balance. Are you saying that when it is in balance something else happens which results in the possibility of the load not having voltage across it?
Maybe the best way to learn what you mean (or what you think I'm missing) is you giving a concrete example, I have solid state SG, I have a resonant tank (unloaded yet) between diode and charge battery. Show me what I should do with it to experience what you mean.
Btw, you said that in your schematic the third coil is not complete and that the cap would explode. I thought that cap was connected to the coil to make it resonant. It's actually not clear to me if the third and fourth coil are supposed to be one setup the way it is shown, or are they two separate setups? The cap you mention is connected to the coil on its left side, does the caps right leg touch the coil(s)?
I was referring to the diode lamps you show in the main video on your channel, at what voltage are they normally run at?
I'm looking forward to the new video:)
thanks
Mario
Mario,
I am doing a video right now and will go over things point by point. But I am not going to discuss other themes/possibilities because that is getting too involved for people. And so far I have no assurance that people are settled on the very first point. You need to fully settle on the first point before trying to figure out the advanced processes. I will enlarge upon the basics now and that will show you what to do after that. It will be self-evident after the aha! moment.
I said that the balance is something you have to always keep in mind and which is for you to figure out. And yes, in a manner of speaking.
No, I am not going to give my advanced process over to you or anyone no matter how much you ask. I have shown what is sufficient for everyone. You will figure out more after you settle on the basics, and then experiment. I will not dispense with the learning by experience process. If people don't do that they will just be dependent upon others.
I don't know if you have a proper solid state SSG. I cannot help anyone remotely or over the internet. And I cannot be assured that your semiconductors are not partly damaged. Which is most likely the case. EVERYONE will do that when they start to do this basic third stage process. So be prepared to have plenty of replacement parts for each controlled experiment. Very very few of you will ever do such controlled experiments because of the time and cost and mostly because you assume your parts are still fine because they still are switching. Some of you may have advanced semiconductor experience and know what I am talking about here. Again, this is why I didn't show even the basic level. Now I have opened the door and when people jump ahead and try this, even before they are settled in the basics (which I have no evidence that most people here have that settled) then they will go back to the basic level and get poor results. I have 15 years of full-time experience helping thousands of people all over the world with exactly this problem. Some people spend over a year with the same damaged parts and don't realize it. Then I visit them and pop in another transistor and presto, everything changes. Not the magic touch but Mr. Fixer ;) with undamaged parts.
Again, this is why we cannot trust anyone's pictures, videos, or words about claims against FE systems. Because in many cases you have damaged parts.
So I would say that it is a bad idea to start with a solid state setup. Especially I believe you may have said you are powering it with a power supply. And you would want to start with fresh parts anyway.
The cap statement wasn't so specific. It was just said to tell you that no load was on it. It was an incomplete diagram, or just showing an example of a moment in time. And yes, in a tank circuit you can explode the caps.
I don't really get what your last sentences mean exactly.
Can you also explain in video why Q factor is free energy ? I have my own theory about it, waiting for comments on this topic also. If I could only confirm my theory....everything would be changed...
INTRODUCING THE MORON LEVEL OF COMPREHENSION..taken from the yahoo groupI think this is what where talking about. Explained in an easy to understand way. Download the attached document. https://overunity.com/18239/the-solution/ (https://overunity.com/18239/the-solution/)
https://energyevo.com/2015/01/18/updated-compilation-of-important-info-don-smith-shared-to-nuenergy-yahoo-group/ (https://energyevo.com/2015/01/18/updated-compilation-of-important-info-don-smith-shared-to-nuenergy-yahoo-group/)
However I will argue that Don Smith did not invent the effect. It was invented by Carlos Benitez. Benitez stated that when pulsing one plate of a capacitor, the other plate automatically charges up from the ground.( Benitez then switches the ground on and off mechanically creating an energy pump.
To the EE's present who have not been taught correctly - it is called "Electrostatic induction" - Look it up.
It is usually glossed over as unimportant. Nothing to see here - move on (lol).
Very interesting tests your are performing ITSU.
Now I look forward to a test where you insert the (sweeping) signal to the big coil (serial resonanse) and make signal detecting with the scope or else on the two Satellite coils besides or on top of each other. In the same way as before. Parallel and 10kOhm.
About the puzzling question about the LEDs:
Is that refering maybe to some LEDs voltage threshold level (knee) that you come just above when putting the coils on top of each other?
Regards Arne
Well, you will just have to see for yourself. I'm not sure who would dispute this. The angle would have to be turned more for it to not work. When you are very close like that you can almost turn it in any direction and it will do this.
Rick,
are you saying that it's not just about hitting tanks with the negative spike and take some power of the resulting resonant current? I get that depending on tuning we can either send back power to the input or send more to the charge battery, or neither and have the system in balance. Are you saying that when it is in balance something else happens which results in the possibility of the load not having voltage across it?
Maybe the best way to learn what you mean (or what you think I'm missing) is you giving a concrete example, I have solid state SG, I have a resonant tank (unloaded yet) between diode and charge battery. Show me what I should do with it to experience what you mean.
Btw, you said that in your schematic the third coil is not complete and that the cap would explode. I thought that cap was connected to the coil to make it resonant. It's actually not clear to me if the third and fourth coil are supposed to be one setup the way it is shown, or are they two separate setups? The cap you mention is connected to the coil on its left side, does the caps right leg touch the coil(s)?
I was referring to the diode lamps you show in the main video on your channel, at what voltage are they normally run at?
I'm looking forward to the new video:)
thanks
Mario
Hi all
I'd like to ask Rick about the series inductor impedances which serve as a stand alone reaction loops. Each connecting point between those inductances, is a reflection point especially when we are in resonance. This eventually will lead to a creation of standing waves on the line which consists of that reactive loops. Is that an effect that relates to the amounts of the extracted free energy? Is that a point that we have to pay more attention like building for example reactive loops with specific lengths of wire harmonically related?
Thanks
Jeg
quote a.king21 Posts: 1481: Coils at all angles. ha ha lol
OU coils at all angles2.jpg
It doesn't matter what you are doing guys the LEDs will be glowing anyhow. Ha ha
Any serious measurements?
NO
Arne
Hi Rick,
that's great, take your time. Something else: when we talked about how to use a negatively charged battery on the front end I said I use a big cap, you said it's the right direction but something else needed to be made, and that the schematics have been shown. Could you tell me where I can find them? I suppose it could be disconnecting the battery from the cap on the positive side with a mosfet run out of phase with the drive mosfet...
thanks,
Mario
BEWARE: Stop using the abbreviation 'LOL,'" the hastily made image that invokes the same qualities as a Westboro Baptist Church sign reads. "'LOL stands for 'Lucifer our Lord.' Satanists end their prayers by saying Lucifer our Lord,' in short, "LOL.' Every time you type 'LOL' you are endorsing Satan."26 Nov 2012I thought it meant laugh out loud. Ah well you live and learn.
The OU reference is for Overunity.com. I never claimed anything in that picture just the fact that the coils can be magnetically crafted to light up at whatever angle you wish. Some people may not be aware of that. Why don't you do some experiments and show us your results instead of having a go at other people.
quote a.king21 Posts: 1481: Coils at all angles. ha ha lol
OU coils at all angles2.jpg
It doesn't matter what you are doing guys the LEDs will be glowing anyhow. Ha ha
Any serious measurements?
NO
Arne
Hi Itsu,
Thanks for your kind efforts. Hopefully the sensor can cope with the 180 kHz frequency.
Perhaps the following suggestion may also reveal the field strength at the place where the two vertically stacked
satellite coils were positioned. See attached picture from your earlier video. First replace (in any one of the 3 coils)
the power LED bulb with a single low power white or red 5 or 10 mm LED which are able to give visiable light at
a few mW received power at the same distance from the TX coil the stacked coils were. This way you can use the
same sized satellite coil as a probe sensor coil.
I drew a vertical green line in the top picture where the stacked coils were, remove them and then use the probe
sensor coil alongside the vertical line, up and down to indicate field strength. For this to happen you need to drive
the TX coil in the same way as earlier with the stacked coils setup and leave the 1st coil (with its power LED too)
at the same place it was when you stacked the two other coils and place the middle coil far away from the setup.
I drew a nearly horizontal green line in the bottom picture to indicate that the 3 satellite coils were positioned quasi at
the middle height of the TX coil where supposedly the EM field is the strongest with respect to the top or bottom part
of the TX coil. This may mean that when you put the middle coil onto the top of the outermost coil and the LED got lit
on the latter coil, then the top coil may not have received more energy from the TX coil because the EM field may not
have been so strong for it at that height wrt the TX coil. This is a speculation of course.
Gyula
Hi Itsu,At last! that's why I use a tuning method. Have another look at my pics and you'll see I use a ferrite rod (as used in early crystal sets) to re-tune the coils. They can be re-tuned in a couple of seconds. I was waiting for your results to see if I was correct or if there was something else going on.
Yes, your conclusions are correct, many thanks for doing the tests. The variation in field strength to explain
the change in brightness for the stacked coils was also a possible option (and the EM field surely changes
with the satellite coils height but not significantly in this present setup).
Your 3 satellite coils surely have a high unloaded Q, hence their loaded Q may still remain high when the load
is a nonlinear one like a LED bulb.
If their loaded Q remains say 60, the 3 dB bandwidth (B) of the receiving LC tanks would be B = 180 kHz/60 = 3 kHz
so no wonder that a 10-13 kHz shift in resonance due to the stacked (closely coupled) position there was no enough
induced energy available in them to light the LEDs, the coils got offtuned.
Gyula
Hi Itsu,Gyula I'm not so sure about that, as being true, My dear friend Nelson Rocha has clearly really excelled in that
Well, the split resonance point found due to the mutual coupling sounds an unwanted situation here because
it represents off tuned satellite LC circuits. The goal is tuning all coupled LC circuits to the same resonant frequency.
I do not know whether 'avalanche effect' may come about under the split resonance case, have never heard about
such with mutually coupled LC circuits, not even with carefully adjusted ones which are tuned exactly to the same
resonant frequency.
Claims like 'sympathetic resonance' or 'phase conjugate mirroring' ought to be proved to bring extra output energy
in this TX-RX resonant LC circuits discussed here. Of course, nothing can be proved via the web or by videos... ::)
Gyula
Hi Itsu,
The goal is tuning all coupled LC circuits to the same resonant frequency.
Of course, nothing can be proved via the web or by videos... ::)
Gyula
A.king21,
so you have every coil (how many?) (re)tuned via a ferrite rod?
I have 8 coils right now, that are many rods already, let alone when using hundreds of coils.
Itsu
Gyula I'm not so sure about that, as being true, My dear friend Nelson Rocha has clearly really excelled in thatHi AG,
field and one or two others know or knew a thing or two one being Adrian Guska and others I#m told are no longer with us thanks to those from the dark side. The question is will we all drown in a sea of melted polar ice and permafrost
or will we permanently destroy everything living with atomic radiation before DISCLOSURE occurs?
Hi AG,WITH OUT PREJUDICE
You would need to clarify what you are not sure in as being true? Did you mean the split resonance occuring ? Something else?
Anyway, I do not rule out the possible usefulness of split resonance between mutually coupled LC circuits, all I meant was that the receiver coils in this setup are said to be tuned to the same frequency, no offtuning are allowed, otherwise energy transfer suffers.
Gyula
Watch this it's not just induction. this is something else it's technique some have.
Don Smith was a sow man and exhibitor Meaning
He showed you what he wanted you to see, and made a living out of it.
What i'm saying is use that this Tesla device! produce it for your self!
but please cut out the 'show time' BS, it's not nice!
hI Gyula, i'm not sure if that is a 'trade name or not' I think we are really talking about radiated magnetic resonance in an impulse form in reality here but since Mr Friedrich hasn't shown any circuits or scope shots that produce any real 'power' from his negative magnetic impulsing technique which is what both Mr Friedrich and John badini 'appear' as far as i know been promoting here unless i might be mistaken by mr friedrich's confusing statements on this thread because if he could prove some worth of power produced and i mean at least over 100 watts I could well be persuaded to buy a device at a reasonable competitive price of course. Oh and with out the magna-carta (style) inquisition questionnaire Mr Friedrich appears to address me with, would be nice.
Does that answer your question ?
AG
Claims like 'sympathetic resonance' or 'phase conjugate mirroring' ought to be proved to bring extra output energy in this TX-RX resonant LC circuits discussed here. Of course, nothing can be proved via the web or by videos... ::)
Gyula
Yes that subject of what is happening in the battery is too involved to get into on the forums (and it requires the use of words and models that I am undecided in at this time). As for the idea, you are converting the negative to positive through a capacitor. So you can see the way we do it with the cap pulser before the battery, and you can think that through and do something similar on the front end. This would be like using various RC or even LC filters like you find with bandpass bypass, etc. I don't usually do that and having posted any schematics myself so you are on your own.
The idea to understand, as has been recently brought up here, is the DSE or Don Smith Effect. The idea is that the capacitor is a blocking device. More importantly it allows for replicating the energy on the front side on the back side. So the OU demonstration Don gave, that most people completely missed, was that he had double the arcing from the input when you consider the regular arcing to the one side of the plate was about 1" and then when he added a ground terminal an inch away from the other side plate it arced another 1" and effectively doubled or duplicated the energy. Now the arc was a real load on both sides. This is an essential process with Don Smith systems.
The point here is that the capacitor replicates the energy on the output side, and this case the replication becomes positive energy and results in current flow under the circumstances. So once you understand this you can build the appropriate filter(s) so do the same on the front end. The same is true with doing this third stage process to power loads with positive energy.
Realistic ???
All of them fine tuned coils ???
Yes.
Arne
Hi AG,then Yes it is the exact same frequency !
You would need to clarify what you are not sure in as being true? Did you mean the split resonance occuring ? Something else?
Anyway, I do not rule out the possible usefulness of split resonance between mutually coupled LC circuits, all I meant was that the receiver coils in this setup are said to be tuned to the same frequency, no offtuning are allowed, otherwise energy transfer suffers.
Gyula
"Rick: It was never my intention to make this an OU device, but rather a tool to learn the sensitive relationships."
:o
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt11.html (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt11.html)Half wave would cancel it self out as it would be 2 negative peeks or 2 positive peeks.
" the Joseph Newman Motor.....
Dr. Roger Hastings..... 800% efficiency...
with 1,5 Watt power input ,the back emf exceeded 80000 Watts. ...."
Peak efficiency/average efficiency. ? No/quarter/half/full load condition
Half wave would cancel it self out as it would be 2 negative peeks or 2 positive peeks.
Rick
This thread is : confirmation-of-ou-devices
and-claims
I'm anyhow glad that you put the safety first.
Arne
Hi Itsu,
Well, the split resonance point found due to the mutual coupling sounds an unwanted situation here because
it represents offtuned satellite LC circuits. The goal is tuning all coupled LC circuits to the same resonant frequency.
I do not know whether 'avalanche effect' may come about under the split resonance case, have never heard about
such with mutually coupled LC circuits, not even with carefully adjusted ones which are tuned exactly to the same
resonant frequency.
Claims like 'sympathetic resonance' or 'phase conjugate mirroring' ought to be proved to bring extra output energy
in this TX-RX resonant LC circuits discussed here. Of course, nothing can be proved via the web or by videos... ::)
Gyula
Rick,
I assume that you have built an OU device. How did you determine that it is OU?
Danger Danger Danger.
Yesterday I got my first mains power electric shock in five years from experimenting with the DSE. It was totally unexpected as I was looping the output to the input but accidently touched one of the capacitors. Luckily it was only a 450 volt 4.7uf motor run capacitor. I verified the output with a 220 volt mains bulb and it lit for maybe half a second and then dimmed out.
The input was 4 x 1.2 volt nimhs in series, charged to about 5 volts. I am not posting the circuit or giving any more details out, nor am I claiming OU.
What I am claiming is that the DSE IS LETHAL. Don't go anywhere near it unless you are a qualified person and wear protective clothing at all times.
I realise why Rick is ultra cautious now. This stuff is no joke. It will KILL YOU if you make a mistake.
The resonance kit is safe if you follow the book instructions.
Do not use an earth ground.
Rick,
I assume that you have built an OU device. How did you determine that it is OU?
itsu
#900
Rick quote : ......... No, only the primary was tuned. They were not positioned carefully at all. There were no variable caps other than on the primary.
This is really for my customers who already have the kit and realize that this would be possible to do if they had that many coils. But I do not recommend going to such efforts to try and prove this to yourself. We can do much more with a few coils than even everything you see in that picture/video. ........
Regards Arne
Hi Hoppy. I have watched a number of Rick's YouTube videos in the past, and he invariably leaves
out one or more important basic measurements which would show the actual efficiency of the overall circuit while (sometimes at least) implying it is OU. For example, he may measure an input battery voltage, but not measure the average or RMS input current from the battery and that sort of thing, while indicating or hinting he believes it is OU. Of course the actual efficiency will almost certainly be less than 100% if measured properly. I personally have never seen any claim (or hint) of OU by Rick which he backed up with proper measurements or a proper demonstration.
I am not at all trying to be negative, but just stating what I have observed.
I have done experiments with coils and resonance and taking off power using multiple receiver coils
tuned to the resonant frequency of the transmitter coil, and I personally have not seen 'OU' with such
a setup. In my experiments the power from the transmitter coil divides amongst the multiple receiver coil circuits, as would be expected, and the total output power is less than the input power. If there is a way around this expected behavior, I wasn't able to find it.
Regarding Don Smith, I only ever saw one video demonstration where Don Smith actually demonstrated powering a load with one of his claimed OU devices, (his briefcase device powering a bunch of bulbs) and the output voltage to the bank of bulbs was steadily dropping over time. Don Smith didn't leave his device connected to the bulbs long enough to be able to determine if anything really unusual might really be going on there, but his small briefcase device was able to power a large bank of incandescent 120V light bulbs for a while, which was still interesting to see. If he had a
small bank of batteries in his briefcase, it would have been quite a large current draw from the batteries to power all those 120V light bulbs. Don Smith didn't show how large of a battery or batteries he had inside his briefcase in that demo. Basically Don Smith's devices were never properly demonstrated in the public that I know of. Anything that comes from Don Smith is therefore quite questionable, as many people no doubt are already aware of.
Hi all, there is an other aspect to all this, the psychology aspect of asking validity questions, where the questioner has been accused out right of attacking him, and he will directly repeatedly ask me direct personal identity questions as if it is he who is on some sort of trial. The fact remains if I am interested in buying something I want to know what I am buying.
AG
Ideally you would properly space all these coils so that they all become both transmitters and receivers in afrom https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253
sympathetic relationship with each other in a way like the London bridge that was falling down (haha, no, the London
millennial bridge). Once this is locked into place then we do in fact have what Kron talks about in a different
context, and where you can remove the input as it is self-sustaining. And more than that, you can add loads to the
transmitter and even reverse the input. This usually requires several coils around the transmitter because the
output of the transmitter drops off at the square of the distance so enough has to come back into the transmitter to
accomplish that (considering that you have transmission radiating almost in all directions and usually we are only
placing coil just horizontally around it).
The loads off the 10 bigger coils (one not shown) were bright 3W LED bulbs, and another one was powered below off a
regular coil which isn't seen in the picture. So I had at least 11 of these big LEDs and almost 70 small LEDs
powered. I also added ferrite coils with these bigger bulbs that brought the input power down without lowering the
loads. So for 80ma at 12V that was an okay demonstration. It's the 1 watt challenge.
Again, there is nothing wrong with taking Itsu's claims in words and pictures as something to personally consider,
but to assume that you have some correct understand of what he was doing under the circumstances is mere assumption.
Gyula,
yes, i would agree that the goal would be to tune all coupled LC circuits to the same resonant frequency,
but looking at the picture in Seaad his post #890, many of those coils are so close they are bound to influence
each other and thus detune each other.
Anyway, the term avalanche is not quite what i mean, so probably wrong here.
Itsu
Hi Itsu,
Yes, the picture you mention in member Seaad's post (#890) shows many coils and they surely influence each other.
But look what Rick wrote about his setup earlier, when he was commenting his own pictures showing about 75 coils
around the big red coil (Seaad's picture came from A.king who took it from Rick's video, shown with some more coils):
from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253)
And look what he wrote to me yesterday:
So Rick knows better what I understand from your video than I myself do. LOL The many years of our cooperation on this and other forums is enough for making only assumptions. Go figure. Now it is my turn: hahaha
Just keep up your excellent work!
Gyula
Hi all, there is an other aspect to all this, the psychology aspect of asking validity questions, where the questioner has been accused out right of attacking him, and he will directly repeatedly ask me direct personal identity questions as if it is he who is on some sort of trial. The fact remains if I am interested in buying something I want to know what I am buying.
AG
Hi Itsu,
Yes, the picture you mention in member Seaad's post (#890) shows many coils and they surely influence each other.
But look what Rick wrote about his setup earlier, when he was commenting his own pictures showing about 75 coils around the big red coil (Seaad's picture came from A.king who took it from Rick's video, shown with some more coils):
from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253
"Ideally you would properly space all these coils so that they all become both transmitters and receivers in a sympathetic relationship with each other in a way like the London bridge that was falling down (haha, no, the London millennial bridge). Once this is locked into place then we do in fact have what Kron talks about in a different context, and where you can remove the input as it is self-sustaining. And more than that, you can add loads to the transmitter and even reverse the input. This usually requires several coils around the transmitter because the output of the transmitter drops off at the square of the distance so enough has to come back into the transmitter to accomplish that (considering that you have transmission radiating almost in all directions and usually we are only placing coil just horizontally around it).
The loads off the 10 bigger coils (one not shown) were bright 3W LED bulbs, and another one was powered below off a regular coil which isn't seen in the picture. So I had at least 11 of these big LEDs and almost 70 small LEDs powered. I also added ferrite coils with these bigger bulbs that brought the input power down without lowering the loads. So for 80ma at 12V that was an okay demonstration. It's the 1 watt challenge. "
And look what he wrote to me yesterday:
"Again, there is nothing wrong with taking Itsu's claims in words and pictures as something to personally consider, but to assume that you have some correct understand of what he was doing under the circumstances is mere assumption."
So Rick knows better what I understand from your video than I myself do. LOL The many years of our cooperation on this and other forums is enough for making only assumptions. Go figure. Now it is my turn: hahaha
Just keep up your excellent work!
Gyula
AG,With out prejudice
You have been playing a lot of games here. You needlessly insulted A.King when he recommended to Itsu to try grounding. Then you denied it. I quoted all the details and you just said "no comment." You are spending a lot time and wasting space here with such games. I appreciate many things you have said even with your attitude and ambiguous words at times. You have mocked me several times directly and indirectly in your questions so who are you trying to kid here? It doesn't bother me AG. You can see that I am always in good humor about it. It only serves to prove my points I have been making here. And all I am trying to do is help people here for free. This conflict ends up benefiting us all as people can now understand these games that are played on the forums while getting the important details on how to do free energy research.
I am not soliciting any sales here. I don't need you to buy anything from me but I will not refuse to sell you something if you want. Nor have I failed to answer anyone's questions. I only sell what people ask for, or rather demand. That started over 25 years ago as a special order ministry where people asked me to republish old classic books. So one thing lead to another and I became a small publisher. 15 years ago I extended that ministry to this research as well. I transcribe books for free, and patents, and make them available for print for those who would rather read them in that format. People demanded that parts be made available, so I did what I could to give them such. Same with the battery chargers. Same with the kits and books. I have not been able to keep up with the demand this year and am having to enlarge operations. I have spent a great deal of time helping you AG, and you are not a customer. I have said so many things to you that you could build such things yourself. It is evident that no matter what I do you seek to mock and pick at me in any way you want. That doesn't bother me and only serves to show everyone what is going on.
I have two questions for you.
Does cold electricity exist?
Have you ever built a device which exhibits cold electricity?
A.king,
I have two questions for you.
Does cold electricity exist?
Have you ever built a device which exhibits cold electricity?
Itsu: One further point. When the phase conjugate mirror occured the coils went stone cold and the earth wire went stone cold. Also the big coil went stone cold.I ask: did you use an infra thermometer or any thermometer to establish those wires actual temperatures? Can you repeat that test and check it if you did not check temperature back then? How many degree Celsius (or F) "stone cold" means?
...
G
Cold electricity: Let us say you light up a 4 watt 12 volt led lightbulb. Under normal conditions it would heat up. Even if your voltage was low there should still be a slight heating effect. That is ordinary or conventional electricity.
When you light up the same bulb using high frequency and/or an earth ground utilising Tesla single wire technology, the bulb lights up cold.
ie no heating effect which should be present. Secondly it dips in temperature to varying degrees depending upon the circuit. This effect also happens on the RICK (Resonance induction coupler kit) under certain conditions. It most certainly happens using a Slayer output to bulb and earth ground in a series configuration.
I did not use any equipment to check the readings. I mention the effect because you cannot prove anything over the internet. It is for others to repeat the experiment and comment. I am happy it went cold. So replicate it if you can. That's my message.
I gave the information for free. I did not have to. Simple as that.
Thanks for the answers. Rick blames me not being scientific and whenever I ask for scientific results I am refused.There you go twisting my words. I do not charge for information. I think you have some issues, or you are being paid to impune free energy research.
Why is that ?
By the way, this is an open forum. I did not know about giving information for money is the habit for you.
Gyula
Hi Itsu,
Yes, the picture you mention in member Seaad's post (#890) shows many coils and they surely influence each other.
But look what Rick wrote about his setup earlier, when he was commenting his own pictures showing about 75 coils
around the big red coil (Seaad's picture came from A.king who took it from Rick's video, shown with some more coils):
from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253)
And look what he wrote to me yesterday:
So Rick knows better what I understand from your video than I myself do. LOL The many years of our cooperation on this and other forums is enough for making only assumptions. Go figure. Now it is my turn: hahaha
Just keep up your excellent work!
Gyula
There you go twisting my words. I do not charge for information. I think you have some issues, or you are being paid to impune free energy research.Well, I misunderstood you then, sorry. Why did you write you had given information for free?
...Hi Itsu,
Anyway, i am glad we are on the same wavelength and have been for years.
I will try to do some sympathetic resonance frequency tests with more then 2 overcoupled coils and involve
temperature tests to see if anything gets cold.
Thanks, itsu
Coils at all angles. ha ha lol
Hi all
I'd like to ask Rick about the series inductor impedances which serve as a stand alone reaction loops. Each connecting point between those inductances...Is that a point that we have to pay more attention like building for example reactive loops with specific lengths of wire harmonically related?
Thanks
Jeg
Is that an effect that relates to the amounts of the extracted free energy?
Thanks
Jeg
Hi Itsu,
You are welcome.
Small comment: maybe for achieving the sympathetic resonance you would need quite a few RX coils, perhaps you receive information on the approximate number of coils for the phenomena to manifest.
If you do not have enough ferrite rods (or loopsticks from old AM pocket radios) for tuning the RX coils you could use toroidal cores just a single one (or stacked ones if their permeability is low) scavenged from discarded PC power supplies or any other 'gadget'. Also, simple cylinder shaped ferrite tuning 'slugs' would also serve for fine tuning the coils. You can wrap such cores up in foam or airbag material and put inside the bobbins for fixing them temporarily while tuning.
Guys:
Perhaps, it would help to space the coils evenly all the way around the main coil. As in winding turns on a torroid coil, which helps to fill the whole circumference. On small coils in the MHz range I've used pencils to help help tune the coils with. But, itsu's coil are much wider, so pencils may not work as well.
Gyula: If you don't watch out, you'll be in the ranks of a troll, like AG, and me.
Itsu: I think that I get the same stomach problems... NickZ
Hi Itsu,
You are welcome.
Small comment: maybe for achieving the sympathetic resonance you would need quite a few RX coils, perhaps you receive information on the approximate number of coils for the phenomena to manifest.
If you do not have enough ferrite rods (or loopsticks from old AM pocket radios) for tuning the RX coils you could use toroidal cores just a single one (or stacked ones if their permeability is low) scavenged from discarded PC power supplies or any other 'gadget'. Also, simple cylinder shaped ferrite tuning 'slugs' would also serve for fine tuning the coils. You can wrap such cores up in foam or airbag material and put inside the bobbins for fixing them temporarily while tuning.
Gyula
Guys:
Perhaps, it would help to space the coils evenly all the way around the main coil. As in winding turns on a torroid coil, which helps to fill the whole circumference. On small coils in the MHz range I've used pencils to help help tune the coils with. But, itsu's coil are much wider, so pencils may not work as well.
Gyula: If you don't watch out, you'll be in the ranks of a troll, like AG, and me.
Itsu: I think that I get the same stomach problems... NickZ
Guys:
Perhaps, it would help to space the coils evenly all the way around the main coil. As in winding turns on a torroid coil, which helps to fill the whole circumference. On small coils in the MHz range I've used pencils to help help tune the coils with. But, itsu's coil are much wider, so pencils may not work as well.
Gyula: If you don't watch out, you'll be in the ranks of a troll, like AG, and me.
Itsu: I think that I get the same stomach problems...
NickZ
Seaad, Gyula,Nice vid. You have just rediscovered the relay resonator......https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963 (https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963)
Thanks for the info, lots to think about and harder to do :-)
I just wanted to show where the max. RF is on the big coil by using a little RF probe, see video and diagram.
Its on top of the coil inbetween the coil and the var. cap (unless i turn around the coil).
The magnetic field though is somewhat harder to pinpoint, as a satellite coil will show different values
depending how its positioned to the big coil, see video, so the drawing of Seaad above might not be thru.
Anyway, i tried that proposed setup and got some result, but not where Seaad drew it, see video.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjiNoeyBLd0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjiNoeyBLd0)
More in the next days......
Itsu
Thanks for the answers. Rick blames me not being scientific and whenever I ask for scientific results I am refused.
Why is that ?
By the way, this is an open forum. I did not know about giving information for money is the habit for you.
Gyula
There you go twisting my words. I do not charge for information. I think you have some issues, or you are being paid to impune free energy research.
Gyula,
i do not read Rick's long posts, nor see his long video's, i just don't have the stomach for it.
I bravely start reading or looking, but after a few sentences or minutes i am lost and have to give up.
Its probable me as i have the same with most of AG his posts.
Most if not all i know from my present setup came from Benfr and A.king21 as they were feeding me snippets from posts and video's.
Not ideal, i know.
Anyway, i am glad we are on the same wavelength and have been for years.
I will try to do some sympathetic resonance frequency tests with more then 2 overcoupled coils and involve
temperature tests to see if anything gets cold.
Thanks, itsu
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMQqnaWUA98
I assume this is related to Rick's energizer technology -for those who have never seen the video.
Coils at all angles.
==> ITSU, (all)
Some thoughts on a small test regarding coils in all directions:
I assume that Rick said.
A coil can be a receiver and a transmitter at the same time.
In my simple ugly picture below, I give an example of this.
Normally, coil A can't transmit energy to coils C, D with these mutual coil directions.
First test that with coils A + C + D so that the LEDs on C, D do not lit.
The ellipses roughly show the energy propagation.
But coil A can transmit energy to coil B. (red ellipse)
Thereafter, coil B repeats energy (blue ellipse) to coil C which transmits energy to coil D (purple ellipse).
This can of course be completely up in the "blue" ::) ::) 8)
- Maybe the test has to be redone with other angles between the coils to work?
- Maybe a re-transmitting of the energy from coil B may only occur with a certain kind of load? (LED resistor, ETC)
Regards Arne
Nice vid. You have just rediscovered the relay resonator......https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963 (https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/19/9/1963)
(It was invented by one of Rick's students. I believe (Almost sure - but not 100%))
Anyhow as you and G love equations - it may enhance your understanding..
And it's starting to look more and more like a Gabriel Kron network system.
A quotation from the paper,"The relay resonator restricts the dissipation of the magnetic flux and generates an enhanced amount of magnetic flux from the Tx to the Rx. It consists of a rectangular loop antenna connected to a capacitor that allows the relay resonator to resonate at a fixed resonating frequency"
Quote,"Generates an enhanced amount of magnetic flux" - Now where have we heard that before......... I wonder......
Hoppy, were you on vacation or something??? I am not aware of anyone who has given more OU demonstrations publicly.Yes, that's right and I now wish that I had stayed out. ;D ::)
Seaad, Gyula,
Thanks for the info, lots to think about and harder to do :-)
I just wanted to show where the max. RF is on the big coil by using a little RF probe, see video and diagram.
Its on top of the coil inbetween the coil and the var. cap (unless i turn around the coil).
The magnetic field though is somewhat harder to pinpoint, as a satellite coil will show different values
depending how its positioned to the big coil, see video, so the drawing of Seaad above might not be thru.
Anyway, i tried that proposed setup and got some result, but not where Seaad drew it, see video.
Video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjiNoeyBLd0
More in the next days......
Itsu
Rick
I'd like to ask about a bank of capacitors that I have, charging them through ''negative'' energy. The bank itself is of 20 milliFarads at 63Volts. The spikes across them are in the order of few KV. I see that it charges while dumping the input KV peaks down to safe levels for the dielectric. At least this is how it looks like. But is it true? I mean doesn't dielectric suffer due to all this sudden stress across the plates? Even if it looks that it charges smooth from zero to 50 volts, is it susceptible to inter-arcing between the plates? We know that this kind of waveshape sees differences in impedance even in distances of few cm away. What about a plate of an electrolytic cap of many meters long which in addition has also an inductance?? And finally what about charging 12V supercapacitors? Are they in danger for the same reason?
Thanks
Jeg
I was wondering why the magnetic coupling between the big coil and a small coil is how it is, meaning why
is there a maximum in the middle when both coils are vertical and why is there a minimum in that same middle
when the small coil is horizontal?
Itsu
Looks like one position traces voltage nodes/antinodes and the other position current. Nice tool!
itsu: What happens if you place the small coils inside the big coil? As there are more losses outside the big coil, in field strengh.
I thought it meant laugh out loud. Ah well you live and learn.
Anyhow I did not use capitals.. I was trying to introduce some lightness into the study.
So maybe use ha ha ha instead (ha ha). :D
So the questions are, are those drawings representing what is happening, are if yes, are they the totality, and does all the energy transfer from primary to secondaries in a way that no gains are possible? Is there any point in asking these questions?
I think I understand your point. You are talking about the two energy storage mechanisms that exist and our bad habit to tap in just one of the two. Namely electric and magnetic field. Energy goes back and forth transforming itself in the two different qualities. The electric part is forgotten.Jeg do you mean dielectric? on a real device you need both and mix them for real power. ;D then transmit it !
Hi Itsu,Gyula,
Thanks for the tests.
I think your TX coil behaves like a vertical antenna with a size little longer in length than a quarter wave antenna but
much less in length than a half wave antenna. It has a voltage maximum at its top side (and minimum at its bottom)
and it has a current maximum in its middle part (and minimum current at its top and bottom).
For your TX coil, we need to consider that a generator (gate driver IC or function generator) drives the series LC circuit
with a low AC and DC internal impedance and the series LC circuit is closed via this low impedance. And across this low
impedance there is the 10-12 V or so square wave signal, this is also a relatively low level with respect to common
connection point of the capacitor and the coil where the several hundred volt or even kV high voltage levels develop.
This is why the voltage i.e. E field is low at the bottom of your coil and it has a maximum at the other end.
When you hold the small coil or ferrite coil horizontally, we need to consider it has its own magnetic field reception
characteristics, from its end direction it has a zero response, this is why it shows quasi zero magnetic field in the middle.
But the current in the TX coil creates maximum magnetic field just in the middle part your black tape is.
Here is a good explanation for the operation of a half wave dipole. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bDyA5t1ldU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bDyA5t1ldU)
Notice it has open ends and this explains voltage maximums at its two ends and it has a current maximum at its center
part where it is usually driven and the current is zero at its ends. (Electrons have to stop at the conductor open ends.)
The animation nicely shows the 90 degree phase relation between the current and voltage, a resonant antenna is also
an LC circuit of course.
Gyula
SO ITSU PLEASE USE THREE COILS PUT TWO HORIZONTALS TOP AND BOTTOM AND A VERTICAL COIL ALL IN THE MIDDLE ALL IN SERIES RESONANCE AND SEE WHAT HAPPEN.
Rick, AKing,Good question!
What is the difference between your setups and Itsu setup?
Thanks!
Rick, AKing,I have a tap on my coil at 180khz going down to 137 khz, so I run my set up at 137 khz so that the cheap Chinese frequency generators can be used.
What is the difference between your setups and Itsu setup?
Thanks!
I have a tap on my coil at 180hz going down to 137 khz, so I run my set up at 137 khz so that the cheap Chinese frequency generators can be used.
I also use the DSE to earth ground and loop back. Also insert coils inside the big coil to lower the input wattage on the gate driver.
I am also in the process of tuning a 1/4 wave coil which is out by 1/2 a turn but still unexpectedly lights an led to brightness.
I noticed when Itsu used the relay coil his input went down and his output went up. So that is worth investigating.
As I have said before I have had the gate driver voltage unaltered at input voltage for 3 hours whilst powering the load although the frequency gen was separately powered.
I am also using batteries on input to take advantage of the Heavyside component.
I would use a 1/4 wave wire to power the setup but they would be too long. You need to be up in the 400 mhz range to get your wire lengths down to a few feet (4 or 5 feet).
Rick, AKing,
What is the difference between your setups and Itsu setup?
Thanks!
Hi
Have performed this test in the simulator LTspice XVII
I used the same coils as ITSU's but made the test at 200 kHz
with some minor adjustments of the capacitors values to maximise the output voltage.
A load resistor of 10 k-Ohm was chosen.
A resistor is inserted after the ideal square wave generator to simulate ITSU's gate driver impedanse somewhat. The switch SW can be closed
to use the ideal gate driver (with exteme low impedanse).
Regards Arne
a.king: Interesting that you placed the coils inside of the main coil. Can you show a video of your set up working?
Well, he shared the other day that he hasn't bothered to read what I have written and I returned the compliment. ;) So who knows? I looked at around 20 or more posts early on before I was writing on this forum a few weeks back and noticed too many mistakes and differences with what we were doing to have any hope that this would go anywhere. I've looked at a few videos and posts more recently and still found similar differences. However, I'm thinking he is trying some new things that may show him curiocities. Nevertheless, I can see that Itsu and G are not getting the basics yet of this. It still looks like G is just trying to find some kind of remote disproof of anything I may be saying and trying to confirm mainstream understanding of these things. So that is the difference. They are limiting themselves to mainstream understandings and using their own parts to try and accomplish something unknown to themselves. That could go on for years I suppose. It is really an attempt to confirm an unknown claim at this point. Just more of the same for these forums, where some mainstream "expert" is directing someone with no OU experience to try this and that and hopefully stumble across some interesting result (maybe with Itsu the hope of OU, and with G some greater efficiency). It has the appearance of trying to replicate something A.King posted, or what I have done, but there was only really a commitment from Itsu to deal with A.King. So he will have to share what he see's as the differences. He was very optimistic about Itsu with me, and that was why I looked at his early postings. But then I saw the problems and told him that there were no real grounds for this going anywhere under the circumstances. I can see years of the same sort of thing trying to replicate the eastern Europeans and being no better for that. That is unfortunate that so much time has been spent without any success. I couldn't imagine spending years of my time doing that with no success. As Mario wrote the other day, there comes a point where this is either going to work for you or it is time to move on to something else. This is why this weekend I'll be starting a new presentation that should help people from the ground up giving the principles of free energy in a very condensed format. That way you can understand what to know and do and what is mistaken and what not to do.Rick,
Then you can do it yourself very cheaply. How many people tried to replicate Kapanadze and never measured the coils or learnt about 1/4 wave relationships?
Listen up very carefully: The most important thing Kapanadze said to me personally was and I quote, " YOU HAVE TO MEASURE THE COILS".
I have a tap on my coil at 180khz going down to 137 khz, so I run my set up at 137 khz so that the cheap Chinese frequency generators can be used.
I also use the DSE to earth ground and loop back. Also insert coils inside the big coil to lower the input wattage on the gate driver.
I am also in the process of tuning a 1/4 wave coil which is out by 1/2 a turn but still unexpectedly lights an led to brightness.
I noticed when Itsu used the relay coil his input went down and his output went up. So that is worth investigating.
As I have said before I have had the gate driver voltage unaltered at input voltage for 3 hours whilst powering the load although the frequency gen was separately powered.
I am also using batteries on input to take advantage of the Heavyside component.
I would use a 1/4 wave wire to power the setup but they would be too long. You need to be up in the 400 mhz range to get your wire lengths down to a few feet (4 or 5 feet).
EDIT: I also use ferrite inside the satellite coils to fine tune them for maximum magnetic output.
I also use a gauss meter to ensure the total magnetic output is increased by correct placement of Rx coils. I place the gauss meter directly against all the coils and check the gauss both wth led on and off - so it's a give and take situation as every coil affects every other coil.
SO ITSU PLEASE USE THREE COILS PUT TWO HORIZONTALS TOP AND BOTTOM AND A VERTICAL COIL ALL IN THE MIDDLE ALL IN SERIES RESONANCE AND SEE WHAT HAPPEN.
Okay that it contradicts to my above post, we learn all the time.
Gyula
There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at theIt is a pity if you refrain from proving it and it remains a claim.
top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs
totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input.
Hi Rick,Gyula, Well I assume that's Rick's device but what of Itsu it's pointless me asking any one in the group,
I knew you would jump on it, that is mainly why I worded it like that. ;)
Here is one of the most catching comments I have read on this forum.
It is a pity if you refrain from proving it and it remains a claim.
Gyula
Rick,
Interesting post. You have expended much time and words attempting to show the mainstream experts the error of their ways by applying conventional electrical thought and measurement processes to their experiemnts. Some time back, I mentioned Peukerts Law in respect of battery capacity. I'm sure that you like me have run Bedini wheel energisers for years on end using the same source and charge LA batteries in rotation, (as taught by John), whilst doing work charging batteries and doing mechanical work. By studying Peukerts Law, it can readily be appreciated why this is possible and on the surface appears surprising and exciting to the unitiated. So, in this respect, I understand why you are excited, as I was to experience what could be done using this type of tech. Also, like you, I have applied this to practical uses running modified motors with more powerful mechanical and solid state setups. The only difference between us is that I understand that conventional principles still apply and what we are really doing is exploiting the vagaries of batteries by carefully tuning loads to the device and as John correctly told us, use decent batteries that are well desulfated by conditioning. We are on a similar page Rick but I choose not to conduct a sermon on the issue. ;)
Re coil measurement: I was asking Kapanadze if special components were required. My team needed a 100 MW set up. Maybe in builds of 10 MW. Kapanadze said the only requirement was the cable or wire required which would have to be accurately measured. Then he seemed to think that ordinary off the shelf components were ok.
(In Rick's case he states that just one cm out and you can lose the effect.)
I enclose a photo of some of the transformers we were going to use to input into the grid .
AGthanks for the reply, but no it wasn't that I didn't believe you i just thought you were or might be comparing the difference between grid hardware and TK's efficient capabilities.
When I said 10MW I meant 100 MEGAWATTS. That is what 100 MW means and that is the size of the transformers we were intending Kapanadze to work with. I don't care if you don't believe me. I brought you the Aquarium 2 to study so lets leave it at that.
Hi Rick,
I knew you would jump on it, that is mainly why I worded it like that. ;)
Here is one of the most catching comments I have read on this forum.
"There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at the top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input."
It is a pity if you refrain from proving it and it remains a claim.
Gyula
Gyula, Well I assume that's Rick's device but what of Itsu it's pointless me asking any one in the group,
but what exactly are Itsu's figures to date ?
A.king,It was just one section of an industrial complex - there was a whole row of these monsters. It was a disused coal mine that was converted to an industrial park. We had options on two factory units at the time. I was new to this stuff at the time so took a few photos and some short videos. I have found another photo of some of the cages housing these trafos.
The transformer looks a lot smaller than a 100MW transformer. What was the specs on that one?
So now we see Itsu says he doesn't read what I have said so why would anyone think what he was doing resembled what I am doing?
AG,Yes there is some truth in what you repeat here, but if we read from out side the test tube lab we might get a different view from others more factual knowledge especially when it's in a different tongue and where it's not suppressed by federal corporate greed, your transmitting and charging particles and capturing them down the line I did read Henry Morays publications
Maybe the real thing your comment here is pointing out is a lack of knowing what is being attempted here? I have destroyed the misconception of everyone in their thinking you can prove anything over the internet. So this makes pointless so many postings. It forces people to do science for themselves and prove to themselves what everyone was looking for others to do. So now we see Itsu says he doesn't read what I have said so why would anyone think what he was doing resembled what I am doing?
It's not merely a question of what the figures are but what do they imply? What is the basis and context of those figures? What is the relevance to anyone here? He is admittedly in uncharted territory here. His postings are curious but very limited. I'm not saying they are useless by any means. But I fail to understand the goal or purpose of this. Maybe that is part of your question as well.
Yes, eccept with a lot of observation through experimentation - yes, years of it like you - the vagaries become understood as being normal characteristics of batteries under different operating conditions. That is why I can, like you, run a 6W load for an hour and the 12AH battery stay the same while such loads were also being powered from that. Now that does not infer that I want a pis.....g contest with you on best performance. ;) All I am saying is that when laborius and properly conducted load tests are carried out, it is clear to me that the performance of a given DUT can be explained in conventional / mainstream terms. Now, I don't expect you to agree that I may be right on this issue, just to agree to disagree without launching into a tirade.
If I understand you in your using the word "vagaries" that you are thinking that there is just a very unexpected and inexplicable thing happening in the battery and maybe not even predictable or repeatable. Well, I have been at this 15 years full time and this is very real science that is just more than mainstream practice. I have long demystified all this stuff and Bedini's wild bar talk storytelling. But batteries are only the basic first stage experience in this tech. It does not depend on using a battery to experience these processes. I'm personally burned out with batteries and motors but that is all that is permissible for the public.
Hi Itsu,
Thanks for your efforts. Okay that it contradicts to my above post, we learn all the time.
We need to evaluate the results. I think your small and shorted wire loop for indicating the current is ok.
It is also interesting that current maximum remains in the middle while the voltage minimum moves up from
the bottom when you use the ground. One would expect them both move. Let's approach this otherwise:
what is approximate wire length in your TX coil? When I thought of comparing the TX circuit to a vertical antenna,
it came from a Tesla coil voltage distribution. As the Corum brothers wrote it is a quarter wave helical resonator, with maximum voltage
at the top and minimum at the bottom if tuned correctly.
Will be back later tomorrow only.
Gyula
Yes well, so whats a DUT a 'dead universal transistor' ? ;D if your going to use brain teasers can you declare them please some where in your post ;DDevice under test. ;)
And please be aware it's not just that you live your life - it's how you live your life that's important!
AG
Thanks Itsu for spoiling me with this great video. What you said about connecting all the
to a super cap and beefing up the big coil driver will be very interesting. Thanks again
from 4 degrees south of the equator right in the middle of the INDIAN OCEAN.
Hoppy: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu1hNQsr9YnkIjFkMAc3Npw (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu1hNQsr9YnkIjFkMAc3Npw)Very similar but there has to be voltage across the bulb to light. How is it being measured?
1 hour 45 minutes in ...
Is this the same circuit you were using? ie Gabriel Kron's negative resistor schematic (more or less ie with variations). So the battery voltage across a load ie a bulb is zero - yet the bulb still lights??
...Honestly Rick, would you let anyone measure anything relevant to your resonant kit setup on such a meeting?
If Itsu had been to my meetings and then replicated the same, then what would you say to that?
...
Many thousands of people already have OU...
I don't know, it is something I have wondered for a long time. Are they all liars Tesla, Morray, Newman, Meyers, Searl, Wagner, Hans Coeler and the list goes on and some as Searl and Meyers have done jail time but does that mean they were all liars or is there a true conspiracy to keep it all under wraps or is it human greed I don't know for sure yet after 15 years of looking into this stuff. This is part of why I don't even experiment with some things such as energy from the sky or ground because what if you did figure it out and powered your house from the ground do you really think you wouldn't just be thrown in jail for stealing power.
Thanks ITSU for your efforts.
I'm hoping that you will use resistances instead of LED's in this coming test.
If you are using the satellite coils as before in parallel resonance it is obvious that these in the resonance situation are best conformed wih high Ohm resistors or anyhow with other very HIGH Ohmic loads as they go extremely high Ohmic then.
A parallel resonance circuit loaded with LED's will only be "clamped" mismatched and the Q-value totally destroyd.
You can also then skip the FRB's.
[[ Maybe a high Ohmic (load)resistor before two in opposite direction LED's is maybe a choice that also gives a visual option. ]]
Regards Arne
Thanks ITSU for your efforts.
I'm hoping that you will use resistances instead of LED's in this coming test.
If you are using the satellite coils as before in parallel resonance it is obvious that these in the resonance situation are best conformed wih high Ohm resistors or anyhow with other very HIGH Ohmic loads as they go extremely high Ohmic then.
A parallel resonance circuit loaded with LED's will only be "clamped" mismatched and the Q-value totally destroyd.
You can also then skip the FRB's.
[[ Maybe a high Ohmic (load)resistor before two in opposite direction LED's is maybe a choice that also gives a visual option. ]]
Regards Arne
I don't know, it is something I have wondered for a long time. Are they all liars Tesla, Morray, Newman, Meyers, Searl, Wagner, Hans Coeler a......
So many liars and delusionals in this world. Very sad.
" If Itsu had been to my meetings and then replicated the same, then what would you say to that?"
Honestly Rick, would you let anyone measure anything relevant to your resonant kit setup on such a meeting? Would you let Itsu attempt looping back the outputs to replace the power supply? It could be done within 1 hour work by using full wave diode bridges across the LC tanks of the 10 or 11 big receiver units (as per your thoughtful calculations the many small receiver units would not be needed) and collect the DC outputs in a bigger puffer capacitor.
This latter then would feed the gate driver IC directly, provided the DC level holds up in the puffer capacitor at least for some seconds (and hopefully for much longer), that would already indicate the real strength of the received 8W power you claim. This way the participants on that particular meeting, say 8-10 people (or even 18), could see the performance in the real world.
(The function generator could still be run from its own supply because the input of the gate driver needs only a few mW drive level, negligible to the claimed 8 W output. And a discrete square wave generator can be built for the job.)
I hope those participants you mentioned "as a good number of them reading this thread" have been indeed reading this post too and next time they will 'demand' the loop back attempt... 8)
My kind message for them: Folks, electric power going into LED bulbs cannot be evaluated numerically by the naked eye, LED bulbs are strongly nonlinear devices. Please see this post here and think the spectacular LED brightnesses over:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg534508/#msg534508
And no offense but I would believe Itsu 100% what he would have experienced if he had been either a witness there, or if after seeing it he would replicate it and show it in his video: I would certainly believe him. Many members (who care to follow his activity) have known him for years here and on other forums.
And why Itsu would report back a false result after his succesful replication ?? I would trust him 100% and so would several other members here too. For he would have learned from you a wonderful circuit setup... and the other participants present in the real world too.
And I would really be happy that the 8 W (or even only say 4 W) is indeed present at the outputs of the satellite LC circuits while less than 1 W is consumed from the 8 W (or 4 W) output to maintain operation. Rick I would acknowledge I was wrong.
Gyula
Guys:
I'll second that... I would also trust itsu's findings, 100%. Regardless of the test results, being good or bad. Anyone can be wrong, but he tells and shows it how it is. Whether it's positive results, or not so positive results. But, the proof is in the pudding, and lighting just a 10w bulb, as well as a feed back path, would help to turn the tide, for me.
I would trust what certain people show in their videos. Not all devices are faked, just mostly... and that is why we are all so skeptical about what some people say, and what they show. Any OU type of claims need to be verified, that is what this thread is here for. Rick told me to put up or shut up, when I bring up the subject of proof. I guess he forgot where he's at.
We are here to learn... All of us. Without long drawn out sermons, telling us how and what to believe. Thanks, but I got that one down, already. Waiting for the real self runner...before diving in, to unknown waters.
Not in my opinion Rick. Your battery powering the black box and LED lamps dropped around 1V during the video. I appreciate that you were not trying to convince anyone that they were watching an OU demonstration but what exactly were you trying to point out to your viewers??
G, while it may be true that it is difficult to estimate exactly how much it takes to run an LED, nevertheless my point was sufficiently made.
I don't know, it is something I have wondered for a long time. Are they all liars Tesla, Morray, Newman, Meyers, Searl, Wagner, Hans Coeler and the list goes on and some as Searl and Meyers have done jail time but does that mean they were all liars or is there a true conspiracy to keep it all under wraps or is it human greed I don't know for sure yet after 15 years of looking into this stuff. This is part of why I don't even experiment with some things such as energy from the sky or ground because what if you did figure it out and powered your house from the ground do you really think you wouldn't just be thrown in jail for stealing power.
Thanks Guys, for the trusts, but i find it amazing that anyone would doubt any results a replicator would present.
Of course anyone can make a mistake, but thats where the video's are for so anyone can see what is being done.
If you think something is wrong it can be discussed and corrected.
Anyway i always try to keep my posts short and clear so won't comment on it any further.
Itsu
Hi gyulasun
Thanks for the reply, it does seem a sad state of affairs if hiding it would be the answer to such a wonderful thing for humanity as Tesla said todays is theirs and the future for which he worked would be his but I don't know if it will be in my lifetime. Anyway I think I am off topic and will say no more on the philosophy and leave the thread to those doing this great work. I tell you I haven't been to this site so much as when this thread started I love it and I do plan to get expirementing on this but I will need to start further back in Rick's teachings to get up to speed.
Itsu,
Short is fine, but is no virtue. You are claiming to be a replicator but you are not replicating anything here. You are doing your own thing. You are not replicating an OU claim because you are not making an OU claim. This was brought up the other day. What is the meaning of your work here? You have said you do not read what I write nor have you attempted to replicate what I have done. You guys pretend to do that but then admit to not doing that. This is all a big game. Now it is fine to experiment and try things out, but that is not the purpose of this thread is it?
You find it amazing that anyone would doubt you. Why? Are you infallible? Can any of us verify in the real world anything that you are doing? Why should we believe anything you do? You are not making an OU claim. You are making many claims, and because they are not OU claims we are supposed to believe them??? Now that is truly amazing. I saw this right from the beginning and that is why I said to A.King that you are wasting your time with Itsu. He has been at this for years and has not got anywhere because he doesn't know what he is doing. This is all but going around and around in circles. Same old assumptions. And now these guys, along with you, have made you the infallible replicator of no one's claims but your own. This is reckless.
But do not misunderstand me. It is perfectly fine to do what you have been doing in trying things out and posting videos. My objection is with your assumptions about what is implied by such videos. You expect others to believe that you know what you are doing and that they can understand your real-world environment. The only value of your input is merely for others to be able to do something to show themselves. You wish to bypass the real world and expect people to conclude prematurely. So this whole thing is a big game.
You say that anyone can make a mistake, but then take that back in saying videos can not allow for mistakes. But how so? I have watched thousands of videos that don't show the real mistakes that the videos don't show. And why would anyone be expected to trust someone in our day?
Yes it is fine to discuss things that appear to be wrong or mistaken. All agreed there. But to assume that a video proves anything is wrong. It can only give ideas to personally try. Why do you all just want to bypass reality?
Are you all so addicted to science fiction movies that you assume what is on the screen is reality? ???
RF,
For the record, Itsu is one of the best replicators on this forum and although I have not met him face-to-face, I can vouch for his honesty, knowledge, and integrity based on the work we have done together on my various projects alone. He will go the the nth degree in his efforts to prove or disprove circuit claims at his own time and expense. I'm sure you can see the amount of effort and work he has invested in his attempts to prove your claims. IMO, he deserves your respect!
Regards,
Pm
What is my reason for being here and basis for considering such claims?
Rick wrote:
"Itsu,
Short is fine, but is no virtue. You are claiming to be a replicator but you are not replicating anything here. You are doing your own thing. You are not replicating an OU claim because you are not making an OU claim. This was brought up the other day. What is the meaning of your work here? You have said you do not read what I write nor have you attempted to replicate what I have done"
Rick,
so many words again.
What the hell do you try to say with: "You are not replicating an OU claim because you are not making an OU claim"
Its these kind of sentences which makes my head spin and stop reading.
Anyway, i am here because a.king21 was very enthusiastic about your work and asked me (among others no doubt) to start looking into this. We PMed for a while, then jumped over to this thread.
I am trying to replicate what he presented to me, and as i am no Electronics Expert i usually then present my findings on a forum like this via posts and video's to have other more knowledgeable people have a look at it and correct and/or advice me when needed.
The video's are hopefully crisp and clear and for anyone open to ask questions to follow up.
I never "claim" things, i just show what is happening and try to find out why, no more, no less.
Thats the way i work for years and i like it and i don't care if you understand or approve.
Regards Itsu
Just depends what you think they were lying about. You see.....and listen carefully here.....if you read their patents VERY carefully (and they were very well worded!!) there is NOTHING in them that indicates OU. NOTHING
But people love to read into things especially when the mind feverishly wishes for a dream. Tesla talked about millions of horsepower and power generated but after all those years he was still hooked to the grid. For ALL his experiments he was hooked to mains town supply.
As far as the other inventors go, many were working with exotic materials such a radium or other isotopes. Searl is an old buffoon who tried all sorts of magnetic motors and told fanciful stories of his one working motor which lost gravity and shot intp the atmosphere never to be seen again LOOOOL ::) ::) ::) ::). He should go to prison for that nonsense. Newman still worked with big batteries and took thousand's of dollars in investors money Also jail worthy. Moray was a true scientist but also worked with exotic materials and never disclosed the contents of his tube. Many other inventors are often associated with OU sites but the fact is their patents did not state OU. People see what they want to see
SOME of those patents had Terms such as "self sustaining" that Rick Friedrich grabs onto...….but that does not mean OU. Self sustaining …….for how long??? Huh. A flashlight is self sustaining. A rechargeable power tool that does not need to be plugged into the wall is self sustaining but for how long? By the true definition of the term....a vehicle is self sustaining because you can fill the tank and drive 400 mile...… None of those patents said or even alluded to INFINITE self sustaining. Yes...energy is never destroyed but it is converted into heat and light and all sort and that conversion costs you something.
These stories about coils cooling to freezing and cold lightbulbs are nonsense. Even large halogen loads which you run off a tesla hairpin that you can dunk into water without getting electrocuted are scalding hot on the glass....why?? because there is resistance at the filament in order to generate heat and light.
Tesla was a brilliant man and his patents on one wire transmission were cutting edge. Rick....
You have pretty big capacity batteries with lEDS that hooked a certain way can run for days. Your batteries are a still dropping down after all that cycling. I find it amusing that on one hand you say that NOTHING can be proven on the internet and yet that's the very thing you attempt to do. BTW saying that nothing can be proven on the internet is rubbish. You sit there and conduct some very good demonstrations (yes that's a compliment) and draw some accurate conclusions and yet on the other hand when somebody asks you to take all these little black boxes and show 3 batteries being charged for the price of one or a output looped back to the source you come up with the laughable "Im sorry but nothing can be proven on the internet and btw this circuit is not perfectly tuned. ::) ::) ::) ::). "back in my last seminar I showed it running perpetually blah blah blah and thousands have OU!!. You yourself said Bedini was a liar and misled people and yet you are no different.
You know what...Don Smith said exactly the same thing over and over and yet the few guys that took a measurement to his device always showed it as slowly running down.
You may think I am angry or a paid shill (which is laughable) but I am not the one making massive claims and keeping people on the carrot stick for how many decades now??
Oh and btw....mixing what the Bible says with your kit selling is just plain mentally ill. Are you trying to run a church or sell a charger? Jesus himself threw out the money changers from the temple because the things of the flesh have nothing to do with the things of the spirit. So if you want to start a church then go do that but please read the Bible first before prostituting it.
"Occam's razor!"
http://www.r-charge.net/kits.html
P,
I understand what you are trying to say here. But you guys don't wish to address something far more important. I am not saying there is anything wrong with exchanging information back and forth, but so long as people are assuming that something has been proven over the internet then you are all lost at that point. Notice again your point. You vouch for his honesty. Well who vouches for yours? Having 10,000 people say that makes no difference. It still doesn't prove anything over the internet. Why is that so difficult to see??? You guys have been so glued to these forums for so long that you cannot even see what is so obvious here. The more you engage in assumptions the harder it is to see them as that. So you then set up Itsu as an authority. But why? Because you have seen him help you out on a few things. That gives him credibility to you personally. But surely you don't expect others just to assume that? And surely you don't assume he cannot make a mistake? The truth is that you merely benefit from him to the point that you can replicate what he has done. And that is my whole point. It only goes that far.
You guys want to make it more than that. You are all looking for a way to make a forum prove something that everyone should believe. But that can never happen. We have done that sort of thing long ago. It is getting old now. It is merely a fantasy. It cannot happen. Because you will always have the realist come in and say as I do: "says who?" Even Hollywood leaves you with the same problem for spiderman who is going to have to try and convinced his fantasy world how a video was faked. You can't rely on videos to prove anything. You can't rely on testimony through this medium. You should only encourage people to prove things out to themselves. But you guys are setting the stage for more fake OU claims to be believed, and real OU claims to be disbelieved. Both are counterproductive. Some of you guys are disinfo people doing this on purposes. Others are just fooled by this game and not thinking about this. But at least I have forced them to partially admit that anyone could be wrong. Now if they will only really admit that to be the case and not take it back in the next sentence.
P, he is not actually replicating anything I am doing because he said he has not even read what I wrote. So he is doing his own thing based upon no OU claim. He is not seeking "Confirmation of OU devices and claims" in this activity. That is in regards to a particular setup. But in regards to a general claim he may be attempting to do something. But again, he would have to work from the right context. And he shows no interest to understand the right context. The videos show that this is entirely new to him. So you guys are expected far too much from him. Again, if he has been at this for years without success, then doesn't that mean anything to you? I guess I don't understand how someone can spend all that time for years and never have anything to is more than mainstream processes. Why not just do something very simple as I have been saying? Why doesn't G and others show why they believe OU is possible? Surely there is some justifiable reason you guys are all here??? Or do you all just like to chat? Or are you all just here to disprove OU? What is the reason you all think OU is possible? Or how can you justify your time spent here doing this? If the laws are fixed as so many things said here imply, then why even bother? But if you can just do a simple thing to see some gain then you can build upon that. Yet if something is suggested it is ignored or disbelieved with fallacy. And no one wishes to offer up any rational reason why we have any grounds for believing in OU. Isn't that amazing on a forum such as OU? Has it therefore just become a place for hackers to disprove OU?
So why does Itsu do what he has done for so many years when he never has had success in experiencing OU? What is the basis for continuing? I would really like to know what grounds he has for expecting to find something. If there are no reasons, that is fine, but we ought to know that before we make him Pope in the infallible sense. Did any of you ever think to ask this?
And the same with G. Don't you think that it would be most instructive if we learned the reason for his one sentence of expecting to find some circuit give additional gains? These revelations would be far more important than anything he has yet written. But he refuses to say a word about it. If he says there are no actual reasons then he will look foolish, especially to the mainstream skeptics. If he actually has some grounds for that sentence then withholding that information is needlessly unproductive considering all the hostilities about this. Why not just come out of the closet G? Tell us one way or the other. Maybe you don't because you want others to do the work for you? I don't know.
But all of you need to ask yourself this question. What is my reason for being here and basis for considering such claims? If you have any foundation for rational belief in OU then why have you not stated it? Why not build upon that foundation? Why keep silent. If you do not have any, then state that. Come clean. Tell us that you have no reason at this point to believe it. That would be helpful. But no, we just all jump right in ignoring all foundations and get crazed about some schematic or circuit that is supposed make someone a sensation or a liar based upon popular opinion!
It shouldn't take more space / rows than the extra long posts we often can see here to describe what causes this extra incoming effect/ power supply and how to place and dimension coils and use the Coil repeating/ amplifying? effect if any, ETC, ETC.
Regards Arne
Mr.Friedrich, Science and combined with Fiction is ever fine ! ;)
" Calculations for a Nominal Electricity Generator "https://patents.google.com/patent/US8847720B2/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US8847720B2/en)
708 cm3 a 8 Gr. / cm3 ~ 6 Kg
Nominal Voltage amplified by frequency to induced Voltage
Nice claimed power densities ! Up to thousands of KWs !
Device vibrations ? durability,lifetime ?
Question : when and how becomes Science Fiction Science Reality !?
You can make this coil for 1USD per piece on a piece of plastic.Blimey! That has to be a OU coil set at that price!!!! :o
But you will buy it from Rick, because he has secret of OU!
Blimey! That has to be a OU coil set at that price!!!! :o
That is exactly what Richard Max Friedrich claims!So, not just OU but MAX OU!!!! 8)
Buy it and you will have OU. You will have only 100USD less in your pocket!
He claims that he powered big industrial motors also, but I can not find video of that.
Not even one sentence about that claim on the NET, no matter how much I searched!
This forum is his online shop!
So, not just OU but MAX OU!!!! 8)
Not in my opinion Rick. Your battery powering the black box and LED lamps dropped around 1V during the video. I appreciate that you were not trying to convince anyone that they were watching an OU demonstration but what exactly were you trying to point out to your viewers??
Blimey! That has to be a OU coil set at that price!!!! :o
I don't know why forum give possibility to advertise business here and promote buying of someones products!
Is this forum online shop or what?
Rick is promoting his videos and in each of his videos he is talking about his kits,
and pointing you to his page to buy them.
I watched most of that videos, and there is no explanation of his claims of OU in videos,
just talking about his kits and convincing audience that he has something and
everyone has to buy his kits to figure OU secret!
Just a show of a salesman!
And he is using this forum as his own online shop!
That is exactly what Richard Max Friedrich claims!
Buy it and you will have OU. You will have only 100USD less in your pocket!
He claims that he powered big industrial motors also, but I can not find video of that.
Not even one sentence about that claim on the NET, no matter how much I searched!
This forum is his online shop!
Void of truth, yeah that is my point. This is 90-95% psychological. People lie to themselves and others on both sides. Some people want to believe they have something when they don't, and other people convince themselves that something can't happen when it can.
I don't expect you to believe anything I say, just like I have no reason to believe anything a nameless person I have never met says. Such comments have no benefit here and are just wasted space. Just more diversion.
The fact is that everyone believes that millions of people have free energy solar and wind and other means. Solar would have been considered impossible over 100 years ago. Same kind of ridicule would have been hurled at people. I said what I said because it is a fact that many people use the technology in various ways. You assume that people would go online and tell everyone what they have, but that is false. In fact a good number of people have shared things online and you guys don't pay attention to that.
Contributors.
Things seem to be getting a little " out of control " here.
Whilst not keeping a close eye upon this topic/thread I cannot say that Mr Friedrich has been directly soliciting his kits.
Friendly banter is one thing, lets keep it clean!!
Cheers Grum.
Itsu,
I think you comes into a situation where the super caps acts more or less as a shortcut also (extremely low impedance, as LEDs) when loading them.
My advise is to introduce some type of buck- converter in between the secondary coils [the gathered (high) DC voltages] and the super cap.
These buck- converters can be made to have a very high efficiency ( >95%).
Regards Arne
Rick, it is not about belief at all. It's about facts. I commented that I have watched a number of your
videos and it is an undeniable fact that you imply that some of your setups are OU in some of your videos, but it is also clear to me that either you do not have a basic understanding of how to do proper measurements to determine the real efficiency of your circuits, or you are dishonest and deliberately avoid doing proper measurements to mislead people into buying your products. Whether you are deliberately misleading people, or you are deluded, or whether it is a combination of both or whatever else, I don't know, but it is clear to me that you are just another person out there misleading the public with false claims. You then turn around in forums like this and claim you have never implied some of your setups are OU. That is blatantly false. I am not at all interested in your
rationalizations and deflections. Save it for the gullible. I am just pointing out what I have observed.
I think a COP > 1 might be possible. However, when working with AC or pulsed circuits where
accurate measurements can sometimes be complex or otherwise quite tricky, an experimenter really
has to configure the test setup to be 'self-looped' and then test if the setup can be made self sustaining.
All else is folly. Many people have posted to these forums over the years thinking they have COP > 1,
but it all falls apart when they try to properly self loop the setup and see if it can self sustain itself.
Anyone who claims or implies a COP > 1 without trying a proper self-looped arrangement first
is either very naive or very deluded or very dishonest. Period.
Here my setup on checking up on the cooling effect as mentioned by A.king21.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkGvfMnGrVo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkGvfMnGrVo)
Itsu
I have thousands of repeat customers and I only do this because they ask for it.
https://m.banggood.com/DIY-Mini-Tesla-Coil-Module-Unassembled-15W-DC-15-24V-2A-Plasma-Speaker-Electronic-Kit-p-1326817.html (https://m.banggood.com/DIY-Mini-Tesla-Coil-Module-Unassembled-15W-DC-15-24V-2A-Plasma-Speaker-Electronic-Kit-p-1326817.html)
4.29 US$ ( Tesla coil price part ?)
Only to show what organized is possible. !
Beginning with the moment that this Tesla coil assembly propagated by Mr.Friedrich shows really OU effect or equivalent high energy savings by LED lamps use the industry brings fast the coil price down to 1 US$ each.
That was not my setup. I just replicated your setup and itis not cold. I was using the DSE.
Anyhow before we get into my setup can you measure the voltage across the bulb please?
You have thousands of customers X 150USD kit = 150 000USD.
And they are not buying only cheapest kit.
But you are not living from that!
People are coming to you, because you are promoting your kits as OU.
They will not come to you if your kits are not OU.
And you must start measure your circuits to see what really happens in there.
You can not claim without measuring!
itsu, Gyula: Why is there a difference when comparing a multi secondary coils pulsing system like what you've shown, to a radio station. Does the radio station loose it's transmitting power depending on how many people's radios are tuning in to it?
Why would adding more receiving coils, not work the same? But, it doesn't, normally, adding more coils bring down the total working voltage, and output at the load (led). WHY? I ask.
itsu, did placing coils inside of the main coil, help, or not?
What the hell, I'll be nice... once the dust clears...and the truth comes out. Would be good to know, one way or the other.
And if you multiply that times a few million radios tuned in???
So, why not use a lot more juice? Why mAs, why leds, the incandescent bulbs won't work?
Dr. Stiffler showed that he could light several 120v 12w cree led bulbs on flea farts. But, did not show a self runner doing that. Why do I always talk about self runners? Because, that's what I'm here for. Lighting a few leds, I can do with a small 10 watt solar panel, already. Guys like itsu have big solar set ups, already. Pulsing leds is almost a joke, for him.
I think that the real issue here is that Rick does not want to show or prove in any way that what he has is OU, or can self run. And so, that's where this is all at. I really can't blame his for that, if true, as it can get you into trouble.
No other guys are showing anything like that anymore, either. So, it's really up to us, guys.
Rick: Itsu's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY
3 minutes in - inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance
Rick: Itsu's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY
3 minutes in - inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance
That was not my setup. I just replicated your setup and itis not cold. I was using the DSE.
Anyhow before we get into my setup can you measure the voltage across the bulb please?
Rick: Itsu's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY)
3 minutes in - inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance
A.king21,So I take it that the voltage was 1.712 volts ac R M S.
Concerning the voltage across the bulb, i showed you already in this post:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536323/#msg536323 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536323/#msg536323)
Itsu
Rick: Itsu's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY
3 minutes in - inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance
itsu, Gyula: Why is there a difference when comparing a multi secondary coils pulsing system like what you've shown, to a radio station. Does the radio station loose it's transmitting power depending on how many people's radios are tuning in to it?
Why would adding more receiving coils, not work the same? But, it doesn't, normally, adding more coils bring down the total working voltage, and output at the load (led). WHY? I ask.
itsu, did placing coils inside of the main coil, help, or not?
What the hell, I'll be nice... once the dust clears...and the truth comes out. Would be good to know, one way or the other.
So I take it that the voltage was 1.712 volts ac R M S.
Strange as the bulb seems brighter.
Nick, this is a very important question you ask. I'm glad you are finally beginning to realize this. Now we have some progress towards the beginning steps here. ;D Once you guys can see, by experience, that you can have many coils with loads placed all around the transmitter, and which only lower the input power, then the cat is out of the bag. At that point you can begin to start on a Don Smith system. Then you can go back and read what I have shared and you will see that I was just trying to help you guys. Once you can understand that the magnetic flux can have multiple passes through many external coils then you will be more ready to see how you can have the flux multiply in L2 with quarter wave length, etc. The multi coil system is but an easy way to see how you can multiply the output without any serious fine tuning. Now if you can't find any benefit in that then you may as well throw in the towel because the real deal with the L1 L2 will be more difficult to learn.
So I take it that the voltage was 1.712 volts ac R M S.
Strange as the bulb seems brighter.
Oh it's not being ignored! It is an observed effect which warrants a more complete investigation and analysis.
I would like to point out something about Rick's coupled coil arrangement that he has not disclosed so perhaps he is not aware of it and that is, with the transmitter and receiver coils placed horizontally on a flat surface with all axis vertical, the mutual coupling M is negative between the coils. Thus the K factor is negative. This can be easily demonstrated on the bench with two coils while maintaining the proper dot relationship.
If however, the receiver coil is now raised off the surface and moved closer to a position so as to be above the transmitter coil, the mutual coupling will move from the negative value through zero, then to a positive value.
Why is this important you ask? Well, in Itsu's video, the two vertically stacked receiver coils have a positive mutual coupling to each other while combined in reference to the transmitter coil, they have a negative mutual coupling.
Now the so called 'relay' coil is inserted in a horizontal plane affecting the resultant power out and power in through observation. So the question is, what is the resultant coupling between the coils in this arrangement and why does it increase the impedance of the series resonant transmitter circuit and increase the output?
Regards,
Pm
Rich: Just so you know. I have never doubted you, or your shown devices.
However, none of this is new for me, nor am I afraid of using higher power inputs, and looping the output back to the input.
I have been doing that for years. I don't remember seeing any recent schematics of your solid state device that are similar to what you would like to see us build.And similar to what a.21 and itsu are trying to replicate, to see for themselves if what you are trying tell us can be replicated.
Maybe you can upload a recent diagram or schematic of your device. As otherwise, we can only guess at what you are doing and how your are doing it. Which can be part of the problem with building your type of replication. I have not followed this thread from the start, just after I saw itsu going at it. So, I don't know all the facts concerning this or your type of build. Therefore, can you provide a schematic, if you have done so already, just repost it, please.
If interested, here is a link to one of my Dr. Stiffler "diode loop" tests. https://youtu.be/BZsvtlA_Rgc (https://youtu.be/BZsvtlA_Rgc)
My YouTube channel is under my name, Nick Zec. There you can see some devices that I've worked on over the years.
And yes, my on going goal is to build a self running solid state device, that is useful, for me. I'm not interested commercializing it in any way. Nor am I any kind of troll, nor someone against free energy, just for the record.
Hi Nick,
The many receiver antennas for a radio station are usually located far from the broadcast TX antenna wavelength wise. One full wavelength for a long wave (LW) station at say 200 kHz is 1500 m, for a medium wave (MW) station at say 1 MHz is 300 meter. So most receivers receive the so called far field of the TX antenna, many wavelength away from it and the electromagnetic coupling between the many RX and a single TX antenna can only be negligibly small. This involves little overall power loss in
the TX antenna. One more thing: the received power in a ferrite antenna inside an AM portable radio for instance is but a few microwatts, the mixer and amplifier stages boost up this tiny level thousands time to drive a some hundred mW loudspeaker, using the battery power in the radio. All in all, the overall reflected load to the TX antenna from the many receivers is small.
However, when the RX antennas are close to the TX antenna, in the so called near field of the latter, within say a wavelength (this is mostly an unlikely situation for broadcast stations) the mutual coupling can greatly increase hence the TX power is influenced more and more. The power output of the radio station may get reduced. Notice though there can be control circuits to increase the output as a compensation to maintain nominal output, at the price of increased input power to the transmitter.
There were people tapping nearby broadcast station by erecting big sized antennas and used the received energy for feeding incandescent lamps back in the 20s and 30s, they were punished for stealing energy if they got caught. One reason broadcast antennas are not readily built very close to densely populated areas (other reason would be the very high near field radiation harmful to humans, animals etc). In the present setup discussed here the receiver coils are very close to the TX coil, within a small fraction of a wavelength. This inherently involves mutual coupling not only between the TX and RX coils but between the RX coils too. So basically adding more and more receiver coils would demand more TX power if the TX (antenna) circuit were a parallel LC circuit. But the TX circuit here is a series LC circuit driven from a function generator or from a gate driver IC. Consider the impedance behaviour of parallel LC and series LC circuits in the function of frequency.
Will continue later. If you have questions so far, please ask.
Gyula
Yes all these things are to be considered as part of the experiments in the book. It is not my object to spoon feed students. That way they can discover other things that maybe no one has figured out yet. Depending on how you position the coils you can place hundreds of them around the primary (preferably at the 1.25MHz frequency) without drawing more from the input and while actually reducing it. And it is true that you can also do that wrong and decrease the loads while doing that. "Wrong" is relative to what you want to do. It took me 5 minutes to position all my coils around for that video. There was no attempt to tune for ideal positions. Would take a few hours to do that. But at the meeting I also showed how you can position the coils all around, which includes above and below the open sides of the primary.
...Hi Nick,
As itsu has shown a slight decrease in input power, while adding more coils onto the main coil, what makes this possible is the question at hand.
...
itsu, Gyula: Why is there a difference when comparing a multi secondary coils pulsing system like what you've shown, to a radio station. Does the radio station loose it's transmitting power depending on how many people's radios are tuning in to it?
Why would adding more receiving coils, not work the same? But, it doesn't, normally, adding more coils bring down the total working voltage, and output at the load (led). WHY? I ask.
itsu, did placing coils inside of the main coil, help, or not?
Itsu's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9dLj5MrAHY
3 minutes in - inserting a relay coil causes output to go UP and input to go DOWN.
WHY ARE WE IGNORING THIS!!!
It's like the forum has Cognitive dissonance
Hi Void,
The first law of 'over unity' testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable
length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort
of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP.
Hi Void,
I would like to add that when the DUT is running from a battery supply, be aware of the current drawn as a percentage of the C20 rate of the battery. If the current drawn is very substantially less, than the C20 rated current for the battery, then the effective battery capacity is very substantially increased (ref Peukerts Law). This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time. It is also possible that the battery terminal voltage will rise for a period of time, especially if the battery is sulfated to an extent, giving the impression that the DUT is running on free energy! It is in this situation, as well as heavily loaded situations on a battery, that vagaries appear and can very easily lead to false conclusions on the efficiency of a given DUT. Using low current LED's and big batteries, exacerbates this 'hanging' condition. Also, allowing high frequency voltages onto the battery supply rails without effective filtering, also results in vagaries leading to false conclusions.
Hi Void,
I would like to add that when the DUT is running from a battery supply, be aware of the current drawn as a percentage of the C20 rate of the battery. If the current drawn is very substantially less, than the C20 rated current for the battery, then the effective battery capacity is very substantially increased (ref Peukerts Law). This can result in what I refer to as 'stalling', where the battery terminal voltage appears to 'hang' steady for a long period of time. It is also possible that the battery terminal voltage will rise for a period of time, especially if the battery is sulfated to an extent, giving the impression that the DUT is running on free energy! It is in this situation, as well as heavily loaded situations on a battery, that vagaries appear and can very easily lead to false conclusions on the efficiency of a given DUT. Using low current LED's and big batteries, exacerbates this 'hanging' condition. Also, allowing high frequency voltages onto the battery supply rails without effective filtering, also results in vagaries leading to false conclusions.
Hi Hoppy. Yes, I agree. Using a relatively high capacity battery with a small load at the output could
give the false impression that the battery is staying close to fully charged. Itsu avoids that
sort of problem by testing using super caps, I believe, which is good, but the super caps I have are fairly leaky so not the best for that kind of testing. Maybe you can get a type of super caps these days that have low leakage losses. Not sure. That would be great for testing if very low leakage super caps are available.
Rick,I hate to be a cynic ;D but unless you have a device that's capable of eather delaying the
How do you measure the source battery capacity before and after a long demonstration to confirm no loss or perhaps a gain in stored energy? As you know battery terminal voltages are not a reliable indicator of battery capacity. Also, Do you demonstrate your procedure for this to your students before and after demos?
Rick,
How do you measure the source battery capacity before and after a long demonstration to confirm no loss or perhaps a gain in stored energy? As you know battery terminal voltages are not a reliable indicator of battery capacity. Also, Do you demonstrate your procedure for this to your students before and after demos?
I hate to be a cynic ;D but unless you have a device that's capable of eather delaying the
humble electron to the finishing post than your grab circuit your never going to achieve much and that's a fact! Because that's what it amounts to.
AG,Rick, Thanks for the reply, that doesn't surprise me would ESR i have come across that befor would you like to explain a little more please ?
We have done that with the Bill Fogal arrangement. This is a charge barrier technology.
But you are not correct in assuming that is the only thing we can do. All we have to do is spin electrons and have a means of collecting the effects. That is easy to do in different ways.
Rick,
With all this talk about the finer points of LABs, your claims of 'easy' OU, and your having knowledge of many ways to accomplish such , I propose a reasonable test for you to perform to verify your claims that would convince critics like myself to accept what you are saying and teaching!
Take 1 (one) LAB of your choice and any circuit of your choosing that you have developed over the years. Power the input of your circuit with this single LAB and take the excess output from the same circuit that you claim produces OU and use it to replace the assumed smaller amount of energy drawn from the LAB. IOW, the LAB is the summing point of energy consumed by your circuit and the energy produced by your circuit. This should be relatively easy to do and would be a great teaching tool at your seminars.
Regards,
Pm
...
In the present setup discussed here the receiver coils are very close to the TX coil, within a small fraction of a wavelength.
This inherently involves mutual coupling not only between the TX and RX coils but between the RX coils too. So basically adding
more and more receiver coils would demand more TX power if the TX (antenna) circuit were a parallel LC circuit. But the TX circuit here is a series LC circuit driven from a function generator or from a gate driver IC.
Consider the impedance behaviour of parallel LC and series LC circuits in the function of frequency.
...
...
As itsu has shown a slight decrease in input power, while adding more coils onto the main coil, what makes this possible is the question at hand. And how many other coils can also tap into that near field, while dropping the input even lower, to actually obtain a higher output, than the input. Of course, that is still to be seen, replicated and shown. Whether one believes it, or not, is up to each person's discretion.
Rick, Thanks for the reply, that doesn't surprise me would ESR i have come across that befor would you like to explain a little more please ?
"But you are not correct in assuming that is the only thing we can do. All we have to do is spin electrons and have a means of collecting the effects. That is easy to do in different ways."
Rick, Thanks for the reply, that doesn't surprise me would ESR i have come across that befor would you like to explain a little more please ?
When the resonant impedance of the TX circuit increases from say its original 1 Ohm example value to a 3 Ohm transformed back impedance, then naturally the gate driver IC can drive less current into the same TX circuit than it could in the previous unloaded coupled circuit case. This is important to understand: more and more coupled coils will increase the series impedance of the series LC TX circuit higher and higher.
This process manifests measurably across the TX coil and capacitor: their resonant voltage amplitude gradually decreases, say from the initial some kV to as low as some hundred volts or lower.
In return for this, the AC current taken out from the output pin of the driver IC will decrease according to the increasing number of the satellite coils and a decreasing AC current involves a decreasing DC current draw by the driver IC from its DC supply. This process inherently involves a decreasing input power draw by the gate driver IC of course, hence the EM field the TX coil creates around itself will also decrease gradually.
Rick: Ok, so I have an air coil tuned to 1.2MHz. It's connected to two 12v batteries providing 24v DC to the driver circuit. This Tesla type of secondary coil then provides an output of about 4000v, at 1.2MHz. What size do the receiver coils need to be? Like I said, a schematic with all the component values, coil sizes and details would be nice.
Gyula: Thanks for the reply. Yes, I am aware of the normal coupling issues with far and near field of a radio transmitter.
But, the idea here is to find the anomaly, and not the normal situation with transmitting radio waves.That was really my question.
Remember what Wesley has mentioned, concerning transmitting electrical signals world wide. To be received and converted to use able electrical power, with little to no losses in signal. Millions of dollars invested in that updated Tesla type of technology.
There must be something to it... as we all know about signal losses over great distances. But, it's what we don't know, that may be important, in this case. Perhaps using a higher input, and placing the receiver coils further away may help. Or not?
As itsu has shown a slight decrease in input power, while adding more coils onto the main coil, what makes this possible is the question at hand. And how many other coils can also tap into that near field, while dropping the input even lower, to actually obtain a higher output, than the input. Of course, that is still to be seen, replicated and shown. Whether one believes it, or not, is up to each person's discretion.
Hi Nick. There is a difference in the way things work and the way they should be analyzed
between the near field around coils and antennas, and the far field. The near field can roughly be
described as the space around a coil or antenna where self sustaining EM radiation hasn't fully formed.
Placing receiving coils within the near field of a 'transmitter' coil will cause loading on the transmitter coil. The further away the receiver coil is away from the transmitter coil, the less power can be drawn from the transmitting coil. Receiving antennas are normally well in the far field range of an RF transmitter, and do not load down the transmitter. The power the transmitter is consuming is lost in the driver circuitry and the EM radiation from the antenna whether there are any receiving antennas or not. At quite low frequencies, a coil will not radiate much EM radiation, so you are mainly concerned with the near field.
Hi a.king21. I have been busy with various other things and still am, so I haven't seen any of Itsu's test videos here, but I will point out a common misconception in circuit arrangements such as you described, which is the assumption that input power consumption should go up and down in direct relation to the amount of output power being delivered to the circuit load.
That is not always the case however. In AC circuits we have the concept of impedance matching. Changing the output configuration by adding or removing coils or changing coil windings or loads, etc., for example, changes the impedance matching between the input circuitry and the output circuitry. This will cause the efficiency of the overall AC circuit to change. If a change is made to a circuit arrangement which increases the overall circuit efficiency of the circuit, you can potentially deliver more overall output power to your load(s) while seeing a drop in input power consumption.
This is due to increasing the circuit's efficiency by improving the input to output impedance matching.
However, such an increase in efficiency tells an experimenter nothing about whether the circuit is anywhere near COP =1, or not. That can only be determined by properly measuring the overall circuit efficiency. Since making such efficiency measurements can sometimes be tricky in AC circuits, the only really half decent reliable test of whether an OU experimenter may be anywhere near COP =1 or better, is to try to self loop the circuit. Such a test setup bypasses any potential mistakes in measurements or mistakes due to incorrect assumptions or the experimenter potentially overlooking other important factors which are throwing off their measurements. There are numerous ways that experimenters can potentially be mislead by just looking at measurements alone (especially at lower power levels), so a self-looping arrangement becomes the only real practical benchmark way to separate the wheat from the chaff. We have all seen where experimenters thought they were onto something really special only to find that it all falls apart when they try to self-loop
their circuit arrangement. :)
The first law of 'over unity' testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP.
The first law of 'over unity' testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP.
Is this system OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCdrAE_IZ74
Rick,Hoppy, does LA have a double meaning when dealing with LA batteries ie Losey Accumulators as 50% in charging is lost so bang goes your theory ! you need a less losey way to store the energy!
Thanks for your reply ref measuring battery capacity. So, it becomes very difficult indeed to determine a system COP when loads are just a small fraction of a batteries rated A/hr (inverse Peukerts Law). Therefore, for example, how to determine how long a given number of constant current fed very low power LED lamps running as a load on a system powered from a say a 12A/hr, 20A/hr or 40A/hr LA source battery should stay illuminated in order to declare the DUT is running OU.
G: I would prefer it if you would direct your technical questions to Rick. I do not have a permanent lab at my disposal and Rick is far better placed to answer your questions. My valuable time is spent verifying what I need to move on with other experiments. If you choose to disbelieve me that is absolutely fine and i will concede that you know better.
Itsu: I can't remember the cold electricity circuit and it is not important to me if anyone verifies it or believes it.
Void,Sounds like a conspiracy to fraudulent use of grid access and use wifi if you don't mind the risk of brain cancer.
And that is the question. What is really happening in the near field. We don't even have a quarter wave length of distance. And yet quarter wavelength relationships really matter in the near field. We have both capacitive and magnetic relationships here. Not just with coils but many other objects, including our bodies. A lot of radiation is measured around the transmitter, and placing 500 loaded coils around it still produces radiation beyond them. Even placing a proper secondary inside of the primary, or around it (where all the radiation passes through it, will still allow this radiation to go beyond it to other coils and beyond them. This is a matter of fact of basic observation. This is all rather involved and it is perplexing to people who want a tidy simplistic model that conforms to the presumptuous law of conservation. This is why I made the kit as I did with the sensitive LED to learn these relationships in the near field. People really don't have any experience with these things because they are either doing radio in the far field and never even think about getting anything but weak signals they are amplifying, or if they work in the near field it is with one receiver coil that has an encrypted connection (which doesn't allow for the gains we are dealing with). And actually, what I am saying here is the very near future technology that will be in all your homes with the new rectenna tech that will be together with the internet monitoring of everything (ie, internet of things). WIFI powering and interacting with everything in a Smart (actually the dumbest thing ever) existence. Your clocks and gadgets and probably everything over $1 will have it's own IP and be powered this way. Things will be far more 'efficient' in this way at a sacrifice of your privacy and the every present risk of being hacked or just things not working. Total information awareness and total dependence upon his technology for everything. This is the new currency and the next new world order...
Hi AlienGrey,https://overunity.com/17186/the-bifilar-pancake-coil-at-its-resonant-frequency/msg534659/#new
Yes I think he would be the same A.King like you guess.
I need to ask what you mean here on BEMF: is it the voltage spike created across a coil when its current is interrupted? If yes, then it is okay it can be captured and it can be reused again, though I have not seen from anyone that the this_way_captured energy provided COP > 1 performance when added to the input energy.
But after you mentioned BEMF you continued with: "and resonance and above all the protocol" and I wonder how you mean resonance here when you grab the quantity of energy created by switching to get the BEMF ? If this is how you meant, that is.
I would appreciate if someone would point to the video time where Don Smith shows the (almost instantaneous) rapid capacitor charge: I would like to understand how to benefit from it.
Gyula
Is this system OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCdrAE_IZ74 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCdrAE_IZ74)
You have to define what the system is and justify every part of it in relation to your goal. You are making several assumptions here. Obviously your load is very limited. There is not enough detail to understand what you are doing there. You can't determine what the lighting is from the video. But if you are powering only 3 LEDs at 300ma then obviously that is not impressive. Maybe you were just trying to disprove the QEG? Would that even be that hard to do?I just asked one question.
I guess I'm wondering your point in bringing up this old video from 3 years back. Are you trying to prove something with this video and all your numbers? I fail to see some of the points being made. One of the things that cannot be determined from such a video is if you are making your setup properly for your goal. And are you suggesting that your load was all that could be run from that? That is implied in the video.
I just asked one question.
But I'm sure the readers here will note that almost everything you say about my demonstration also applies to yours.
Is this system OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c)
I forgot to respond to this second point in this post. There is no truth in this statement at all. There is no law of over unity testing like this. Just because a few of you guys want and demand a self-looping does not mean you can't draw any COP conclusions. Says who? And why? You guys have not justified this assumption. You can very easily understand and measure the efficiency of your primary loop circuit and also measure your reactive loops where the gains take place. These do not have to feed back into each other to understand the total COP. That is non-sense. You guys are just wanting someone to give you a self-looping circuit and work for you for free. So you ignore any claims that would be different than this.
It just so happens that I may want to power a fan at the same power input and CFMs while charging a battery or running a light. And maybe I only have time to do the basic change by merely moving one diode in the circuit. Now if this only gives me 70% more energy than previously, while still running the motor exactly the same, then why couldn't I measure that COP? Why would I have to self-loop this for it to be significant? Why is not 10% over unity acceptable? Or 20%? Or 50%? Self-looping is not always practical or what is wanted. And it is better to not do it by pushing current either. It allows for more output when you keep the input at zero in other ways. Now the fan circuit could be replaced with a fast switching mosfet circuit like I have in my motors and give better results than merely moving one diode.
So let it be settled that this often repeated assumption is false. It is not a first law of OU research to demand a self-loop system to determine COP. Another OU.com myth busted!
Nick,
I'm not following you. You have this or are asking what size coils do you need to have to do this? Not sure if you mean the same thing here with the words secondary coil and receiver coils.
A full circuit with proper loading is found in the rectenna technology. These will have proper impedance matching and frequency conversion to run DC loads. That is mainstream science already. All of the setups so far, like Itsu's or mine have not used proper or efficient filtering. We are only using a fraction of the actual energy that could be used because the capacitors, diodes, and/or loads are not meant for RF. So everything after the receiver coil (and in a way the coil itself) is already given in the rectenna tech. So that is what you would do. Just consider the many patents on the subject. The thing to examine is the gains in a resonance tank circuit, and it's effects on the local environment that can benefit from such gains and radiation. You are wanting a loop system, and that is fine. I'm just pointing to the easiest way for you to do that.
Rick: Thanks for the reply. Yes, I have that, which I mentioned. It just so happens that the secondary of Tesla coil is tuned to the 1.2MHz frequency. It's frequency can be controlled to a certain point, by adding or removing coils on the secondary, (or by connecting to different taps along the secondary). Or by inserting ferrite into the Tesla secondary coil. It's output is dependent on the input power, but normally it's around 4 to 6000v. My question was about the specs on the receiving coils, and what is needed there.
Dr. Stiffler was doing many different tests along the same or similar lines. And itsu, Gyula, and of our other guys here were also involved in, long with myself. To see if the Doc's dying secret, the "diode loop", would provide for higher efficiency in lighting 120v AC 12w led bulbs. I followed and replicated some his efforts until his death. The diode loop was a very interested project. And somewhat similar with what's going on here. One important point though, the Doc found that at 13.6MHz there is a signal from the planet, (or atmosphere) that can be tapped into, so that was where he tuned his circuits to. However, that particular non man made signal may be something specific to his location, and may vary from place to place, or not, that part was not verified.
Anyway, I still don't know just exactly what circuit is used on this project. And still need a more specific schematic, if there is one.
I do have a 2MHz SG, Scope, multimeters, 12v batteries etz... So I'm ready to play ball...
https://overunity.com/17186/the-bifilar-pancake-coil-at-its-resonant-frequency/msg534659/#new (https://overunity.com/17186/the-bifilar-pancake-coil-at-its-resonant-frequency/msg534659/#new)Hi AlienGrey,
Pease note the circuit was designed by Nelson Rocha. and works very well.
P,
I appreciate your suggestion. I'll make a few points as a response:
1. While it is true that LABs are really more complicated that people realize, it is also true that people can experience free energy with them without really knowing all the details mentioned. You guys are only after one kind of system that is self-running. That is fine, but you need to appreciate first something less than that, that is very easy. A claim that is easier to verify is a fan charging another battery while it is running. All the energy is used up in the Kirchhoff loop and the excess is free energy. I know that is old news, but skeptics don't want to admit that.
2. Yes I know many ways to do OU but I will not get into most of them because such are either not practical for one or more reasons or they will get people into trouble. What you are suggesting is a non-battery system, and that crosses a line. I suppose if you added enough parts to make it big, complicated, and expensive then that may be fine. But small simple systems like that are not allowed for the general public. This would be me taking one of the AC motors I just showed in this video: https://youtu.be/2amFnvh9zqg and making them run themselves (which is easy enough to do when you understand how this energy works). There are thousands of these running all around the world. But no one will ever sell them to the general public. All I'll say is that if you rewire it inside and add three of the right capacitors then you can do that. I've been in many trades over the years and grew up hearing stories about people doing that. These are rumors all over the US and Canada and elsewhere. But they are real. I don't expect anyone to believe that.
3. The thing that everyone has to realize is that the input battery is part of the system. Some of the energy goes back to the input battery. That is why using a power supply does not give the same results. I can't really get into that in a few words here, but there are several important reasons why a battery is necessary in the energizer setups. Now I'm explaining how to have such a battery just stay charged. You can either do the two or three battery bank setups where the batteries can be rotated or just remain charged. I decided a few years back to show both of these. I got in enough trouble for doing that. That is good enough for anyone to provide all of their electrical needs. But to remove the batteries is an entirely different system.
4. What I show at my meetings is more important than that because it shows you how to multiply the output as many times as you want.
Hi AlienGrey,Well yes, but you would have to stick very rigidly to it's construction guide lines the two video's are on you tube,
Thanks for the answer, will try to digest evostars's video(s) on the schematic later. Back then he dealt with it I did not
follow his activity. I know that the circuit originates from Nelson.
I would have questions on that circuit: your notice of "it works very well" means exactly what?
And is the output power taken from L3C4 parallel circuit?
Gyula
Rick,
Thanks for your reply ref measuring battery capacity. So, it becomes very difficult indeed to determine a system COP when loads are just a small fraction of a batteries rated A/hr (inverse Peukerts Law). Therefore, for example, how to determine how long a given number of constant current fed very low power LED lamps running as a load on a system powered from a say a 12A/hr, 20A/hr or 40A/hr LA source battery should stay illuminated in order to declare the DUT is running OU.
Hoppy, does LA have a double meaning when dealing with LA batteries ie Losey Accumulators as 50% in charging is lost so bang goes your theory ! you need a less losey way to store the energy!
I just asked one question.
But I'm sure the readers here will note that almost everything you say about my demonstration also applies to yours.
Is this system OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c
Thanks again Rick for your detailed reply. However, it has not really explained how, that if I was a student of yours, how you could satisfy me that a given system of yours was running OU, given battery vagaries we have discussed. As an example, take a multiple coil and LED system like demonstrated in the video you posted and assume that I just want to experience an OU demo from you as my tutor. Also, assume that I'm not a complete rookie and that I have a good conventional grounding in electrical principles and measurement. Take me through the stages you would take to demonstrate an OU system to me at the bench so to speak, not by video.
Like I said, it depends on what you want to do. You guys are still trying to experience OU whereas many people already have that experience and just want to improve upon their options. So it is more about what you specifically want to do with particular loads than merely trying to prove OU these days. Some people just want free air flow so they will do a fan. Others want a motor for an electric vehicle. Others want generators for electricity.
AG,I have no experience in battery shuffling. I have in my case some solar panels charged with an FET controlled charger and i only have the one battery and it doesn't like it and at over 140 Euros each time I think I will be buying Ni or a high farad capacitor battery bank next time round.
That is very true. So when you can rotate batteries around then what does that mean about how much energy has to be produced?
Any readings can be wrong
A.king21,Your comment to me on another forum is insulting. I don't need to prove cold electricity to you or anyone else. This is for each person to determine for themselves. It was a DSE circuit.
You are joking again, right? Cold electricity is like the holy grail in free energy and you can't
remember the circuit but you asked me to "check it out"?:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536322/#msg536322 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536322/#msg536322)
Itsu
It was a DSE circuit.
Hi Rick. If you only knew just how nonsensical your statements are here...
I actually already clearly explained why setting up a proper self-looping circuit arrangement is pretty much an essential requirement before anyone can be in any position to reasonably suggest that they are getting a COP > 1 with their circuit setup.
Undeniable Fact: Most people who experiment and search for OU are not anywhere near experts on power measurements on complex AC circuits or even on basic AC circuits for that matter, and people in these forums often make all kinds of mistakes in their measurements and in their assumptions, and also often overlook one or more important factors which may otherwise be throwing off their measurements. Self-looping the output power of a device to loop back to assist or fully provide the input power to the claimed COP > 1 device is therefore a very important step to rule out measurement errors, etc. Such a self-looped arrangement doesn't completely rule out external factors affecting the results, but if the self-looping testing is set up properly and reasonably it can go a long way towards eliminating being mislead by measurement errors and incorrect assumptions. One of course does not use self-looping to measure the COP, just to determine if the COP might really be greater than 1.
Rick, from seeing a number of your videos in the past, it doesn't surprise me at all that you are completely missing the great importance of a self-looped test setup in this area of experimentation, and that you responded back with a bunch of nonsense. BTW, I was just kidding about the part about this being 'a law', but really this testing requirement should be an absolute given in this area of experimentation after all the many years of people posting nonsense in these forums and on YouTube. There is just no question about the great importance of trying to implement circuit self-looping in regards to any circuit setup which an experimenter thinks might be exhibiting a COP > 1. If a person can't understand why this is so important, and it really should be obvious why it is very critical, then IMO they should take up a new hobby. They are most likely only going to end up misleading them self and possibly others as well who are also naïve and gullible, unless their intention is to mislead others and try to separate other people from their money. There are number of people like that out there as well.
In probably most cases, examination of a claimed COP > 1 circuit arrangement which may drag on for months and months here due to experimenters making incorrect measurements and/or making incorrect assumptions or missing other important factors influencing their results, could quickly be analyzed as to its real performance by simply taking a little bit of time to determine a reasonable and proper way to self-loop the circuit setup and then observe how it really performs. :)
Rick: Thanks for the reply. Yes, I have that, which I mentioned. It just so happens that the secondary of Tesla coil is tuned to the 1.2MHz frequency. It's frequency can be controlled to a certain point, by adding or removing coils on the secondary, (or by connecting to different taps along the secondary). Or by inserting ferrite into the Tesla secondary coil. It's output is dependent on the input power, but normally it's around 4 to 6000v. My question was about the specs on the receiving coils, and what is needed there.
Dr. Stiffler was doing many different tests along the same or similar lines. And itsu, Gyula, and of our other guys here were also involved in, long with myself. To see if the Doc's dying secret, the "diode loop", would provide for higher efficiency in lighting 120v AC 12w led bulbs. I followed and replicated some his efforts until his death. The diode loop was a very interested project. And somewhat similar with what's going on here. One important point though, the Doc found that at 13.6MHz there is a signal from the planet, (or atmosphere) that can be tapped into, so that was where he tuned his circuits to. However, that particular non man made signal may be something specific to his location, and may vary from place to place, or not, that part was not verified.
Anyway, I still don't know just exactly what circuit is used on this project. And still need a more specific schematic, if there is one.
I do have a 2MHz SG, Scope, multimeters, 12v batteries etz... So I'm ready to play ball...
RF,
Respectively, you are correct. The test I proposed does cross a line and a very important one at that! It is the line of TRUE OU. On one side we have everything that is conservative that is, COP<1 and on the other side is the undeniable proof of COP>1.
When you incorporate multiple batteries in your work, this opens up the possibility of many incorrect assumptions and calculations to appear and thus raises question of the validity of any OU claims made.
If you truly are producing OU, then your device should be able to bootstrap charge a battery or capacitor totally by itself. If not, then it is not OU. It really is that simple because then nothing then depends on analysis, only the results.
Regards,
Pm
Thanks again Rick for your detailed reply. However, it has not really explained how, that if I was a student of yours, how you could satisfy me that a given system of yours was running OU, given battery vagaries we have discussed. As an example, take a multiple coil and LED system like demonstrated in the video you posted and assume that I just want to experience an OU demo from you as my tutor. Also, assume that I'm not a complete rookie and that I have a good conventional grounding in electrical principles and measurement. Take me through the stages you would take to demonstrate an OU system to me at the bench so to speak, not by video.
Lead acid batteries in good condition are generally taken to have a charge and discharge efficiency of roughly around 85%, but could be as low as 50% efficiency or possibly even lower depending on the exact Lead Acid battery type and the battery condition. However, if a claimed OU circuit setup has a COP of say >= 2, then you should be able to self-loop and completely do away with any battery at the input. You may be able to do that with an even lower COP. If the battery is claimed to be an essential part of the OU setup, then you should still be able to self-loop as long as you leave the circuit running in self-looped mode for a reasonable length of time in comparison to the battery capacity.
Overall very straightforward. Some people avoid such straightforward test setups for obvious reasons however. They prefer hand waving and rationalizations and excuses and incomplete and/or improper or at least questionable measurements and assumptions to try to help further their cause. ;)
Second law of OU circuit testing:
If a person refuses to put in an effort to self-loop a circuit setup under test in a reasonable way, which they are claiming is OU, which should be quite straightforward and easy to do in most cases, then chances are very high they are just blowing smoke.
Is that too honest? :)
For anyone who cares at all about reality, here is a recap of the essentials in OU circuit testing.
These laws were derived from many years of practical experience and have been proven many times over to be true and immutable laws.
First law of 'over unity' circuit testing:
If you haven't tested your circuit arrangement using a self-looping arrangement and left it to run for a reasonable length of time (depends on power source being used and total power consumption), then you are not in any sort of reasonable position to attempt to draw any definite conclusions about the circuit COP (i.e., the supposition of COP > 1).
Second law of 'over unity' circuit testing:
If a person refuses to put in an effort to self-loop a circuit setup under test in a reasonable way, which they are claiming is OU,
which should be quite straightforward and easy to do in most cases, then chances are very high they are just blowing smoke.
Third Law of 'over unity' circuit testing:
Ignore the above two laws at your own peril. All else is folly.
I for one would love to see a reasonable demonstration of 'cold electricity' or 'negative electricity'.
I can't say I have ever seen a demonstration of such concepts which looks reasonable to me, but I have an open mind. Nothing would be more cool (no pun intended) than to be able to power a load without depleting the power source and while the circuitry and load remains cold or gets colder or forms frost as the circuit operates, and I am not talking about a refrigeration type circuit. ;-)
Rick, Rick, Rick... What are we going to do with you amigo? ;)
You refuse to listen to reason. :)
Let me try saying it in a different way, but I know I am probably wasting my time:
If a person really has something unusual, they should be able to demonstrate it in a reasonable
and clear and concise way.
Some people are under the mistaken notion that if someone is a PH. D. in Physics,
they must automatically have a good practical knowledge in electronics or mechanics.
That is not necessarily the case at all however.
Dr. Stiffler made a very obvious mistake in his approach. He ignored the first and second laws
of 'over unity' testing as outlined above, and in my opinion he lead himself and others down the garden path. He could have easily avoided doing that and saved himself and various other experimenters a lot of wasted time and effort if he had simply heeded the first and second laws of 'over unity' circuit testing. A self-looped arrangement would have quickly shown that his circuit arrangements were not capable of self-sustaining, and therefore probably not showing a COP >1.
I just asked one question.Hi Tinsel good to see you here . Makes a change from reading your posts (correctly) dissing the Earth engine fiasco on Disqus.
But I'm sure the readers here will note that almost everything you say about my demonstration also applies to yours.
Is this system OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c)
Hi Rick,
I have a question about series impedance in pulsemotor setups and would be very happy, if you can give me a tip what I can do. My situation is, that I was able to replicate the zero voltage process, that my Voltage on the source battery stands still a long time, and my motor runs the hole time and Lights were on. No doubt, I know it works. It was simply trail end error with different impedance, and after a lot of hours I had it. After that I was switching complete to the resonance kit and never tried the zero voltage process on pulsemotor setups again.
In the last two days it was my goal, to do it again with different small fans and bedini style motors from old days and also transformers and coils from scrap, but I struggled more then I was exepted. I had some outputs and LEDs for free, but didn't find the perfect matching anymore. Had tried to use one of the free outputs (secondary transfomer side) to loop back via rectifier to the source battery, but in my understanding it is not the right way.
My Question is: is there some tricks, that helps to find a good impedance matching. In resonance kit it is no problem for my, to get many outputs for free. You showed the tuning via variac, so I had tried small variable transformers from model railways. It helps but was not the best for my small Fans.
Some things I have also tried:
- Tryed to reach Zero Voltage over the loads (AC and DC). I know this is only a indication that should help, not exact measurement.
- Added the biggest Transformers with large Wire diameter first, then the other Transformers that had -for example- higher Coil resistance.
- Added one transformer and matched it best I can, then I moved to the next one and also tryed to tune it.
- Used big 110AH Battery on the end.
- Used small 7Ah as Source.
- I used good low resistance labratory cables to connect everything.
- Tryed to add capacitors on every impedance that matches the frequency of the negative pulse (I used online calculator).
- If neon bulb (protection over transistor, I don't know the exact word for that) lits to much, I removed the last added impedance or tried to tune it better with capacitor in parallel.
Is there something more, that I can do to find a better matching? Can I tune the impedances via oscilloscope? Do you have shown something like that in one of your videos? If so, I can't remember, where I can find it.
Thanks a lot for all your posts, Videos and comments Rick !!!! .
If you were following what I have been saying over the last 3 weeks you would see that I agree with that. I do not try and prove anything with a video. But this means that you cannot disprove anything with a video as well.No, that's not the "big difference" at all. The "Big Difference" is that I provided good, repeatable measurements and I showed all my work to derive the result. I've shown the power in the reactive loop of my apparatus is many times over the input power. Later videos in that particular series demonstrate the Transverter, an apparatus to convert the reactive power VARs into real power in Watts, to drive motors, incandescent bulbs and high voltage spark gaps, while simultaneously powering LEDs. And I present my work in fully replicable manner. I do not expect anyone to accept "proof over the internet" -- just assemble the circuits, follow the protocols and see what happens.
The big difference with your setup and mine is that you were using 300ma to power three tiny leds and I was using 60 and 80ma powering 90 LEDs and also that I could have easily 500. I also had witnesses who are actually reading this forum right now. But again, you can't prove anything over the internet, which is what I titled the video showing this.
Hi Tinsel good to see you here . Makes a change from reading your posts (correctly) dissing the Earth engine fiasco on Disqus.No, actually I have no idea what circuit you are talking about. Messed up my cctv? Sorry, I can't recall. Can you give me more details?Just about any High Voltage E-field emitter will do that though, with these crappy unshielded USB extension cables. I can whip up something for you in a few minutes if you really need a CCTV/WIFI disruptor. I have lots of devices I don't dare operate inside the house, the EEEE being one of them. Yes, it is still in the wings waiting for the right time to debut.
https://disqus.com/by/disqus_ztbFmjSU6Q/ (https://disqus.com/by/disqus_ztbFmjSU6Q/)
So I have a question for you....
Remember that "special" circuit I sent you - a number of years ago.
You know... the one which downed your cctv system and which downed my internet.
Why haven't you done a video on THAT.
I know why...and so do you.
No, actually I have no idea what circuit you are talking about. Messed up my cctv? Sorry, I can't recall. Can you give me more details?Just about any High Voltage E-field emitter will do that though, with these crappy unshielded USB extension cables. I can whip up something for you in a few minutes if you really need a CCTV/WIFI disruptor. I have lots of devices I don't dare operate inside the house, the EEEE being one of them. Yes, it is still in the wings waiting for the right time to debut.It was the circuit from the Ukrainian Government's Agricultural institute based in Kiev. It was a replication of only a part of a Don Smith circuit. It kept blowing bulbs and they concluded that this required further study. It was performed by a PHD student for his exams and supervised by the appropriate professor.
TK:Thanks for the flowers, but I'm trying to retire. Sometimes I just cannot restrain myself though.
Good to see you here. And you're showing a good refresher course of input to output calculations. Something that most of us can learn something from. Your rig appears to show OU, but if so, can it be made to self run? As that is the final show down.
Any readings can be wrong, so the loop back is always the part that fills the missing link.
Thanks for showing your previous videos. Perhaps you'd like to join in on this project? NickZ
If you were following what I have been saying over the last 3 weeks you would see that I agree with that. I do not try and prove anything with a video. But this means that you cannot disprove anything with a video as well.Ah... but your system depends on the Function Generator to operate, and someone needs to retune the FG fairly frequently as load characteristics change, right? My system is self contained and _all_ the input power is accounted for. People forget that _all_ necessary components of a system must be included in the power calculations. If the FG is necessary for your system to operate, you need to include the INPUT power to the FG as part of the system's total input power. This is true regardless of whether or not significant power can be transferred through the gate driver's internal capacitances (and you might be surprised how much can be). By all rights you should also include your breakfast in the input power, since you are retuning the thing constantly and it won't perform without your retuning.
The big difference with your setup and mine is that you were using 300ma to power three tiny leds and I was using 60 and 80ma powering 90 LEDs and also that I could have easily 500. I also had witnesses who are actually reading this forum right now. But again, you can't prove anything over the internet, which is what I titled the video showing this.
No, that's not the "big difference" at all. The "Big Difference" is that I provided good, repeatable measurements and I showed all my work to derive the result. I've shown the power in the reactive loop of my apparatus is many times over the input power. Later videos in that particular series demonstrate the Transverter, an apparatus to convert the reactive power VARs into real power in Watts, to drive motors, incandescent bulbs and high voltage spark gaps, while simultaneously powering LEDs. And I present my work in fully replicable manner. I do not expect anyone to accept "proof over the internet" -- just assemble the circuits, follow the protocols and see what happens.
OK, so maybe that's not what you mean by OU, and maybe you don't like reactive power, even though that is what your system is based on. And Itsu is perfectly correct about the phase shift, as I also explained in later vids in that series.
But you didn't even say a word about the other two videos I asked about. The Partzman Bifilar Transformer produces clear and unambiguous OU measurements, even taking into account the phase difference between current and voltage through the load, and shows input power decreasing as a further load is added by inductive pickup. Is it OU?
And the TinMan Bifilar LED circuit shines its 4 LEDs brilliantly with ZERO CURRENT indicated on meters monitoring both legs of the input power. Zero milliamps, even zero microamps. Is it OU?
I'm just trying to figure out what kind of OU you are selling, Rick, since it can't be self-looped, it can't be daisy chained, it can't be accumulated in a battery or a capacitor, and the properly measured outputs never actually exceed the inputs. All three of the demonstrations I've provided illustrate different aspects of inductive wireless power transmission, resonance phenomena and measurement protocols and pitfalls. And all three provide OU measurements, exhibit behaviours similar to your device and make various points that relate directly to your system.
I know you've been doing this a long time. In fact the first time I remember you is from the Mylow days. Where is that video clip of Bedini standing in the background, and someone who looks a lot like you in the foreground, spinning a "Mylow Magnet Motor" and shouting out "IT WORKS! IT WORKS !!!" Oh well... we all make mistakes.
Ah... but your system depends on the Function Generator to operate, and someone needs to retune the FG fairly frequently as load characteristics change, right? My system is self contained and _all_ the input power is accounted for. People forget that _all_ necessary components of a system must be included in the power calculations. If the FG is necessary for your system to operate, you need to include the INPUT power to the FG as part of the system's total input power. This is true regardless of whether or not significant power can be transferred through the gate driver's internal capacitances (and you might be surprised how much can be). By all rights you should also include your breakfast in the input power, since you are retuning the thing constantly and it won't perform without your retuning.
(And of course we all know and appreciate that current is not power, right?)
And please don't tell me you believe that _only_ three tiny LEDs would light up in my system. In further vids I show it powering incandescent bulbs and motors with real, not reactive, power -- while the three tiny LEDs and their receiver are just sitting on the table, brilliantly lit. No FG involved, no manual tuning of the transmitter required.
So I ask again: Is it OU? Seriously, it seems to me that if you can claim that your system is OU, then you should be able to acknowledge that mine is too. Conversely, whatever reasons my system _isn't_ OU... apply to yours as well, don't they?
(500 LEDs on minuscule power? No big deal at all, just ask Pirate Bill ! )
I have mostly got ridicule on this thread so I didn't now what you were doing with the link.Really ??? I don't think so. You have been treated fairly well, given the many long posts you have delivered and the disrespect aimed at one or two posters on this thread! Strong disagreement should not be confused with ridicule. Our beliefs and experiences are varied and that should be respected. You have put yours on record, which is all that can be achieved in a forum environment.
Really ??? I don't think so. You have been treated fairly well, given the many long posts you have delivered and the disrespect aimed at one or two posters on this thread! Strong disagreement should not be confused with ridicule. Our beliefs and experiences are varied and that should be respected. You have put yours on record, which is all that can be achieved in a forum environment.
Rick
I also have an impedance relative question.
You have kindly shared the rule on how to arrange impedances in a series reactor chain matching, or else the bottleneck effect appears. Does that rule also involves the primary? Don't we have to consider primary as the first reactor of the chain?
Thanks
Jeg
I show scepticism with any extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice with measurements correctly, and
this latter is not the case yet with your setup. I never wrote that obtaining excess energy is not possible at all.
I do have an open mind and I believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy
compared to its input we feed in.
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output. Did you use your light meter for checking
LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people? Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC input
power to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?
Quote
from https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535253/#msg535253)
These bigger coils naturally have higher Q which translates to higher actual gain.
And yes, resonance IS A GAIN. Don't let people fool you about that.
But you need to clarify what you mean on gain: voltage, current, power, energy gain?
I would agree with voltage or current gain in resonant LC circuits.
If you claim power (or energy) gain too, then you would need to demonstrate it by measurements.
Anyway, if resonance is a gain in the sense that a series tank circuit is actually a "multiplication" or "amplification of voltage" WHILE AMPERAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, or parallel tank circuits are a "multiplication" or "amplification of amperage" WHILE VOLTAGE REMAINS THE SAME AS INPUT AMPERAGE, then the gain is seen as the voltage or amperage divided by the input amount. So if I have 9V at 25ma input and 250V at 25ma circulating with the regular frequency generator I then have 27 times gain. And if I add the gate driver and have 1300V with the same 25ma then I have 144 times gain. This follows the idea of the gain in Q or quality factor for the both parts (cap and inductor) combined (if one of them has a low Q it brings down the combined as I deliberately did with the cap to keep things safe). So as some textbooks would imply without prejudice, the Q at a given frequency will determine your gain IF YOU LET IT DO THAT FOR YOU AND DON"T KILL IT WITH MAINSTREAM CIRCUITRY THAT DESTROYS THE PROCESS. So it can be seen here that what you go into this will be what you get out. If you expect this to be merely a transformer process then the word resonance and words like gain, are deceptions and meaningless.
Now this is a gain of not only efficiency but of useable energy. Why? Because of something the college textbooks will not want to admit. That the circulating current in series tank circuit is equal or more to the input current while the voltage is amplified. Most admit that it is a voltage amplification or multiplication but they avoid stating the other part about the amperage because they want to give the wikipedea idea that this is merely a transformer process where voltage goes up and amperage goes down. Essentially equating resonance with transformer processes. The mistaken notion is further stated as merely a building idea where the oscillations merely accumulate the energy over time. On the contrary, the circulating amperage is at least the same as the input amperage, while the circulating voltage is multiplied. Now the radiation from the inductor is real and can be used as such (as we can see with hundreds of coils all around). The electrical can also be used as we see with the one wire output and several other methods.
The problem is you do not consider the phase angle between the 1300V coil voltage and the coil current: In a
resonant LC circuit they never happen simultaneously but nearly with 90 degree phase difference, coil current lags
coil voltage. So the real or average power is nowhere near what you imply in your text. There is no any instant
when the current has a high peak amplitude whenever the 1300V peak to peak voltage is also present across the coil.
You have a voltage gain and voltage is not power or energy in itself.
And when you consider the phase angle, then power should be estimated by P=V x I x cos(phi) where V and I the RMS
values and phi is the phase angle.
And when the loaded Q remains relatively high then the phase angle may remain close to 90 degree so its cos(phi)
value will reduce the power value significantly. (i.e. suppose phi=88° then cos88°=0.0348 will be the multiplier in the power formula).
Of course you will not care about this fact. But the phase angle in AC power estimation is one of the key factors.
This is why careful power measurements should be done. Obviously the measurements at 1.15 MHz can be very difficult, this is why I mentioned DC current and voltage measurements for the LED bulbs after a full wave rectifier. Power loss in the diode bridges can be easily estimated.
So again we are all wanting know G, is there any real gain with resonance? We can deal with the phasing later.
Can there be any gain resulting from this oscillation? It is evident that you do not want to commit to this as YOU ARE EVADING THE QUESTION. Maybe you don't want others to know you really do believe that. In fact you implied that in a circuit you expected to find some gain or something one day. But you never answered me if that was a hope or if you had any concrete reason for that sentence. So here I make that question more specific. And let me tell you people, if he every does commit to that answer, unless he just says I don't know, he will be either done with this Forum or will have to accept so many things. Now I have explained that you can use the cap as a fuel cell at the same time that it is functioning as a series tank circuit. Stan M did this many years ago, and this is rather easy to do once you condition the plates to become a capacitor. So you can easily get at least 3 times the gas production of electrolysis for the same input. Now you can also draw electrical energy off of that with the Don Smith effect idea (or what people call the Tesla Hairpin circuit). Now people don't show this, but I say to you you can also have the coils be used as a transmitter to do the very things we are doing in this setup. And as we have the frequent saying around here, if you are going to impulse a coil you may as well... push a magnet, and you may as well... (about 7 things we are up to now). Oh but now my friends. G tells you the phase angle doesn't allow you to do anything with gains created within the tank circuit but maybe act as the various filters. Nope, don't make that cap a Stan M. high voltage resonance fuel cell!
Rick,
You have 'demanded' answers from me on certain questions while you avoid some of my questions to answer, so fifty-fifty...
And I note that I prepared most of this answer this morning, so your last but one post of #1192 above did not exist. 8)
Gyula
Anyway, this is what I wrote back then in my reply to you: https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535318/#msg535318 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg535318/#msg535318)
I show scepticism with any extraordinary claim which is not proved in practice with measurements correctly, and this latter is not the case yet with your setup. I never wrote that obtaining excess energy is not possible at all. I do have an open mind and I believe that a circuit setup can surely be built which can produce extra energy compared to its input we feed in.
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output. Did you use your light meter for checking LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people? Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC input power to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?"
So why I believe that extra enegy is possible to obtain from a device / circuit is that not everything has been discovered in science and there can be unknown anomalies to be discovered and utilized. And what I put in bold above is what you neglected to answer. It is ok that 18 people were present but if they watched the brigthness of the LEDs by their naked eye it is not science Rick.
Rick,
Well I'm glad that is finally settled. It is really important to know where someone is coming from. What if we found out that everyone on this forum was merely hopeful of OU but assumed mainstream theory was universal? Maybe that would explain why it just goes around in circles.
So far your setup in question does not seem to produce any extra output. Did you use your light meter for checking LED bulbs brightness in front of the 18 people? Did you calibrate your LED bulbs in advance with measured DC inputpower to know what power level is involved at the certain brigthnesses of the LEDs?
And what I put in bold above is what you neglected to answer. It is ok that 18 people were present but if they watched the brigthness of the LEDs by their naked eye it is not science Rick.
Loop back to self-power is good, but don't forget the Daisy Chain. Can the output of the OU system power another identical unit, which in turn could power a third identical unit, with even a tiny bit extra to run an external load at each stage? This should be even easier than self-looping for an OU device with electrical inputs and outputs.
I have politely asked repeatedly for a current diagram or schematic that clearly shows all the component values, wire sizes, coil sizes, capacitors, led values, and any other important information. I'm still waiting... I was referred to the Rectenna tech. Why? Is there no clear diagram?
Although it seams that Rick's set up is rather simple, and should be easy to replicate. But, there are many questions unanswered. There are no pictures of what the device should actually look like, no videos showing scope shots readings, or voltage points, (that we can see). No step by step building advice. Like do this, then do this, then do that, etz... No wonder no one can obtain the same results. That information can be placed on a single post on this thread. Why is it not being made available???
And, why does Rick not measure the output??? Or follow any of the simple tests that forum members have asked for?
Why Rick? How many coils does it take to be able to see and measure OU. One, three, ten?
Does the input drop to 0? Where is that shown? Build it... and they will come... or something like that.
Well, I wouldn't want to get hurt building such a dangerous device the "wrong way".
So I guess that, I'd better wait and see...
Yes, I was just mentioning that. It is easier than self-looping as the batteries are electrically connected so looping needs additional processes.Why not endlessly, if it is truly OU?
And you can also do this with what I call my third stage process in the Loving Paths teaching. Ideally you can make the motor a prime mover and run loads like motors off of each negative impedance in a series chain. But then you can go out from there again and again just like a) in figure 5 in True Wireless as I mentioned. I did show that at a Goshen Indiana meeting 3 or so years ago. Not endlessly but with several motors, after properly inverting them...
Your other question to me has been: "is there any real gain with resonance?" and you said twice that I avoided answering it.
….
But you need to clarify what you mean on gain: voltage, current, power, energy gain?
I would agree with voltage or current gain in resonant LC circuits.
If you claim power (or energy) gain too, then you would need to demonstrate it by measurements.
You have a voltage gain and voltage is not power or energy in itself.
Of course you will not care about this fact.
and you then simply brought in Stan Meyer's HHO setup to explain away the phase angle issue. In Meyer's setup the reactive current between the plates of the capacitor is submerged in water is used for water splitting as part of a resonant LC circuit. Yes, this is possible that you utilize capacitive current, here the phase angle does not matter between capacitor current and the resonant voltage across the coil from the resulting HHO point of view. But in your resonance kit you simply have no any means to reuse reactive current in your LC circuits. This is why I stressed above the ongoing topic have always been your resonant kit setup and not another setup. And you stormed at me on my bad science...
Is there any of my questions that you can answer??? We are not asking for you to show us brushing your teeth.
We are asking for you to measure the output current. Is that so hard? Not just more excuses for not doing so. We are all holding our breath.... Glad that you like my humor. But, I'm starting to turn blue.
I was not talking about noisy impulse motors or fan builds. Not not here for that.
NickZ
Rick,
This is an international forum with members from many countries where English is not spoken. English is the second language for me (and I have a 3rd and 4th language knowledge too but becoming rusty on them because I do not use them as often as I used to in the past.).
So you should not ride on high horse with English grammar semantics here because you are blessed with good English and you certainly make a very good philosopher too.
I do not know if you speak another language or languages beside the English, if you do, then you may as well have some problems with semantics (no offense intended) and would understand this problem.
I do think many members here did understand what I wanted to express and they do not care whether I had written "can surely be" or "there can be". Rather, they also focus on the technical pieces of information.
Gyula
@Itsu:
I note you are using the IXDD614P mosfet driver. This driver incorporates an "enable" pin 3 which can be used for all kinds of neat stuff, like audio modulation for example. You could send music to a pickup coil and instead of it having a useless load, use a speaker! You could call it "radio" !
But even more significant is the high impedance clock input. This means you can make your system "autoresonating" simply by using a small antenna and a couple of diodes (to clamp the voltage from the small antenna.) The FG will provide an initial "kick" that doesn't even need to be particularly close to the resonant frequency, and then the antenna/diode can provide enough signal to the driver input pin to take over and automagically boost the frequency into self-resonance. The FG can be disconnected at that point. Sometimes the initial kick can be provided by a simple toggle switch. All that is needed is a single impulse to get the tank ringing, then the pickup antenna takes over at the ring (resonant) frequency. And the system will stay tuned as the environment changes, within limits.
Of course you may or may not want to do this. Since the gate driver will provide nice fast rise and fall times of the current to the transmitter coil, and it will always be in exact resonance, the voltage in the coil-cap tank can rise to quite high levels. You will of course get greater range to your receivers and you may even see the odd CFL bulb light up in the area. And et cetera.
But is it OU? ;)
Why not endlessly, if it is truly OU?
Perhaps we have different definitions of terms. To me, OU (overunity) in this context means that a device, over a suitable time interval, produces more energy measured in Joules at its output, than it takes energy in Joules to run it at the input.
Joules out > Joules in, that is what I and I think most others would consider OU.
What say you to this, and please try to not turn it into another wall of text.
We measure energy in Joules, we measure real power in Watts (Joules per Second), we measure reactive power in VARs, we measure current in Amperes and voltage in Volts. Or their powers of ten, like kilovolts, etc.
And energy is the ability to perform work, and work is force times distance, and so on, common engineering and physics definitions, no wordplay or "alternative facts".
Right? Can we agree on some common terms here?
I'm still trying to figure out what kind of OU we are talking about here. I've given three examples that I think are showing similar things to what you are talking about, but apparently you don't have time to look closely at what I presented or to think about it very much. Are they OU, by your definition, or not? I am not talking about proving anything, just take what is presented at face value (since anyone can replicate it and all necessary info is provided) and give a yes or no answer, and if "no" tell why not and why your system doesn't have the same issues.
And perhaps all this talk about Joules and Watts and other dead heads is too confusing for the unwashed masses. So consider this hypothetical:I have a battery and a load compatible with the battery. The battery starts out fully charged. I connect them, and run the load until the battery is so depleted that the load does not run any more at all.
Now I connect my black box in between the battery and the load. Voila! The load starts running again, and runs and runs and runs for a long time, maybe even longer than it ran the first time from the fully charged battery! But it does eventually stop.
No, there is no battery in my black box, just a few common electronic components, and of course it won't work at all without some kind of battery or capacitor connected to the input.
Is this OU, by your definition, or not? Please, no walls of text.
T,That is what I wanted when I asked you not to post Yet Another wall of text without actually answering a question.
No reason to insult here. No one is forcing you to read. If you want details you can read them. If you want ambiguity then insist on few words.
Here is an example of ambiguity. When I said endlessly, I meant endless motors added. That is the context of what you said, replicate the output again and again. I was saying I showed that with several motors in a chain.And that is what I meant too. Why not endlessly? Why did you not simply go on connecting motor after motor, with a little bit of extra load at each stage? It is because your system does not actually output more energy in Joules than it takes to run it, stage by stage, and you will eventually reach a stage where an additional motor will not run. And this will be sooner rather than later.
As for your school lesson with words, not all places in an OU system will show power measurements. The only place it will show it is when you are using a closed loop that destroys the source charge. So you can do that after a process when you are looping a regular load, but not all loads will show power measurements either.Any system can have its input energy measured in Joules. Any system can have its output energy measured in Joules. This is true whether it is "self looped", Daisy chained, or just sitting there running itself. Your statement above makes no real sense. Do you even understand how to make proper power measurements? If so, this knowledge is not in evidence in your posts or videos.
I don't know about your experience with OU, but it appears you may not agree with this. I don't really care about what the physics books say these days. I agree with Walter Lewin that all the college level text are wrong. So if you want to talk about higher level physics then that is fine. Here is some light reading for you to consider along those lines:https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9812779965/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i1 (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9812779965/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i1)And that pretty much says it all. No need to give answers to questions, no common definitions of what OU actually means, no need to do proper measurements of silly quantities like Joules and Watts, some incoherent gobbledegook that someone with no electrical engineering experience might pretend to understand... and all those college level texts that trained the engineers who made your computer and more importantly who made the tools to make your computer -- all wrong. And you, on the other hand, are all right.
T,And all of those gentlemen know me and understand what I am saying and doing.
You are a little presumptuous here. I have been engaged with many of these gentlemen ;) here for about a month and have ongoing things we have been working out or otherwise.
You just jumped in here and put up some video links expecting some response from me. I don't know you or how relevant your videos are. I have been busy with these guys and our talk. You are jumping in here expecting me to focus on it and frankly I have just not had the time yet. I barely watched the one and would need to carefully watch it again and think about what you are really wanting with all this.But you expect people to read your walls of text and watch your interminable videos, even though your rate of disseminating true information is very low. Obviously, your cup is so full that any additional info will overflow and be lost.
But by reacting this way it is not inviting. The other guys who posted videos have had the patience to let people get to them. There has been a flood of posts that have been more pressing that you jumping in here and say look over here.But the "several" kinds of OU you have mentioned do not correspond to Joules in < Joules out, which is the only kind that actually matters. And all I did with my videos is to ask you one question: OU, or not, according to YOUR definition. But you won't even do that much.
As for what kind of OU, I have mentioned several. I will be doing a big presentation when I get the time for that which should help.
I appreciate the invitation and will get to it when I get some time. So rather than spending time to search for these video links again, I'll respond to your below point.No, I am just trying to see if we speak the same language. I think the chances are slim, but I'm willing to give you an opportunity to prove me wrong.
There isn't a lot of talk about J and W and are you trying to be insulting here?
It seems to me that you have described rather exactly all of the "self sustaining" systems that you have ever offered.
As for the hypo, I guess it depends on if you are making a trick question. It appears you are looking for a setup or you are just telling me about some OU system.
Some of the statements are ambiguous. What is the load. You say compatible. That doesn't tell me if it has a low voltage cut off. If this is a trick question then I would say the battery half discharges because the load has a cut off voltage. This is compatible with the battery and: "run the load until the battery is so depleted that the load does not run any more at all". So then you connect the battery to a buckboost in the box and discharge the battery down all the way until it fully discharges. You never said the battery was fully discharged the first run, just till the load stops. So that is most likely what you are doing because no OU system would do this sort of thing. I mean, if you really depleted the battery all the way to zero then why would an OU system in the box run at first but not for good.
So it appears to be just a voltage drop situation with some kind of boost situation.
Do I win the prize?
T,Why, then, do you now bother with the Function Generator at all?
I shared that already. One of my students has a video showing that with the kit a year ago.
Hi TinselkoalaNot necessarily. It's part of it by necessity, but right now I am realizing that there actually aren't any good measurements of anything, nor any hard definitions of what RF considers OU, so it's hard to know what's relevant and what's not.
Is this coming down to real power versus apparent power or is that not where you are going with these questions, just wondering thanks.
G,RIGHT !!
(snip)
Power is not = to energy.(snip)
(snip)WRONG !!
Voltage is energy.(snip)
That is what I wanted when I asked you not to post Yet Another wall of text without actually answering a question.And that is what I meant too. Why not endlessly? Why did you not simply go on connecting motor after motor, with a little bit of extra load at each stage? It is because your system does not actually output more energy in Joules than it takes to run it, stage by stage, and you will eventually reach a stage where an additional motor will not run. And this will be sooner rather than later.Any system can have its input energy measured in Joules. Any system can have its output energy measured in Joules. This is true whether it is "self looped", Daisy chained, or just sitting there running itself. Your statement above makes no real sense. Do you even understand how to make proper power measurements? If so, this knowledge is not in evidence in your posts or videos.And that pretty much says it all. No need to give answers to questions, no common definitions of what OU actually means, no need to do proper measurements of silly quantities like Joules and Watts, some incoherent gobbledegook that someone with no electrical engineering experience might pretend to understand... and all those college level texts that trained the engineers who made your computer and more importantly who made the tools to make your computer -- all wrong. And you, on the other hand, are all right.
And all of those gentlemen know me and understand what I am saying and doing.But you expect people to read your walls of text and watch your interminable videos, even though your rate of disseminating true information is very low. Obviously, your cup is so full that any additional info will overflow and be lost.But the "several" kinds of OU you have mentioned do not correspond to Joules in < Joules out, which is the only kind that actually matters. And all I did with my videos is to ask you one question: OU, or not, according to YOUR definition. But you won't even do that much.No, I am just trying to see if we speak the same language. I think the chances are slim, but I'm willing to give you an opportunity to prove me wrong. It seems to me that you have described rather exactly all of the "self sustaining" systems that you have ever offered.
For example the Clarendon Dry Pile has been ringing its little bell since 1840 with few interruptions. But none of your self sustaining systems actually self sustain. They all eventually stop, and when the battery is examined it is found to be drained, so "something went wrong" even though the system is clearly OU. Right?
Please correct me if I am wrong and point me to a demonstration of one of your self sustaining systems that is still running continously after... well we don't need to do it for a hundred and seventy eight years. Just a couple of months should be enough.
T,The only forum I have ever been "kicked out" from is Aaron's Energetic Forum, where I was kicked out for being RIGHT about Rosemary Ainsley. And the electronics I cite actually works and does what it says on the tin. Yours? Not so much.
No wonder they kicked you out of the other forum what are you but a parrot citing high school chapter 1 basic electronics? So what are you the cleanup crew here when all else fails?
Hah hah very funny. NOT. You cannot refute me, so you resort to this kind of childish ranting.
Not sure where you get your information from, but you are talking about someone else. You can make up anything you want, I doubt anyone is going to pay attention to you anymore. I think you were outed as Troll long ago. You made it a little too obvious. Next time milk out the introductions a little longer and someone might fall for your game.
Well, I'm actually 150 years old and have been running Cook's patent process all this time, from when I was a few years old. It's still going man. Come on over and check it out! You wouldn't even believe a solar panel would give you any gains. Probably wouldn't even bother to hook it up because you may not believe that they can give you free energy. Where's the Joules coming from T? Can you measure watts going into the panels? Must be a false claim.
Why would anyone tell you anything if you just vomit out your insults?
T,You might not be able to measure a solar panel's input and output energy, but I certainly can. And no, a solar panel is not free energy, in fact they aren't even very efficient yet. Keep digging, there's plenty of room at the bottom.
No wonder they kicked you out of the other forum what are you but a parrot citing high school chapter 1 basic electronics? So what are you the cleanup crew here when all else fails?
Not sure where you get your information from, but you are talking about someone else. You can make up anything you want, I doubt anyone is going to pay attention to you anymore. I think you were outed as Troll long ago. You made it a little too obvious. Next time milk out the introductions a little longer and someone might fall for your game.
Well, I'm actually 150 years old and have been running Cook's patent process all this time, from when I was a few years old. It's still going man. Come on over and check it out! You wouldn't even believe a solar panel would give you any gains. Probably wouldn't even bother to hook it up because you may not believe that they can give you free energy. Where's the Joules coming from T? Can you measure watts going into the panels? Must be a false claim.
Why would anyone tell you anything if you just vomit out your insults?
Re the capabilities of the IXDD mosfet driver:Why, then, do you now bother with the Function Generator at all?
Let me check my records to see when I demonstrated this kind of self-resonant wireless power transmitter using e-field feedback, and lighting incandescent bulbs with the wirelessly received output. Oh... has it been that long already? June of 2017. That's over two years ago.
And using EM feedback and a phase-locked loop to maintain locked in resonance ... that was way back in 2015. SO maybe your students are paying more attention than you are!
T,You have no self-sustaining systems, just as I have said. You can play battery merry-go-round long enough for the rubes to lose interest but your batteries will all eventually die and die hard. And you even know this is true!
Now I see your deceit. Just another TROLL not even hiding your intentions. Well I'll give you a few responses then goodbye.
A moment ago you didn't even know what was going on on this thread. But suddenly you have it all figured out do you. Yeah, well everyone can see who you are.
You ask a question but you just want a short reply to use against people. That's your game.
Well when I showed the motors I used the ones I had. It was as simple as that. But I don't need motors as I did that with all the transformers and inductors in my shop once.
You don't know anything I do so why are you here Troll?
No, I can always put a battery on the back of the final motor and rotate them around as we have done for 15 years now. And that is the basic level.
I have a battery charger business so I know a little about power measurements.
Why don't you just go back to high school and play with basic electronics. Leave OU for the big boys. ;D
Yes, all the college texts are wrong. Did I say everything about them is wrong? No. Most of the pages are true. I'm talking about a specific thing here.
Anyway, it is obvious you do not believe in OU so why would you be here?
Yeah I'm alright, just fine thank you. I don't think you are. Can you show us something useful or are you just filling up walls of text?
I personally don't. I made a kit to help people learn resonance and the basics. FG is optional.Ha ha ha. You stated that your student used some aspect of the mosfet driver a year ago, and I pointed out that I posted a video with such a system two years ago. From that you conclude that I ''recently learned" about it? When you had to learn about it from your student a year later? LOL. And you still aren't using a PLL, even though you say "seriously it is good to use"?You are really grasping at straws to try to keep up your insults against me. But the important thing is still missing. Did you notice?YOU HAVE NOT, and CANNOT, refute me.
Wow, you are old man! Shall we call you Master T? I actually made that kit around that month of that year. Must have learned it from you. That's it. Didn't you invent it? Well I'm glad you can add, I was beginning to wonder if you had advanced that far :o Yep, 2017 plus 2018 is one year and 2019 would be 2 years.
phase-locked loop is public knowledge at least 30 years ago. I'm glad you recently learned about it. Seriously it is good to use.
Yep leaning from my students every day. Maybe I could learn from you? Learn what not to do.
So are you boasting that you have figured something out or are you just mocking any OU system? Your game is so off I'm not sure if you even know the right script you were given for this thread as it appears you mixing up two of them. You should go back and get better instructions because it is not going very well for you at this point.
And here we see just what you are. You cannot answer reasonable questions from me or from anyone else. You become insanely defensive when someone challenges you on your easily refutable claims and muddled definitions of words. You are living off of profits made from selling toys to gullible people. And if you really had the OU that you claim, things would be very different for you and for this world.
I don't care what you call me. Believe me, I've been called worse, by better men than you. What hasn't happened yet is for me to be proven wrong. And you sure aren't going to do it. Your systems cannot meet this simple, well accepted OU criterion: total Joules in < total Joules out.
Go ahead, PROVE ME WRONG! You won't, because you can't.
You have no self-sustaining systems, just as I have said. You can play battery merry-go-round long enough for the rubes to lose interest but your batteries will all eventually die and die hard. And you even know this is true!
You want to talk about deceit? Point out anything in my work that is deceitful, and tell what the truth is. And we will do the same for you. For example, your system is not OU at all, in fact it isn't even very efficient at transferring power, and everybody who has built and tested it knows this is true.
You clearly do not know anything about me or my beliefs. What I believe in is the TRUTH, and when I see people who lie and make claims they cannot support with facts, outside references and demonstrations of their own, especially in a field that I am familiar with, I am motivated to say something about it. Suddenly figured it out? You literally make me laugh out loud.
Suffice it to say that your demonstrations and your kits and your battery charger merrygorounds are not sufficient to support your claims of OU, and your avoidance of discussing definitions and terms and quantities -- not to mention the freshman errors -- lead me to conclude that you actually don't know what the flmp you are talking about, AND/OR you really do have such contempt for your audience that you expect them to believe in invisible pink unicorns without even showing them a picture.
Ha ha ha. You stated that your student used some aspect of the mosfet driver a year ago, and I pointed out that I posted a video with such a system two years ago. From that you conclude that I ''recently learned" about it? When you had to learn about it from your student a year later? LOL. And you still aren't using a PLL, even though you say "seriously it is good to use"?You are really grasping at straws to try to keep up your insults against me. But the important thing is still missing. Did you notice?YOU HAVE NOT, and CANNOT, refute me.
Voltage = energy, does it?
So I have here a bunch of different capacitors, all charged to the same voltage. Therefore they all contain the same energy.
Right?
And the way you talk about "J"s measured here and there indicate once again that you either don't know what you are talking about or you seek deliberately to mislead your audience. Or maybe both.
Let's review. Everything I say and demonstrate here can be easily replicated by anyone with the skill to assemble some parts and the test equipment to measure it. This is not the case for what you are presenting. You are advertising OU, but you cannot demonstrate the kind of OU that means anything real, that is, Joules out > Joules in. In fact from your last post it seems that you don't even know what that actually means.
You are so tangled up that you won't even try to refute me, because you know you cannot. So you resort to your childish insults and deflections, and even outright lies that are easily disproved, like you were mocking Mylow, or that I was banned from forums.
The real electronics builders here and at OUR all seem to share the same opinion. It's not just me, it is nearly everyone who has actually shown working systems and analyzed various projects and demonstrated their competence with measurement and construction. We all know that you've got nothing but hot air, and you have no trouble proving that with your walls of text!
OOh the handbags are out ;D . Anyhow Tinsel. Are you ready to discuss the circuit I have asked you about Sir? 8)Here's what I said when you first brought it up:
No, actually I have no idea what circuit you are talking about. Messed up my cctv? Sorry, I can't recall. Can you give me more details?Just about any High Voltage E-field emitter will do that though, with these crappy unshielded USB extension cables. I can whip up something for you in a few minutes if you really need a CCTV/WIFI disruptor. I have lots of devices I don't dare operate inside the house, the EEEE being one of them. Yes, it is still in the wings waiting for the right time to debut.
It was the circuit from the Ukrainian Government's Agricultural institute based in Kiev. It was a replication of only a part of a Don Smith circuit. It kept blowing bulbs and they concluded that this required further study. It was performed by a PHD student for his exams and supervised by the appropriate professor.Sorry, I still don't recall. Are you sure you shared the circuit with me, and not some other crazed koala? Why don't you just open another thread and post the circuit there and if I have it among all this other junk... sorry, junque... we can discuss it if you think it is really important.
One form of energy. Can you tell me what you think voltage is? And pulling out a voltmeter and turning it on is not telling me what it is. I don't care about definitions myself as I try and understand people's meaning even when they differ with me in words.Yes, I can tell you what voltage is. But since you don't care about definitions, why should I? Can you answer my question? A bunch of caps charged to the same voltage. All therefore have the same energy. Right, if voltage is "one form of energy". Wrong, if they have different energies. Yes or no? I am not asking you to define anything, I am asking you if the capacitors have the same energy or not.
I am not F6. He's French and knows what he is talking about in the field of radio electronics and isn't afraid to say it. I'm Texan, and also not afraid.
Well I was just told by one of the moderators that you were banned from their forum. Obviously not Aaron's as that would possibly be good.
Do you know what a "straw man argument" is? How about "Argumentum ad hominem, abusive" ? Do you know what those are? They are _logical fallacies_. You cannot refute me, so you make up things like airplanes and flat earths that have nothing to do with the fact that you can't define your OverUnity in common physics terms or demonstrate its reality. So you resort to insulting me personally, when I am simply criticizing your unsupported claims and your lack of cooperation in providing evidence for them.As far as saying things over and over.... pot kettle black.
So you really think that if you just say the same thing over and over that people are going to take you seriously? No matter how many times you say you have something doesn't make it true bud. No matter how many times you say the earth is flat it won't change the reality. You can say I have never flown in an airplane because you don't believe in human flight, and you can claim to have gone to the moon but no one thinks you are capable. Repeating that over and over doesn't convince anyone of that. There may be something really wrong with you. Are you seeking recognition, to be acknowledged? Everyone, pay attention. This Tinsel has something important to say. Nothing to show, just something to say. He has something. It really is just a whole lot of hot air. ::) But he wants you to know that he has something important to say about himself. Yep that he is important. And you can't refute that. He knows it even if nobody else does ;)
We love you T. I hope you get some help.LOL! You don't know what love is! But whatever it is, you certainly don't feel it for me, and I'm glad of that! I do need some help though. Want to come over and help me change the rack and pinion unit on my car?
So far you have shared not one important thing in these hours you jumped in here. Only repeating the same thing over and over.Somebody has to take up the baton, since the other people who are telling you the same things must be getting tired of it. But it doesn't seem to sink in! Claims of OverUnity should be supported with evidence! Joules out > Joules in !
You have not revealed anything but naming a few units of energy that you would find in a high school primary book. Oh, yeah, you gave a nice little trick that I figured out. I guess your videos are just that a trick. Some parts thrown together with some scribbled numbers on them to give appearance that you are special. Why would I bother watching another video when the first one really had little benefit. Come on Rick, don't think it was proof of anything, but what do you think it proved? I guess nothing. How a foolish person keeps drawing attention to himself and says that you can't disprove him doing that. That's how you come across man! That's what stands out. Behold the man! Look no further! That is worse than Bedini.Silly you! You don't seem familiar yourself with those high school physics units since you avoid them like the plague and scramble them like eggs. Otherwise we (not just I) wouldn't have to bring them up so often. And you criticize something you admit you haven't even watched!
Itsu: Thanks for all that information, and the schematic. That helps me at least, to understand what is being done here.
I don't know if Rick would agree on your build, or not, but it would help if he would let us know just what is not being done right, in order to see what he says is possible, such as more out than in.
Thanks again, NickZ
So far you have shared not one important thing in these hours you jumped in here. Only repeating the same thing over and over.So I guess I missed the part where YOU "shared" the other things that can be done with the gate driver, like modulating it with the Enable pin and using an E-field antenna or singleturn EM loop to autoresonate instead of fiddling with a function generator, before my post to Itsu. Please post a link! Or is that within your definition of "not one important thing"?
...The negative series impedance chain only has the bottleneck when limitations I mention when you are doing the untuned basic level that I show with the open parts. Of course when you are doing the ideal ways there would be no bottlenecking as everything would be in perfect balance.
The thing is that there are many things that can be done and considered. There are 1000 changes or improvements I could make to these motors. There is no end to improving little things here and there.
...But my point is always been to do what is easy and focus on the points that matter.
Hi Nick. Have you ever seen any reasonably done self-looped demonstration from Rick?
I suspect the answer is no. If you have not, then why waste your time with his... err... unfounded claims? I suspect you'll be waiting a very long time if you are expecting any straight forward and reasonable answers from Rick. To be frank, everything he does and says screams pure nonsense. I get that some people just like playing around with circuits whether it is COP > 1 or not, but the truth is if someone really has something unusual they should be able to self-loop it and demonstrate it relatively easily, in most cases. In some cases, some special effort may be required to provide better impedance matching when trying to self loop, or if the COP is not much > 1, then some form of daisy chaining may be required as TK has mentioned. Really though self-looping shouldn't be too difficult to do in most cases.
When a person immediately goes into silly rationalizations and bafflegab and deflections when someone mentions about self-looping, then you can be 99.9999% sure they are just blowing smoke. Rick does this for a business, so that is probably a good part of the reason why he blows so much smoke. He probably assumes he can continue to fool his naive customers and keep the money rolling in just as long as he continues to pile on the bafflegab nonsense. Anyone with even a basic understanding of electronics should see pretty quick that he is talking a lot of nonsense.
Self-looping separates the wheat from the chaff, and there sure is mountains of chaff and lots of lame excuses out there. ;)
I have been really busy for the last while, but I thought I would stop by and see what's happening here lately. As I mentioned in the past I saw a few potentially interesting things in my testing when testing with the Kapanadze/Akula/Ruslan types of arrangements. If I get some time, maybe in the winter, I will try to dig a little deeper into it. From what I have seen, that approach seems to possibly be a little more potentially promising avenue of experimentation, where most other approaches don't seem to hold water. :D
All the best guys....
Don't be fooled by bafflegab. Self-looping talks, bafflegab walks... All else is folly. ;)
So I guess I missed the part where YOU "shared" the other things that can be done with the gate driver, like modulating it with the Enable pin and using an E-field antenna or singleturn EM loop to autoresonate instead of fiddling with a function generator, before my post to Itsu. Please post a link! Or is that within your definition of "not one important thing"?
By the way, I know that Itsu already knew those things! We've been doing this stuff for a lot longer than you seem to think. But maybe other builders might not have known.
And of course it's not important to demonstrate the importance of taking phase into account when measuring real and reactive power in the MicroQEG, nor to demonstrate zero current readings while LEDs shine brilliantly in the TinMan Bifilar device, and it is really unimportant to analyze the Partzman Bifilar Transformer to understand why it gives OU measurements. Nobody is interested in that silly unimportant stuff, while you are showing a room full of LEDs running off a battery and a function generator and claiming it is OU.
Right now I am experimenting with an un-tuned system and even a thin cable of 15 cm anywhere in between the line bottlenecks the outcome. It also looks like that proper termination plays a significant role. At least to an un-tuned system.
That is so true. So many things which beg for innovation and improvement. Materials alone is a whole subject.
Thank you :)
Ps. If anyone interests in a quick and dirty measuring technique of input/output energy, then I suggest you the cap-in / cap-out method. Two identical caps one across the input and one across the output. Charge the input cap to any voltage level fits to your application, disconnect your battery, and then switch your device on. Watch by using two voltage meters, the voltage across the two caps. Then use one of the many online energy calculators to see where you are. In my current experiment I charge both of the caps to 24V, I start operation, and when input energy has dissipated, then i compare the numbers. Just that easy.
One thing to look at with those old setups is placing a 100W LED module in series with the charging battery and tell me if it really lights up or is relatively faint.Sorry if I have confused you, because of my lack of english. I haven't used one of your older motors, it is a self builded motor. With that, I never tried to run such a big 100W LED Module. I have to buy one first, and then come back here, to answer your questions.
Hey B,
This is good to hear. As for your situation there are a thousands things I could say. This is probably best to call me up so we can go back and forth on the details. The first thing probably is to go back to what you had initially and make careful observations. The second thing to consider is that the old setups could have partially damaged transistors. I have almost certainty that many people who got poor results had such because they had that. It is easy to forget to hook the charging battery. And the switching can still work but it is now possibly damaged. Or some experiment was done it was damaged. I have worked with many people only to find that was the case. Because almost everyone thinks everything is ok unless it is a full smoked transistor. The next thing is to realize that the trigger coil setups were problematic in that the impedance keeps changing with batteries. So unless you get things right on as in the video it will wander off (as you can see when the second 100W was added input battery voltage went up and he had to adjust the pot slightly).
Now I am not disclosing anything about the ideal setup other than what I have shared on this thread by pointing to the sources where you can see your options. This is something people have to work for. My policy is that I don't give out part numbers (for one reason as that people end up buying them out) and this ideal system actually crosses the line. All I planned on doing was giving the basics so that people can multiply the outputs enough times for their needs.
Stay tuned as I will do a completely free, literally using that word in the domain, website like I did with potentialtec.com over the years. I will see about adding more detail there if it is appropriate.
One thing to look at with those old setups is placing a 100W LED module in series with the charging battery and tell me if it really lights up or is relatively faint. Or check the collector and emitter with the scope when you are charging a sulfated battery with little capacity. Tell me what the voltage is? We are looking to see the effects of suitable impulsing. This is all before the other questions. Well looking again at what you wrote that should be fine. You can remove the capacitors with the inductors and try some different arrangements... Again, you can call sometime and we can go over exactly what you have there.
Well, it looks like those happy customers are going to need that battery charger, for their OU tests. Perhaps a few of the thousands of happy customers that Rick has mentioned, would like to share their self running or OU results, here. The ones that bought his device, not the battery charger. As this thread is not about battery chargers.
I think that by now, if Rick was going to actually show us his device producing OU, he would have done so. Not just sitting around and watching a bunch of dim leds.
And, I think that we know why he won't show the total output readings of his device, at least to the best of his abilities.
TinselKoala: Welcome to the troll party. Only trolls ask for true readings, so, welcome to the club. It's getting bigger by the day.
Mr Tinsel Koala: I would be very interested in your comment on the following picture.That's got to be a red rag to a bull. ;D
That's got to be a red rag to a bull. ;D
Mr Tinsel Koala: I would be very interested in your comment on the following picture.Yeah I can get as much light out of a 1 Watt LED from wicks for 2.5 euro !! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
never thought i'd say this but glad to see Tinsel Koala show up here. if rf really had anything he'd post a circuit with details and parts list that could be replicated by some of the better builders here. then they could verify if there was ou. that won't happen thoughHe's frightened of us conducting a serious technical analysis of even one of his 15 OU devices by him showing meaningful scope shots. His get-out / excuse is more than likely that his devices cannot be properly measured by conventional instrumentation. The more he carries on with this attitude, the more he will be derided. Words alone are not cutting it for him.
never thought i'd say this but glad to see Tinsel Koala show up here. if rf really had anything he'd post a circuit with details and parts list that could be replicated by some of the better builders here. then they could verify if there was ou. that won't happen though
He's frightened of us conducting a serious technical analysis of even one of his 15 OU devices by him showing meaningful scope shots. His get-out / excuse is more than likely that his devices cannot be properly measured by conventional instrumentation. The more he carries on with this attitude, the more he will be derided. Words alone are not cutting it for him.
How can you verify if someone has OU through the internet? You can verify in person if someone has something. You can verify to yourself that you have done something. But you can't verify to anyone else that you have verified someone else in person, and also then verified it yourself in person to people over the internet.OK, then send an OU kit to either or both ITSU and Tinsel for analysis. Alternatively, send them a decent circuit diagram and component list for them to construct, test and verify your claim. I'll wait for your excuse.
I have already provided parts and instructions.
Like I said, I've already shown all of that.Not true.
Well...itsu is "that kind of guy" the kind of fellow who always does his best and has been rock solid in this community .EXTREME integrity here.Well said Chet. :)
another fellow who Helps him sometimes Gyula , I have not been able to read every word here... But Gyula is similar in the way he handles himself and a consistent assistant to persons here and elsewhere.
Past performance is a very good indicator ,and ten years plus
not even a bump in the road....[CONSISTENT]
and always looks for verification from his peers.
I must add this group of regular FE hunters would absolutelybelieve him/them [and then back it up on their own bench.
not just one mans opinion.
respectfullyChet K
What a cop out Rick. No one is buying your excuses. While you (or the unknown "we"), are laughing at my comments concerning readings.
I want you to have and show success. I believe that you may have something there. Or I wouldn't waste so much time, pleading with you.
You may not be able to fully show OU by scope shots and readings. That may be the case here, but, that also needs to be verified. But, you won't even at least try to show, what you can show, concerning output readings. Itsu can show them, TK can, other guys have been able to. But, not you.
Are you going to give me the run around again?
We are not trolls, and don't need your insults. There were no "trolls" here, until you showed up. Funny how that works.
You know Rick that calling someone a troll, or a lier, and all the other insults that you've posted here, is cause for alarm. You are the one making claims, which need verification. You've called most everyone here a troll. Not even because they don't agree with you, but, because we are simply are asking for verification. So, you insult them, and make up excuses for not doing so.
Hi Guys,first many thanks to Rick for all his great work and publishing it for free here !
Well, a friend of mine has also his Resonance Kit and he got it to work in OU mode...
So, also he mentioned to me, that some posters over here seem todeliberately make bad videos that do not work !
So here seem to be now very many trolls, who are trying to combat free energy for what ever reasons they have...
So to the other people I can only say, don´t trust everything you see here, if some experimenters do videos
and say, it does not work... Better try it yourself !
Also this way, you can learn much more from it, than only watching videos from others, who might also
have bad or broken measurement equipment or no good scope or wrong adjusted scope heads, etc, etc...
But my friend will send me a video, so I can see, what he has done so far with the Kit from Rick.
Stay tuned.
Many thanks again to Rick Friedrich for his great work !
Regards, Stefan ( Admin).
Hi Guys,first many thanks to Rick for all his great work and publishing it for free here !
Well, a friend of mine has also his Resonance Kit and he got it to work in OU mode...
So, also he mentioned to me, that some posters over here seem to deliberately make bad videos that do not work !
So here seem to be now very many trolls, who are trying to combat free energy for what ever reasons they have...
So to the other people I can only say, don´t trust everything you see here, if some experimenters do videos
and say, it does not work... Better try it yourself !
Also this way, you can learn much more from it, than only watching videos from others, who might also
have bad or broken measurement equipment or no good scope or wrong adjusted scope heads, etc, etc...
But my friend will send me a video, so I can see, what he has done so far with the Kit from Rick.
Stay tuned.
Many thanks again to Rick Friedrich for his great work !
Regards, Stefan ( Admin).
Yeah thanks for the trust Stefan, i can see you have done your homework.Me also Stefan. Please remove all my posts and remove my user ID.
I am out of here, please remove all my posts and remove my userid.
Regards Itsu
O hello Mr. F riedrich, do you remember me ?
I am the troll who invite you to the benfr and a.king21 discussion about your coil device , your post level has been : 78 !
Now we did not become nearer to fruitable results,even your post state : 295
But okay ,let us wait for the Admins his friend his video 8) video explains more than 1000 words
video killed the radio( frequency) star https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwuy4hHO3YQ (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwuy4hHO3YQ)
Stefan I think some clarity is required here,
although I can't imagine who else you were referring to [the Vids showing failure ?
are you referring to itsu ?
is it too late to take a call?
Chet
...
So, also he mentioned to me, that some posters over here seem to deliberately make bad videos that do not work !
So here seem to be now very many trolls, who are trying to combat free energy for what ever reasons they have...
So to the other people I can only say, don´t trust everything you see here, if some experimenters do videos
and say, it does not work... Better try it yourself !
....
"..this place is not about proving claims ..." :o
"RE:Confirmation of OU devices and claims" ???
Ai sinq ai heff 2 rifrech Mai inglitsch for understanding ectual lotschik end explaenaschion methodism ;D
I like your life-style and freshness,Mister Peace(= Fried)' + full(= reich/rich)
I think everyone needs to calm down. Where is Tinsel Koala when we need him?
Just because someone says they have replicated Rick's kit does nor mean people should leave the forum. Let us wait for the evidence.
Yes, this thread is the most popular right now. As we are all trying to get to the heart of the matter. But, so far, it's going no where, while at the same time, some of it's best people are bailing out. I hope that that does not happen, over a misunderstanding. So, let try to follow up on this and other claims. The truth needs to he known.Well, if some people want to leave now the forum and requested to delete all their postings, it is too bad, as this would rip this interesting topic totally apart and important things would be missing , as seen from a history standpoint later seeing, who did what and who did achive what, etc.....
Stefan: How about just a picture, of the 3 watt led aimed right at the camera, with another led connected to the grid source, next to it. That way we can at least get an idea, of just how bright the first led actually is. As leds will light on peanuts. Funny that when it comes to showing the results, everyone, well, gets cold feet, if you know what I mean.
Well, if some people want to leave now the forum and requested to delete all their postings, it is too bad, as this would rip this interesting topic totally apart and important things would be missing , as seen from a history standpoint later seeing, who did what and who did achive what, etc.....
So I would rather want, these people to stay here and discuss out the controversy in a good manner...
I don´t acuse any members to do this on purpose, maybe they just did not get the right effects, hard to say , if I have not measured their circuits myself...or they sometimes don´t draw the right conclusion and thus not doing the right experiments and missing the important points...
Everybody is different in his perception...
So I am sorry, if my former comments pissed some members off...I apologize...!!
Also if you really want to leave, please be sure to get fully KYC (Know Your Customer), so I need a picture scan of your passport, your living address and a picture from you also showing your email adress, so I can see, that it is really you, who want to have all your posts removed, so that no hacker, who might have compromised your email account, can claim, they want to take down all of your postings...
Many thanks for your understanding.
Regards, Stefan. ( Admin)
Hi Guys,first many thanks to Rick for all his great work and publishing it for free here !
Well, a friend of mine has also his Resonance Kit and he got it to work in OU mode...
So, also he mentioned to me, that some posters over here seem todeliberately make bad videos that do not work !
So here seem to be now very many trolls, who are trying to combat free energy for what ever reasons they have...
So to the other people I can only say, don´t trust everything you see here, if some experimenters do videos
and say, it does not work... Better try it yourself !
Also this way, you can learn much more from it, than only watching videos from others, who might also
have bad or broken measurement equipment or no good scope or wrong adjusted scope heads, etc, etc...
But my friend will send me a video, so I can see, what he has done so far with the Kit from Rick.
Stay tuned.
Many thanks again to Rick Friedrich for his great work !
Regards, Stefan ( Admin).
Probably T, in that he deliberately was trying to trap me playing games with fake OU claims. While his videos were not replications the way he was attempting to try and trick me into a deceptive conclusion was possibly what added to it.Er... no. Nowhere in any of my videos posted here, or anywhere else, have I made an OU claim, much less a "fake" one. I have displayed OU measurements, and if "someone" refuses to understand how those measurements indicate OU, or whether or not the same reasons apply to "someone's" own REAL claims of OU.... well, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him think. I think we are in a position here where, had I been one of Rick's customers, I mean students, he would gladly have said that my demonstrations indicate OU, the same kind he has. But no, I'm a contrary Koala who doesn't like to be rubbed the wrong way or lied to, or about. So RF won't touch my demos with so much as a click.
While there has been a steady flow of bad activity here, it certainly intensified and appeared coordinated the last few days.
(snip)You talking about me again? You really should do a little research before you disparage someone. YOU are acting like the source of all wisdom-- you have Students, and Customers, and you have been Teaching OU for years!! You are the Source of OU! Why cannot you convince G or anyone, except those who paid you money? LOL... you cannot show a single instance where I have _ever_ claimed to have an OU device, nor pretended to teach someone else how to make one. But you might be surprised at what I _have_ demonstrated. The difference between my demonstrations and your claims is that anyone can repeat my demos +including measurements+ for themselves. Independently Repeatable Data. You have personal anecdotes, not data, and it also appears that you have "jam yesterday, jam tomorrow, but no jam today".
I find it really hard to believe that you guys have been here all these years and don't know the first thing about OU. If you do then why can't you convince G? If T is source of all wisdom and OU then why can't he convince G or anyone? Why are you guys not using the energy? Maybe you are. How are we really to know? So I am not convinced that you guys need convincing. You are just trying to pull more information out of people and then attack them for it. Same old game going on for many years now. Well at least that is obvious now.
Mr Tinsel Koala: I would be very interested in your comment on the following picture.8)
Some facts:Oh, are you talking about this thing:
Tinsel Koala does not remember so I am going to post the overunity experimental circuit done by the Ukrainian government's agricultural college. We corresponded for some time.
Here are some of Rick's REAL CUSTOMERS in the REAL WORLD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucvc38NCg9k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucvc38NCg9k)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShXBAniR1JY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShXBAniR1JY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_rlCAFQxs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_rlCAFQxs)
These are customers who have purchased his products.
Oh, are you talking about this thing:You have not built it correctly. You do not have the correct windings so it's not a complete replication. Their calculations were extremely precise. That is why they saw an anomaly which required further investigation
(well, I did ask you to open a different thread....)
What makes you think it is overunity, or that the Ukes have had different results than I have?
You have not built it correctly.Yes I have.
You have not built it correctly. You do not have the correct windings so it's not a complete replication. Their calculations were extremely precise. That is why they saw an anomaly which required further investigationUh huh. I also used wire with red enamel insulation, and performed my tests on Tuesday instead of Thursday. So clearly there is no hope at all.
If someone hasn't self-looped the circuit and got it self-sustaining, then that person is in no reasonable position at all to be making claims about 'OU'. There are just too many ways that a person can go wrong even in the rare case where that person has some decent understanding about making proper measurements and also understands well the many pitfalls which can be encountered in doing proper measurements. To call members here with many years of experience in this 'OU' experimentation area 'trolls' for pointing out the very obvious flaws in Rick's claims is mind boggling to
Did you make the exact number of turns they calculated?How many turns would you like, and can YOU show that it makes a real difference? Did the Ukes?
Re Rick presumed short for Richard, you were talking about or mentioned John Bedini's Cole - Bedini PM dc Motor or one of the many others, to cut it short it looked suitable for driving the Newman motor circuit, so I have used the circuit using 2 x Hall effect trigger circuit that drives a FW circuit with a home made PCB and a Full bridge feed back circuit, all remains is to drill the holes and assemble the board PCB shown below and lay out. I presume the pulses derived from the device do magic.
If there is something to what Rick is saying, then it should stand up to self-looping testing. There are probably at least a few people here who could help Rick with setting up such proper self-looping tests if he really wanted to understand how his setups are truly performing, but that does not appear to be the case at all. Quite the opposite. When people here get called trolls for pointing out the obvious flaws in someone's claims, then something is very wrong. I will fade back into the background now. I have had my say. ;D
You know with all the brains on this site I am sure we could do something constructive. Instead it's one faction against another faction all the time. It's just sad folks.
a.king: One faction against another faction, all the time? There was NO factions at all fighting with each other, until Rick started insulting everyone. This is about disrespect, which is not allowed here. Yet, because this thread has become so popular now, Stefan has allowed what normally he would not allow. The missing link is trust. Who and what to trust and respect. Someone who insults you if you ask questions? Are we to trust and replicate someone's device, that won't show what is needed? Just says, buy the kit so you can learn about resonance. I'm not here to prove anything. He says that to an open source forum, which is all about PROVING results. So, where do we go from here?
There ae some considerations in doing Cole's circuit. You have to give enough time between the phasing or you will have problems.
This circuit was never intended to be self-sustaining but we did show a video where the one motor ran for 20 minutes off an amplifier capacitor. That would probably take under 30 seconds to normally discharge. So it is cycling around the energy like Cole wanted. It is always better to charge an external battery and rotate it, but if you want something to just go a whole lot longer then that is a simple way of doing that.
Which brings me to the point I just made in the last post to Void of truth: Why is self-looping the only thing of value to these people? This arrangement has a lot more appeal in the present world that does not believe in perpetual motion. Charging up a battery much less frequently is accepted by everyone and is a great way to disguise such free energy processes. And of course that has long been done...
[/font]Void of Truth,I don't need help with self-looping. I have been doing that for 15 years now. You have entirely missed what OU is as I have pointed out. I have long demonstrated self-looping. Everyone has long been invited to see public demonstrations. Even in Germany I invited Stefan to come 5 years back. I have also worked with many EEs and engineers all over the world, some of them at the very top of the ladder in the biggest companies and military. So your condescending words don't change that fact. These people can obviously do measurements to the satisfaction of their respective companies and all EEs. But they are not such fools as to think that could be proven over the internet. What you write sounds like it has substance until people realize that you are talking about doing this in a scifi movie reality show. You are not talking about the real world. I live and test in the real world. You just play games behind a screen. I understand how my systems work, you don't. I see them working for years with or without batteries. Batteries get better over time, with real gains in capacity. I guess I can't believe that until you make a video showing your meter on it. hmmm sounds a little unreasonable. I never came here to prove anything. You want proof of something. Get off the computer and have a good look in the mirror and ask yourself why you call yourself Void![/font]
Listen carefully: I have watched his long drawn out videos, and still don't know all the details that I mentioned in my last post. It's hard to watch a two hour video, and harder yet to have to watch 3 hour videos, about his opinions, without careful measurement to go along with it. But, I did watch it. LOL. Yet, you say "it's all there". Really?
So, A, now that you know all that needs to be done and are familiar with his devices, videos, and chats, and are up to speed, why don't you show the results. Like itsu has done. Perhaps you can show some actual gains. That would help. As most of us have watched at least his more relevant videos, and still don't get it. But, getting it, is not the same showing it working as a OU device.
Kapanadze also has a patent. Did that help to produce a working replication? He also talked about the cause of free energy, yet, no one can replicate what he has shown many different times, as yet. So, perhaps you can tell us what is missing? And show some gains that can be measured and replicated. As battery swaps and noisy motor devices are NOT what this thread is about.
TK could you please explain the what looks like shorted copper winds pleaseSimply the top and bottom (or left and right) terminations of the coil windings. I have experimented for years for the best way to terminate high voltage, high Q helical resonators and for this particular project I tried this method, which works well. I used heavier copper for two turns on either end of the fine wire winding. This allows the fine wire winding to stay tight, without bends or kinks or sketchy terminations, and provides good contact for experiments and circuit connections.
You know with all the brains on this site I am sure we could do something constructive. Instead it's one faction against another faction all the time. It's just sad folks.I hope you noticed that that string of 20 NE-2 neons in series with 16 of them lit up (90 volts each) was just being held by my fingers at one end, and not connected to anything at the other end. Like I said, a powerful e-field emitter that can and will wreak havoc with instrumentation. And it could be made even stronger quite easily but then I wouldn't want to run it in the house.
Listen carefully: I have watched his videos, and still don't know all the details that I mentioned in my last post. It's hard to watch a two hour video, about his opinions, without careful measurement to go along with it. But, I did watch it. LOL. Yet, you say "it's all there". Really?
So, A, now that you know all that needs to be done and are up to speed, why don't you show the results. Like itsu has done. Perhaps you can show some actual gains. That would help. As most of us have watched at least his more relevant videos, and still don't get it. But, getting it, is not the same showing it working as a OU device.
Kapanadze also has a patent. Did that help to produce a working replication? He also talked about the cause of free energy, yet, no one can replicate what he has shown many different times, as yet. So, perhaps you can tell us what is missing? And show some gains that can be measured and replicated.
Some facts:Maybe you can explain why people who have OverUnity systems running in their homes still need battery chargers. I thought you just swapped them back and forth while running the load and they "self sustain".
Tinsel Koala does not remember so I am going to post the overunity experimental circuit done by the Ukrainian government's agricultural college. We corresponded for some time.
Here are some of Rick's REAL CUSTOMERS in the REAL WORLD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucvc38NCg9k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ucvc38NCg9k)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShXBAniR1JY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShXBAniR1JY)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_rlCAFQxs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX_rlCAFQxs)
These are customers who have purchased his products.
Nick,
I'm the worst critic of my videos. I delete them all the time. The truth is that I haven't had the time to do quality videos. Sometimes I do forget to post the schematic of what I was showing, or to bring the camera close. I have deleted a good number of videos that I made and never uploaded because they just were not good enough. I did get a proper mic however, and that was an improvement. I do show meter readings all the time, so this shows that you really haven't watched my videos. Like I said, I am making a new website right now and I'll organize the more relevant videos from those that are obsolete and just taking up space and need to be deleted.
But you have to understand that I did not do these videos for you or for people just starting out. They are me talking to customers. They want those rambles. ::) So it is a matter of doing something rather than nothing. I guess the point is that my videos are gifts so who can complain. If you don't want the gift then you can ignore them as you do what I write here.
The other point is that it is not my goal to prove OU in a video, or to always show the same measurements. I am dealing with many different topics. The goal is not to prove OU but show people how to maximize this. You guys keep making all these fallacies to try and discredit me. That is your only goal the last month. I rarely see anything useful from the whole lot of you. Sometimes something said is good, but somehow I am supposed to do everything I guess. I never came here to prove OU, even if someone else may have. If you are not satisfied with the information or videos then so be it!
Hello Rick,
In an attempt to clear up some confusion, I would like some clarification on your idea of ‘self-looping’. I was at the 2011 Renaissance Charge Conference in Coeur D’ Alene, Idaho. I spoke to you at one point asking you about your Bedini inspired devices. The topic was the batteries. I asked you if you ever had to recharge your primary batteries or if you could keep them fully charged with rotation. You were very reluctant to tell me, but did say that you needed to top the source charge off on your batteries with an external charger on occasion. This was only 8 years ago. You say you’ve been self looping for 15 years. My understanding of self looping would be a self sustaining system, no more input from you, the operator. Can you define self looping in the context previously stated by you? Does your definition of self looping involve adding external energy to the system on occasion?
Thanks for the clarification,
Dave
Rick: Ok, well, I like the tone of your last comments and post. They are easier to deal with, than previously.
You know that I don't know all about you, what you've done, or shown, or said. But, I wonder if you know anything about me, other than being a "troll", that is. Have you looked at my videos, at all? No? So, we are both lost in space, as far as that goes. Or what itsu has done, or TK, or Hoppy, and other replicators of these supposed free energy contraptions. What guys like me have done through the years here, also. Hoppy and I have over 8000 posts between us here, and at what we call the asylum. TK has almost twice as many posts, or even more than that, including other sites. Maybe that is not important to you, but, you must recognize that WE are not trolls, not believing in free energy, and doing what we can to disrupt it, when possible. Just the opposite.
I have recommended that you make a video, for us. Not for your customers, clients, or those that you've deal with before, this time. Will you do that, for us? Please...
And yes, showing updated improved scope close-ups, and output readings, as mentioned by the other guys, here. So, that we can see the scope readings, with all the bulbs facing the camera this time. I'm sure that would please everyone following you on this venture. As that video would be for us. And anyone else interested.
You see, I have watched your videos. But you haven't watched mine, or I'd know it.
The idea is not to prove or disprove anything, but just to observe the results. That's all. That is what I try to do on my videos. And TK does with his, "is this OU". No claims, just showing what is happening. No need to get personal, or judgemental.
I am not blind, or dumb, and can see that you MAY have something there, worth pursuing.
Pura Vida,
NickZ
Maybe you can explain why people who have OverUnity systems running in their homes still need battery chargers. I thought you just swapped them back and forth while running the load and they "self sustain".
One of those videos shows the amazing charging of a "non rechargeable" 6 volt battery. But I have an even more amazing video for you, where I use a bedini-like motor system running on a single AAA battery to charge up a C battery. Is that OU?
I hope you noticed that that string of 20 NE-2 neons in series with 16 of them lit up (90 volts each) was just being held by my fingers at one end, and not connected to anything at the other end. Like I said, a powerful e-field emitter that can and will wreak havoc with instrumentation. And it could be made even stronger quite easily but then I wouldn't want to run it in the house.
Is that OU?
Back to my three videos and the questions for RF. The first video shows a great gain in VARs over input power in Watts. The phase shift measurement that _indicated_ in phase was an error introduced by the current measuring method I demonstrated which introduced a phase shift of its own. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was Overunity in VARs, and whether or not 1) he had measurements he could show of his own, and 2) whether he would point out the phase shift error as Itsu did.
The second video shows overunity measurements in the Partzman bft, and _fully accounts_ for the phase shift problem with its careful layout and use of non-inductive precision load and current sense resistors. The phase shift is evident and correctly displayed on the scopes that I and others have used, both low and high end equipment. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was Overunity measured in power dissipated by a noninductive resistor in a situation of high, known phase shift incorporating a resonating coil as demonstrated there. Unfortunately RF has been too busy (typing and talking?) to view that very significant demonstration that most of the rest of you have seen.
The third video shows overunity in TinMan's bifilar LED driver circuit by having the load and the internal LEDs, 4 in all, shining brilliantly with ZERO current shown on two inline ammeters, even in the most sensitive 2000 microamp range. I used cheap meters but this effect has been reproduced with all kinds of meters cheap and expensive. My Fluke 87-III acts the same way and is even more sensitive. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was this kind of Overunity, where meters indicate zero current supplied to a resonating loop but the load is still running along happily.
Three possible types of Overunity indications. But RF's is somehow different? And his measurements somehow more valid? OK, I'm willing to consider that... with evidence. Unfortunately, walls of gobbletext and anecdotes about other people's work done in the misty past do not count as evidence for me.
Rick: Can we just dispence with personal issues and focus on this project? For once.I can see that you know nothing about me, nor the rest of us that you are still considering as trolls. Ok, no problem. I am done pleading. You won the debate, I forfit.
I can see when I am waisting my time. I have provided my full name to you as can be found on youtube. Along with most of the other guys on this forum. But, you won't look, to see what we've done or anything about us.And considering that you won't "do videos for this forum", I think that pretty much sums it up.No further questions. Thanks for your kind reply. I will not trouble you again, as I can see that you are just too buzy to cooperate with "guys like me".
Rick: To answer your question about why self running is the only way to prove anything. Because there has been many many many supposed OU devices that have been posted, here and on youtube which are not working as claimed. Therefore the doubts.
We are not expecting you to "prove" anything, but, we are expecting you to be able to tell us what exactly needs to be done, instead. By SHOWING IT YOURSELF, TO US. So that we can decide what to actually do about it. You have NOT done that.
Other than the schematic and pictures and videos presented by itsu, none of your diagrams showing all the information has been made public. Like coil sizes, turn counts, capacitors, wires sizes, frequency values, and output readings. No wonder that we are confused as to what you are doing, and how you are doing it. If all this mystery is about dimly lighting a few leds, well, I think that you get my point. At least the guys here, understand where I'm coming from. Although, you may chose not to.
Even video of self running device is not a proof. I bet you all watched Kapanadze videos.The only proof is many succesfull replications, which is what we are expecting here
I won't go into my background, but let's just say I can usually very quickly see when someone has little to no real understanding of electronics, and when they are talking a lot of hooey. Such people will typically go on the defensive immediately and start insulting and attacking when anyone starts asking them legitimate questions or points out apparent or obvious flaws in their statements and assumptions and behaviour. As a case in point, Rick has made it clear that even though it is has been clearly explained here, that he still doesn't understand the critical importance and value of trying to self-loop a circuit setup to see if it can be made to self-sustain. He has mixed this simple and straight-forward and very valuable testing method all up into supposedly being some way of creating or achieving OU or something completely bizarre like that. :o
Why would an output that is 1.5 times that of normal not be amazing and free energy or OU? This is self-evident. You just ignore that and spew your repeated lies over and over hoping that you can continue to detract people from the truth.So, if I managed to improve the COP of a device by 1.5 times from its 'normal running efficiency, then I would have OU by your reckoning. So, now I understand how you define OU and why you cannot understand why very few of us on this thread understand you. Onwards and upwards Rick. 8)
So, if I managed to improve the COP of a device by 1.5 times from its 'normal running efficiency, then I would have OU by your reckoning. So, now I understand how you define OU and why you cannot understand why very few of us on this thread understand you. Onwards and upwards Rick. 8)Hoppy you want to self loop look at the JB video he shows you how to do that!
Hoppy you want to self loop look at the JB video he shows you how to do that!Nah, don't need to cos Rick said so. Got all JB's stuff. 8) ;D
your pm is stopping you from getting the latest info!
PS I just know this Newman motor / window motor is going to be a dead duck in the water ! ;D :-X :-[
So, if I managed to improve the COP of a device by 1.5 times from its 'normal running efficiency, then I would have OU by your reckoning. So, now I understand how you define OU and why you cannot understand why very few of us on this thread understand you. Onwards and upwards Rick. 8)
Hoppy you want to self loop look at the JB video he shows you how to do that!
your pm is stopping you from getting the latest info!
PS I just know this Newman motor / window motor is going to be a dead duck in the water ! ;D :-X :-[
Nah, don't need to cos Rick said so. Got all JB's stuff. 8) ;D
H,How are you measuring work done?
This is not what I am saying. Efficiency of a motor is not the same as unity. You have your circuit loop with the motor in the circle requiring so much energy from the input. It is outputting so much work over time as a result. The work resulting is compared with the input given and that is where you have the understanding of COP. Ratings of some of these motors in sometimes given as 96% around so that really isn't much to worry about. If we had 80% efficient motors then that would be more of an issue in these considerations. But practically speaking, if it takes a certain amount of energy over time to do a certain amount of actual work, then if I have 1.5 times the work done (or specifically 1.5 times the total work done--which would include the losses on the primary side of the system--so heat production as included). 1.5 is just an arbitrary figure to make it more obvious than 1.01 would be.
How are you measuring work done?
Because power meters will never accurately measure or predict the energy of an impulse because impulse is entirely different than constant current and is nonconservative and results in gains when there is a suitable collector/load.
Rick,
Thanks for your reply but how do you measure work done. For example how did you determine that your big electric boat was running OU and what instrumentation did you use?
What is your opinion on the use of oscilloscopes for measuring pulsed and complex waveforms?
C'mon this thread is going nowhere.
Here is what you guys should concentrate :1. Can we use resonant circuit like Tesla did to impress as much power on antenna ?2. Can the power radiated from antenna be larger then the input power to the tank circuit ?3. Can the antenna be loaded with resistive load ?4. Can the antenna output be directed to that resistive load and converted to work ?The end is the radio transmitter with the output converted to heat for example !
Well I wrote out a response but when I tried to upload a picture it deleted my post. So I'll just say, reread what I wrote already. I use meters like everyone else. On the boat, etc. I'll post boat details on the new website showing that I first did my forklift motor from my Honda EV conversion where I installed it and ran it with the Curtis controller at max 350A @ 132V golf cart batteries to maintain 7MPH, then replaced that with my system, yes another window motor on the water AG. I never ran it more than 24V off the same batteries, and at 50A I was driving it around 5MPH. It was a 10,000 pound 1979 boat. Always had meters on it, and just rotated it around. Didn't do anything special to show everyone that even the basic system was practical. So on efficiency I was doing much better than regular systems. On power consumption I had zero for three years. Also for a few years before that when it was in the rider lawnmower.Thanks Rick. Just two more questions please and I'll leave you in peace:-
I use oscopes for many reasons and measuring complex waveforms results in complex discussions. That's my opinion. I have already answered the limitations of trying to measure non-existent current processes to try and conclude nothing substantial is happening. The scope and probe become their own loop in a circular argument of sorts. However, limited measurements can be made and software can and does predict nonlinear reactive processes. So once you learn that you can create endless free energy systems...
Thanks Rick. Just two more questions please and I'll leave you in peace:-
Do have a record of the total sailing time over the three years?
Did you ever top up the battery bank(s) and if so, how frequently?
"G, I guess the first point to make is that the question of when and where am I referring to gain. What you are doing in in all of this is referring to an unloaded tank circuit. Obviously gain is when something is actually being used as such. Now there is real potential and that is real energy even though you guys only consider power measurements as real. Now you can talk all you want about the phase angle, which I said is important, but that capacitor is charging up to the voltage across it and so is the inductor. It is not transmitting a 9V output as it does when out of resonance. The gain is seen in the total environmental effect. That was one of my points where you can see that there is real gain in a tank circuit, and that is why it is called multiplication and amplification. You can measure the radiation differences and see for yourself if you know how to do that."
Rick,
I return to the gain at resonance question. You wrote https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536614/#msg536614 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536614/#msg536614) this:
Because you did not consider important details I gave on the real explanation on voltage gain in series LC circuits involved in your setup, I repeat it here.
"In my answer #1130 I gave to Nick I described why the use of a gate driver enhances the resonant voltage and current:
...the output pin of the IC has a much lower output impedance (around 1 Ohm) versus the 50 Ohm output of the function generator so the same 10 V output from the IC is able to drive a higher current into the series LC TX circuit. The 50 Ohm of the FG simply limits the maximum current in the LC circuit the same 10 volt would drive into the series LC circuit, compared to the 1 Ohm of the gate driver IC. "
Rick, this is a physical and measurable fact: a much higher coil current is pumped into the series LC circuit at resonance from the gate driver than from the function generator (at the same output voltage levels), this is as simple as that.
No disruptive discharge happens. Notice that a function generator is able to provide square waves with fast rise and fall times, comparable to that of a gate driver, just study the specs of your FG. The gate driver can of course be faster than the FG because at resonance it pumps current into resistance and not reactance, the latter always slows down switching speed. For FGs you can find 40-50 ns rise and fall times or lower (depends on the make), for gate drivers this can be 20-30 ns or even less, also depends on the type.
Regarding your sentence "It (i.e. the coil) is not transmitting a 9V output as it does when out of resonance."
I agree with this but the question is why that happens? Well, it is obvious: the coil current dramatically decreases in a series LC circuit when it is out of resonance. In the out of resonance state the AC impedance of a series LC circuit goes up to the several kOhm range and higher, so the driver IC can pump much less current into a high impedance. So it is obvious that there is a radiation difference between the resonant high coil current and the off tuned low coil current cases. [Rick adds: what about the full context you purposely leave out so your readers are mislead?]
I agree that power is not = to energy. I did not write or imply that, so why mention it to me?
However, if you write voltage is energy, then it is your unique science I disagree with.
It is interesting that you have not stated that current is also energy. For it is the current that creates magnetic field around a coil afterall... but 'conventional' science does not state that current is energy either.
So, the stronger EM field around the coil of a series LC circuit is created by the much higher current at resonance versus the field at off resonance. And the stronger EM field can only contain and represent the equivalent of your 0.75 W or so DC input or whatever other DC input involved.
The gate driver does a much better impedance mathing needed for efficiently driving the low impedance series LC circuit, the 50 Ohm output of an FG (or any resistance you insert into the series LC circuit) can only ruin the matching.
Gyula
Rick,
I return to the gain at resonance question. You wrote https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536614/#msg536614 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536614/#msg536614) this:
Because you did not consider important details I gave on the real explanation on voltage gain in series LC circuits involved in your setup, I repeat it here.
"In my answer #1130 I gave to Nick I described why the use of a gate driver enhances the resonant voltage and current:
...the output pin of the IC has a much lower output impedance (around 1 Ohm) versus the 50 Ohm output of the function generator so the same 10 V output from the IC is able to drive a higher current into the series LC TX circuit. The 50 Ohm of the FG simply limits the maximum current in the LC circuit the same 10 volt would drive into the series LC circuit, compared to the 1 Ohm of the gate driver IC. "
Rick, this is a physical and measurable fact: a much higher coil current is pumped into the series LC circuit at resonance from the gate driver than from the function generator (at the same output voltage levels), this is as simple as that.
No disruptive discharge happens. Notice that a function generator is able to provide square waves with fast rise and fall times, comparable to that of a gate driver, just study the specs of your FG. The gate driver can of course be faster than the FG because at resonance it pumps current into resistance and not reactance, the latter always slows down switching speed. For FGs you can find 40-50 ns rise and fall times or lower (depends on the make), for gate drivers this can be 20-30 ns or even less, also depends on the type.
Regarding your sentence "It (i.e. the coil) is not transmitting a 9V output as it does when out of resonance."
I agree with this but the question is why that happens? Well, it is obvious: the coil current dramatically decreases in a series LC circuit when it is out of resonance. In the out of resonance state the AC impedance of a series LC circuit goes up to the several kOhm range and higher, so the driver IC can pump much less current into a high impedance. So it is obvious that there is a radiation difference between the resonant high coil current and the off tuned low coil current cases.
I agree that power is not = to energy. I did not write or imply that, so why mention it to me?
However, if you write voltage is energy, then it is your unique science I disagree with.
It is interesting that you have not stated that current is also energy. For it is the current that creates magnetic field around a coil afterall... but 'conventional' science does not state that current is energy either.
So, the stronger EM field around the coil of a series LC circuit is created by the much higher current at resonance versus the field at off resonance. And the stronger EM field can only contain and represent the equivalent of your 0.75 W or so DC input or whatever other DC input involved.
The gate driver does a much better impedance mathing needed for efficiently driving the low impedance series LC circuit, the 50 Ohm output of an FG (or any resistance you insert into the series LC circuit) can only ruin the matching.
Gyula
You appear to ignore the factor of 'time' in your rationalisation of resonance. Yes, of course there is a big difference between 9V and 1300V but most importantly what is the relationship between input to output energy levels. Time is an essential factor in energy calculation! That is why I asked you if you had recorded the full duration of your actual sailing time over the three years you quoted. You answered 'no' to this question, which tells me that you are missing one of the most important bits of data in order to seriously claim that your boat was running efficiently, let alone OU. Its also why I asked you about your view on the use of oscilloscopes as measuring instruments. In electrical terms, work done is inextricably related to time.
If I have any radiation detector I can see what the inductor radiates in and out of resonance. In fact the difference of input is minimal in or out of resonance, but the radiation is phenomenally different. The way you word things contradicts that. You have an art in not finishing the context so that the reader gets the opposite impression. Sure you don't actually say it, but the way you argue implies it (otherwise there is no point in saying any of it). Or maybe this is just all a test to see if anyone is paying attention. The input does not change substantially, or proportionately to the radiation and voltage between in and out of resonance. This is a nonconservative relationship, obviously. Now if I was ringing the bell instead of a forced oscillation then that would be even more obvious. But again, all we have to do is compare the input with the output and see what the difference is: Input is about the same in or out of resonance, yet output massively different. hmmm, about the differences between 9V and 1300V. There's that 144 times the difference, and is what we see in radiation difference. Sounds like confirmation to me. Electrical resonance is just as much of a gain as piano resonance is no matter if you can't tune a string, or measure with a meter, or position with a coil. It is experimentally observable just as with a piano. You agree with the radiation difference, but you deliberately leave out the most obvious detail (which is implied by other things you say elsewhere) that the input does not correspondingly change to be 144 times different.
and software can and does predict nonlinear reactive processes. So once you learn that you can create endless free energy systems...
You guys are kidding yourselves, resonance is the shuffling of a specific quantity, nothing more.Thanks guru, surprise surprise tell us some thing we don't know
take 30ml of water, in a closed pipe, arrange on a pendulum, the water moves to one end, the pendulum moves, as does the water, the same 30ml of water returns: Zero Zeta, no resistance.
Time to wake up nubes, I am a Paid Debunker
Thanks guru, surprise surprise tell us some thing we don't know
Hi Mofo
Could you show us your work with this that hasn't worked, words mean nothing like this otherwise we would believe Tesla was just a mad man anyone can say anything.
Hi Mofo
Could you show us your work with this that hasn't worked, words mean nothing like this otherwise we would believe Tesla was just a mad man anyone can say anything.
That is a nice picture but I asked to see your work in this area that proves we are wasting our time thanks.
I am no hero nor do I have proof although I have my doubts, I don't have money to do these replications at this time so I watch and will try to learn from anyone who has been there and done that. I thought from your post that you had done this before and I was wasting my time so I thought you might show your work proving it a waste of my time and possibly change my mind and save me a lot of effort but even if I am wasting my time I will learn some things thanks.
That will have to be my home work I have to go to work now so thanks and have a good day.
Well, I must say, a different approach. What is energy, how does Energy get delivered to a LCR or Tank Circuit? How could it be possible to increase the Energy? R would have to become negative wouldn't it?good question on holes
How could R become negative? Why is this necessary?
In Rick's circuits, R can never become negative, why do I say this?
don't get sucked into scams, the absolute basic rules apply to these circuits and a generational moment never occurs.
I am thinking about if I want to get involved for the next 6 months or not. I took a two year break and came back rusty but soon got up to speed. I am wondering whether to open up a thread on the Ukrainian Don Smith device or not. So I am thinking about it. ie Kapanadze is a Don Smith copy in my opinion
Hi Mr. a king, it seems to me you are in look of a useful task to produce. I have an idea that I would like myself to realize, but frankly, have no knowledge on where to start.
As I have asked Rick, Why not bring up that Atelier from the RICK on "running a small DC motor" from the resonance multiplied voltage / amperage situation?
Gyulasun,
I can see you worked hard on this one. Nice job! 8) Almost everything you write here is out of context or just a basic level understanding of how all this work. You are arguing right out of the book and not from real world experience. You, through Itsu, may have a setup doing one thing, but it isn't what I am doing. You can do all that in college and limit yourself to one set of relationships. Then you can argue in a circle within the circle you have drawn for yourself to only experience. But I have stepped outside of that Lorentz truncated circle and find more to the story. I actually start with the fact that I have measurable 8W with a limited number of coils. I don't need to do any gymnastics to deny that and have 3/4W input. That is was just what happened without any tuning and rushing a video. If it is zero or negative then what? Obviously your explanation is mistaken if you just consider the results. You have to start with the results and work your way backwards. Again, you argue merely in a circle to perpetuate an conservative dogma. How do you hope to realize your hope of a circuit producing any gains if you argue thus? This is why I said that was just misleading hype. We all know the mainstream theories here Gyulasun. The point of being here is to expand our minds beyond that when we see contradictory results like these and then consider what is really happening in the tank, and external to it. Consider what Barrett said and proved with real evidence. Consider what he also wrote in 1991 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305636853_Tesla's_nonlinear_oscillator-shuttle-circuit_OSC_theory_compared_with_linear_nonlinear-feedback_and_nonlinear-element_electrical_engineering_circuit_theory (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305636853_Tesla's_nonlinear_oscillator-shuttle-circuit_OSC_theory_compared_with_linear_nonlinear-feedback_and_nonlinear-element_electrical_engineering_circuit_theory)
This also shows you the difference in relation to Tesla. What you are fixated on inside your circle is a single body symmetry that has fixed relations and you suppose it can have no extra influence on other bodies. But that just isn't the case in a resonant tank is it? And in my case is it obvious that I can add more and more coils (about 500) without raising the input or lowering the other outputs (if properly positioned). So now I add 45 more big coils and bulbs at 1/2W each (30W total), with 440 small coils and bulbs (26W) and I'm just getting started, because the input has gone down more and I haven't even done the full tuning.
The point is that I can't make your hand move coils around and force you to see what you don't want to see because of your circle reasoning. I have tried to provide a different context for you to explore according to your "surely" expect hope. But that doesn't sound like expectation, but rather, it can't be more than conservative. I gave the historical context which most people are long aware of. This includes the financial motivations of Rockefeller via Morgan to keep this from the public. Followed by Tesla's context along these lines. Now I'll quote Benitez to show another example similar to what we are looking at here:
This invention relates to a new utilisation of the high frequency currents or electrical oscillations, by means of which a constant production of electrical energy can be secured, under unusually simple, economic and practical conditions. ...
Therefore it is only question of reversing the connections of said batteries from time to time and to repeat the same procedure, in order to obtain a continuous production of electrical energy. ...
Obviously, if such electric power instead of being stored by said condenser had been simply rectified, and directly applied to the charge of one of the above mentioned batteries, such power would only produce a very small effect on these accumulators, and the whole discharge of the other battery would never cause the complete charge of the second group. On the contrary, if same said power is stored by said condenser 48, and this condenser is properly connected to an oscillatory circuit in which one of said batteries can be joined, and furthermore if by means of a rectifier the high frequency currents produced in such oscillatory circuit are forced to pass from the positive to the negative pole through said battery of accumulators, it is obvious to state that it is always possible to secure by these means, the number of amperes required by said accumulators in order to get them charged in a given time. That is to say, with a small number of coulombs stored by the condenser 48, it is possible to produce on the oscillatory circuit a great number of amperes, if same said small number of coulombs are forced to pass and repass through said circuit, thousands or millions of times per second, just as was explained with the water analogy." Carlos F. Benitez, 1918 British Patent 121,561 New Process for the Generation of Electrical Energy.
Was Tesla, Benitez, Smith, Rick all lying to everyone about the real amplification of a tank circuit output? You many not realize how to do that, but can you say his testimony is a lie? I have demonstrated several years ago an earlier Benitez system that is easy for everyone to do. It is very similar, and the oscillations can be seen in your oscilloscope, as well as the fact that the batteries can be rotated. Benitez is verified as accurate. It is interesting that the skeptics never go after his patents and almost everyone but Peter and me have ignored him. Now the Resonance kit is a model of this last patent that is quoted above and does the same things. If what you said was true there would be no gain from a nonresonance condition to a resonance. Obviously there is a gain in resonance. Just ask any musician and they will laugh till they roll on the ground if you say no.
Now we do the Benitez system above, to a lesser degree, in chapter 2 with one wire system. But the same thing applies with wireless. And we can do the wireless in addition to this above patent. According to you, the tank would only output to the battery what would be output without the tank, because resonance is not a gain at all. 1,250,000 cycles per second of 1300V is not doing anything more than 12V@60ma would do. Of course resonance is just for tuning into radio stations, and music is flat. But with the wireless we are doing something else still.
If I have any radiation detector I can see what the inductor radiates in and out of resonance. In fact the difference of input is minimal in or out of resonance, but the radiation is phenomenally different. The way you word things contradicts that. You have an art in not finishing the context so that the reader gets the opposite impression. Sure you don't actually say it, but the way you argue implies it (otherwise there is no point in saying any of it). Or maybe this is just all a test to see if anyone is paying attention. The input does not change substantially, or proportionately to the radiation and voltage between in and out of resonance. This is a nonconservative relationship, obviously. Now if I was ringing the bell instead of a forced oscillation then that would be even more obvious. But again, all we have to do is compare the input with the output and see what the difference is: Input is about the same in or out of resonance, yet output massively different. hmmm, about the differences between 9V and 1300V. There's that 144 times the difference, and is what we see in radiation difference. Sounds like confirmation to me. Electrical resonance is just as much of a gain as piano resonance is no matter if you can't tune a string, or measure with a meter, or position with a coil. It is experimentally observable just as with a piano. You agree with the radiation difference, but you deliberately leave out the most obvious detail (which is implied by other things you say elsewhere) that the input does not correspondingly change to be 144 times different.
So all your reasoning is a bunch of hoopla. And it becomes merely a prestige jargon fallacy for those who do not understand these things. It took some time to craft those words. I don't have time to do this with the rest. Everyone can see again that you just have to consider the input and output in and out of resonance without understanding much else. You see that is what I am about. Not talking over people's heads. I show them the real world and use words they can clearly understand. I fill out the context and walk with them till they get it. Maybe irritated by that, but they hug me in the end. ;D You have just argued in a circle quoting the text book against your hope of more, have been special pleading to pick out whatever Itsu does one time and conclude on that, and have deliberately left out obvious facts that completely change everything. All this with mild prestige jargon so that those that don't understand just get discouraged, those that do don't pay attention to the details and just commit confirmation bias by the crafty missing context left out (the mind automatically concludes in the silence that the input must change). Well done! This is why I say this is mostly psychological.
Again, if you had shared this on electroboom's youtube channel or on a regular electronics forum, I would understand your insistence upon textbook circular quotation. But there has to be more than one person here on this forum that actually believes in OU and is willing to try these things out? Some of you guys claim to have OU, unless that was just a game as well. Does everyone here agree to believe what the textbooks tell you?
I suggest then you move up to Barrett's textbook then. If you are looking for mathematical justification he will open your mind. If you are looking for evidence and application of the same, he is also your man. He points you right back to the beginning, and then also to Tesla.
You appear to ignore the factor of 'time' in your rationalisation of resonance. Yes, of course there is a big difference between 9V and 1300V but most importantly what is the relationship between input to output energy levels. Time is an essential factor in energy calculation! That is why I asked you if you had recorded the full duration of your actual sailing time over the three years you quoted. You answered 'no' to this question, which tells me that you are missing one of the most important bits of data in order to seriously claim that your boat was running efficiently, let alone OU. Its also why I asked you about your view on the use of oscilloscopes as measuring instruments. In electrical terms, work done is inextricably related to time.
You guys are kidding yourselves, resonance is the shuffling of a specific quantity, nothing more.
take 30ml of water, in a closed pipe, arrange on a pendulum, the water moves to one end, the pendulum moves, as does the water, the same 30ml of water returns: Zero Zeta, no resistance.
Time to wake up nubes, I am a Paid Debunker
Rick,
I quote from your post below:
"You are arguing right out of the book and not from real world experience."
You know nothing about my background, about my real world experience.
You also wrote:
"Obviously your explanation is mistaken if you just consider the results. You have to start with the results
and work your way backwards."
Are not these 2 sentences in logical fallacy? 8)
So if I have fully discharged a 24V bank with the amount of time and amperage we would expect, and then rotate it around even several times, then I have OU. Next you will say 3 years of doing that isn't enough.??? So, how did you determine the amount of time you would expect, if you took no record of sailing time or calculated energy used in comparison with energy available from your battery bank(s), using properly measured power consumption measurements over time for each sailing. Note that this is a rhetorical question, so you don't need to answer this, simply because you cannot provide an answer that can convince me that you have taken any real care in collecting meaningful data to support such a bold claim The problem Rick, is that there appears to be no real scientific method being applied by you. I'm not outright rejecting your OU claim but your account is just not adding up with me.
Rick,
OK, you have my curiosity up regarding this boat that you ran over a three year period with the batteries remaining charged over this period. Obviously you swapped batteries from what you previously mentioned and used the electric drive motor(s) as part of the charging scheme, correct? So, my question is, what basic circuit configuration did you use? I'm not asking for you to divulge any secrets but rather just general info like was it Benitez based, DS based, JB based or other? Was any form of spark gap used?
Regards,
Pm
it seems obvious rick you can't show any real proof of overunity because if you had any you would sell lots of your kits. however you seem unwilling to do yourself the favor that would sell a lot of your kits by showing proof. i'm sure a lot of people would jump on buying your merchandise if they had proof of ou however since your kits aren't cheap people hesitate to buy them. so either do yourself a big favor by giving all the details needed that can be replicated in a way that shows proof of ou or give it up and admit you have none. you ramble on endlessly hoping people will just eventually give in to your circular nonsense and buy a kit from you.
QuoteG,You are not showing us anything here, so until you do I will just go by your words. Your words show that you have not experienced this yet. And your response shows calculated misleading.
(gyulasun wrote)
I quote from your post below:
"You are arguing right out of the book and not from real world experience."
You know nothing about my background, about my real world experience.
You also wrote:
"Obviously your explanation is mistaken if you just consider the results. You have to start with the results
and work your way backwards."
Are not these 2 sentences in logical fallacy? 8)
This is not a logical fallacy at all. Nice try. The results are not the conclusion and an attempt to find justification. The results are the premise. So is looking back at the rest. The conclusion we are looking for is not the mere results. It is in trying to conclude on what is happening. You have made a claim as to exactly what is happening. That is your conclusion. I have said that your claim is factually false. The results are not the output but the input and the output and considering the differences between in and out of resonance. The results of what is happening from beginning to end.
On the other hand you have deliberately left out the fact that the input is relatively the same when the output voltage and radiation is radically different. And in place of that you may as well just be his joker mofo just mocking everyone for being here because in the end you will just say the same sort of things. Input = output. Again, where is your basis for this hyped up hope for free energy?
??? So, how did you determine the amount of time you would expect, if you took no record of sailing time or calculated energy used in comparison with energy available from your battery bank(s), using properly measured power consumption measurements over time for each sailing. Note that this is a rhetorical question, so you don't need to answer this, simply because you cannot provide an answer that can convince me that you have taken any real care in collecting meaningful data to support such a bold claim The problem Rick, is that there appears to be no real scientific method being applied by you. I'm not outright rejecting your OU claim but your account is just not adding up with me.
Ah Mr. Aggressive (as you urge people to be on OUR),
You can see it in the picture partly, and more in the videos. I'll show all this and more pictures on the new website shortly. It is just the SSG circuit opto sensor triggered, with some additional transistors to drive all the gates. Real simple. No spark gap. Technically is not Bedini as I'm not sure he invented anything. It is more a newman motor with what has been called BEMF charging that predates Bedini if you even look at the prior art in his patent. But I mistakenly popularized this as Bedini.
Yup, that's me!
OK, thanks for the reply and I'll tell you why I asked. If you place enough info on your new website, I will attempt to simulate the circuit. Oh, oh, I see it will be a rotary generator design. Oh well, that makes it a bit more difficult to analyze but doable. I'm sure you are aware but perhaps not that simulators are designed around classical theory. So, as many people have stated thru the years, "OU can never be shown with a simulator". Wrong!!! It can and I have two examples of technologies at present not counting a sim I made of Tesla's ozone patent.
I will patiently wait.
Pm
Rick,
I am not your mindreader nor are the members here. And now you deny the logical fallacy you did write, you deny your own written words everybody can see that. Not nice behaviour at all. But this is a secondary point for me, I am 99% technical and only 1% psyhological... And I do not care if you make 100% psywar here.
I am not surprised that you back out from the very basic calculation results I gave you from your own measured data. So far you have done like that here whenever I or others pointed out correct technical data, conclusions in connection with your setup(s) in question.
I have not made any free energy or ou claim like you, I do not need to show you anything. And nor you nor any replicator have proved your results yet that justify your claim of 8W out vs less than 1W input.
You wrote: "On the other hand you have deliberately left out the fact that the input is relatively the same when the output voltage and radiation is radically different."
No. I have not been presented with correct data from which I could estimate and compare the in and the out. You return again to the increased radiation at resonance and of course you ignore why it happens. It happens because the gate driver can pump higher current under a better impedance match condition (output pin of the driver IC you use has around 1 Ohm typical internal resistance, so it can switch the DC supply input voltage onto the TX circuit with small loss).
You also wrote: "And in place of that you may as well just be his joker mofo just mocking everyone for being here because in the end you will just say the same sort of things. Input = output. Again, where is your basis for this hyped up hope for free energy?"
I do not know what are you talking about here? Lots of conjectures appear in your posts, not only towards me but towards everyone who asks the correct questions, this is one of your main forum tactics.
And by the way, it was you who wanted to introduce rules on this forum? I quote "The first rule of forums is to be polite." this is what you wrote here: https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536716/#msg536716 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg536716/#msg536716)
To be polite? You would need to look into a mirror first, for you called me a foolish person and also a troll and you called other members here as liars, trolls. Now you attempt to compare me to mofo mocking everyone, this is hilarious, LOL
Gyula
G,You are not showing us anything here, so until you do I will just go by your words. Your words show that you have not experienced this yet. And your response shows calculated misleading.
This is not a logical fallacy at all. Nice try. The results are not the conclusion and an attempt to find justification. The results are the premise. So is looking back at the rest. The conclusion we are looking for is not the mere results. It is in trying to conclude on what is happening. You have made a claim as to exactly what is happening. That is your conclusion. I have said that your claim is factually false. The results are not the output but the input and the output and considering the differences between in and out of resonance. The results of what is happening from beginning to end.
On the other hand you have deliberately left out the fact that the input is relatively the same when the output voltage and radiation is radically different. And in place of that you may as well just be his joker mofo just mocking everyone for being here because in the end you will just say the same sort of things. Input = output. Again, where is your basis for this hyped up hope for free energy?
(gyulasun wrote)
I quote from your post below:
"You are arguing right out of the book and not from real world experience."
You know nothing about my background, about my real world experience.
You also wrote:
"Obviously your explanation is mistaken if you just consider the results. You have to start with the results
and work your way backwards."
Are not these 2 sentences in logical fallacy?
I understand that in a working setup shown in the video, the 1.153 MHz AC output from one of the receiver coils might be used instead of an FG to drive the input of the gate driver IC so the FG could be dispensed with.
BUT my explanation refers also to your example you often mention like in the above quote: [BLA BLA BLA deflection follows] when you drive the TX circuit from the FG you get 250 V at resonance across either the L or C and when you drive this same TX circuit from the gate driver you get 1300 V. The explanation I gave includes impedance matching issue when using the FG's 50 Ohm output resistance and matching is better with the gate driver IC's 1 Ohm or so output resistance. And there is much less loss across a 1 Ohm generator resistance than across a 50 Ohm generator resistance. The missing 50-1=49 Ohm is what enables a much higher current in the TX coil versus the current the FG would be able to insure and higher coil current does increase the EM field, ok? And Tesla used mainly charged up capacitors as voltage sources that had very small equivalent series resistances hence the internal loss was also very small. And his fast mechanical switches (often in combinations) determined the rate of change he mastered to quasi perfection, they did the disruptive dicharges from the (mainly HV) charged up capacitors.
So it is not the fast rate of change which caused the high voltage across your L or C but the higher current due to much better impedance matching between the series LC circuit and the output impedance driving the LC circuit. And this is valid whenever the driver IC feeds a load comparable to its low output resistance: internal power loss is much less than that of
a FG with the 50 Ohm output resistance. That loss not present in the driver IC converts directly to an enhanced output current. I did mention that I am aware of the switching speed data involved both for an FG and for gate driver ICs (including the very fast 5 ns or so families you mention). There is no as much difference in speed between them as to cause the high voltage change.
Of course, when you pulse a coil and no resonance involved, the fast rate of change does count: the higher the switching speed the higher the induced peak voltage across the coil at the moment the magnetic field collapses.
You also wrote: "Anyway, you don't acknowledge any gains in impulse and rate of change as determining the amount of gains, as well as oscillating energy as a gain, with higher Q and higher CPS as determining the amount of gains."
I never wrote any of what you listed. I did write about voltage gain across L or C at resonance, I explained how much the energy content the created EM field can possess due to the higher current the gate driver IC insures under the better impedance matched condition. Understand now?
You also wrote: "The missing point was that the input was about the same when the tank was in or out of resonance.
And that was my point from the very beginning that you wouldn't address."
Rick, your claimed 8 W output power versus 0.75 W or so input has not been verified by replications yet so until then how can I comment your point meaningfully?
You also wrote: "One more point is that I showed in the video that the added grounding changed the output even more.
The input did not increase as well."
I wrote earlier that one cannot estimate power levels by the naked eye, by simply watching the brightness of LED bulbs.
I watched in your video how the brightness increased (or decreased) when you put the ground wire onto the different
RX circuit points. I understand the difficulty of measuring output power of the receiver units and I also explained earlier
to A.king why the ground wire brings in more TX energy from the enviroment. It is the same effect a crystal radio receiver
manifests by giving higher (lauder) audio output when a ground wire is attached. The ground wire opens higher receiving
area / surface for the RX units when ground is connected to the proper circuit point. You say the ground wire brings in
extra electrons, this might fit here too but actually how much power this would add to that of the received by the EM near
field radiation should be estimated by measurements. Naked eye brightness observations are good for fine tuning to
achieve maximum transfer.
Gyula
Like I just wrote, you don't know what you are talking about.
Rick,
You know, I searched thru the posts here trying to find where you said the above but I could find nothing. Then I thought "wait a minute"' and sure enough, you had posted that on OUR. That is really poor forum etiquette sir and not very commendable!
Plus, do you realize that you and those in control of this forum may be bordering on libel with your statement above?
As I stated on OUR, you are not worth wasting anymore time on.
Carry on-
Pm
Why are you even entertaining this idiot?
Clearly he knows nothing about basic science. Conservation of energy baby, never gonna beat it, stop kidding yourselves.
rick f = scam con-man, bs-artist and liar just like TrollMan
since this thread is about .
Confirmation of OU devices and claims
I'm sure we would all find this 'very' interesting.
It is or rather (used to be) Tom Bearden's site. I don't know who controls it now as apparently Tom is too old now.
Prove to us the Conservation of energy is a universal.
It is not. The fact that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate,is proof that the conservation of energy dose not apply in an open system ,nor dose it hold.Really thats what i said, create an disruption pulse faster than the rise time of an electron through a piece of wire ( current / magnetic influence) a 'nano pulse' you can fill a capacitor at light speed.
The conservation of energy only applies to closed system's,and is not a universal law.
Brad
Really thats what i said, create an disruption pulse faster than the rise time of an electron through a piece of wire ( current / magnetic influence) a 'nano pulse' you can fill a capacitor at light speed.Maybe you can, but I can't, and I don't know anyone else who can either. I have a fair amount of experience filling capacitors one way or another and measuring how long it takes, and so do my friends and colleagues. Also in generating "nano pulses".
AG That site has been reorganised (Cheniere) to offer information for sale. It is or rather (used to be) Tom Bearden's site. I don't know who controls it now as apparently Tom is too old now.Too bad there aren't any True Experiments in there. If Effect A is alleged to be caused by Cause B, not only do you need to show that A occurs in the presence of B, but that Effect A _does not occur_ unless Cause B is present, and that no other Cause can result in Effect A. Get it? Null hypothesis testing.
Rick covers much of the Heavyside component here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-Q77slGAw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-Q77slGAw) for free.
I'm sure you will not find anything at all,nor will there be any confirmation of an OU device in relation to the topic at hand.Yep. Almost a hundred pages of non-confirmation, of no OU devices.... but plenty of claims!
Brad
Hi Rick,
if I may ask, with the setup on your boat (or similar setups you've used), did you charge the batteries straight negatively with conversion on the input side of circuit or did you charge the batteries with cap dump. If cap dump, at how many volts did you dump the cap?
thanks,
Mario
Mario,
I am thinking about putting together a collection of many pictures and videos of the boat that I have not shown online. Kind of like people do on EValbum where I showed my Porsche EV conversion. I found some old files and will see what I can do. The big 1979 26' Reinell EV conversions (as I did two different motors to compare) evolved from the rider lawnmower. I started with a huge monopole model and later used the other motor that was more suitable for vehicles. Then I added two more 60 pound coils to it and put it in the old boat after I had first tested it with my forklift motor I had in the EV Honda. I later made a smaller commercial model of the motor and ran that on other boats... The idea of doing boats came from two different customers who had bought parts from me and made their own very large motors (bigger than mine) that they had on their big sale boats as their only electrical supply and means of moving when there was no wind. These guys travelled around the world and I would ship one of them parts here and there as they needed them.
I have usually used the cap dump when I have rotated the batteries around like that, unless I add something else to the front end. In the first lawnmower I used 5 very big paralleled caps. I'll have to check (as I still have them) but I believe around 80,000 uf and at least 100V. I had a very big SCR, which I still have as well. But usually I used higher voltage, at least 450V for my setups, and tried to have flash or fast switching. After the first motor I used higher voltage.
Tom is also broke,and still hooked to the grid ::)
Brad
Rick,
where these the voltage ratings of the caps or did you actually dump 100 or even 450V into the battery?!! I thought batteries get ruined with such high voltage dumps,
Mario
The high voltage is not a problem, it is the current. I moved from high uf to low. And you regulate the rate of change impulsing of the cap dump to be gentle enough, but to also allow for the ability to rotate the batteries around.
Regular cap dump pulse chargers ruin batteries over time.
For people with maybe not so much experience in 'over unity' experimentation,
I will try to explain and demonstrate here in a simple and straightforward way why just
looking at the brightness of bulbs (LED or otherwise) can't tell you anything too meaningful
or definite about how a circuit is really performing.
A picture was posted here of Rick F. lighting what looks like about 11 or 12 LED bulbs (I think
they were stated as being LED bulbs) and the stated input power to his setup was 0.864 Watts.
It was implied that lighting 11 or 12 of those bulbs fairly brightly at less than 1 Watt input power
was something that should be considered quite impressive and an indication of possible over unity (OU).
Please see the three attached photos.
Photo 01: Picture of Rick F. lighting what looks like about 11 or 12 bulbs at a stated 0.864 Watts = 864 mW input power.
Photo 02: My comparison of lighting a single LED bulb quite brightly.
Can you tell how much power this bulb is consuming from just looking at how bright it is? Of course you can't.
I had spots in front of my eyes from looking at this bulb when I was setting it up to take a photo of it. :)
It was very bright when looking at it directly.
Photo 03: Measurement of the power consumption of my single LED bulb.
3 Volts x .02 Amps = 0.06 Watts = 60 mW
If I were to light 14 of my LED bulbs at the same time, the total power consumption of my setup would be:
14 x 60 mW = 0.840 Watts = 840 mW
I hope this simple comparison test clarifies why people are (and should be) quite skeptical of any type of circuit
arrangement supposedly being over unity without proper measurements being shown.
Don't be fooled by any max or 'equivalent' power ratings which may be specified for a given LED bulb.
Those numbers can be quite misleading.
What matters is the actual power consumption of each LED bulb being lighted while connected in the circuit setup.
You can only determine that by doing proper measurements. My rough comparison test shown in the photos below
seems to indicate that Rick's results shown in that photo do not appear to be anything too unusual,
and only if proper measurements are taken could the actual efficiency of the setup be determined with any degree of certainty.
Hope this clarifies some things. :)
Void,merci beaucoup for the well done measurement and comparison !
I think this is a point where also Itsu get his satisfaction !
Rick, thanks. So are you saying the cap dump turn on time shouldn't be as fast and abrupt as possible? Also, when negatively charging (diode) the additional gain is to be found in the battery. If we use a small cap, even high voltage, where do you think the gain is entering the system, the small cap or the battery, and if the battery, can we still consider it positively charged?
Sorry for these basic questions, but after all the confusion and after many experiments there is still uncertainty, especially after JB and Peter recommended big caps in the latest guide...
Mario
Notice Void has 10ma (0.01A) on his supply and the other meter reads 20ma. So which is it? How can anyone go from a picture to conclude these things exactly?
The problem with his analogy is that my bulbs don't even come on until 6V, and only at 7V can they show any significant brightness.
Void,merci beaucoup for the well done measurement and comparison !
I think this is a point where also Itsu get his satisfaction !
One does tend to wonder why there are only 14 LEDs lit in that famous photo, since there are plenty more coils and plenty more LED bulbs lying around.
Hi Rick, I truly am very embarrassed for you.
Anyone with even a basic understanding of using meters will understand that an ammeter which only displays its current reading to two decimal places will display 0.01A from 10mA right up to a current measurement of just under 20mA. :) This is why I was using my analog DC ammeter, which I have tested compared to my digital ammeters and I know it is reasonably accurate as I have calibrated it recently.
I did not claim the LED bulb I tested with is the exact same bulb you are using. :)
Most any modern LED bulbs are all high efficiency and various LED bulbs with different voltage
ratings available these days should all perform at similar high efficiencies. My demo and explanation was not meant to be an exact replication part for part, but just to show that LED bulbs which should have the same ballpark efficiency as the LED bulbs you used can glow very brightly with only a relatively small power consumption, and this can be confirmed if someone actually puts in the effort to measure the actual power consumption of the LED bulbs in some sort of reasonable way, as Itsu was doing, for example.
Rick, I won't respond to the rest of your excuses and deflections and general hooey, as I am just too busy right now. :)
I think my demonstration speaks for itself. Without actual power measurements done in some sort of reasonable way, no conclusions can be drawn about LED bulb power consumption. You will be 'in the dark' so to speak, and just guessing.
You are welcome!
One does tend to wonder why there are only 14 LEDs lit in that famous photo, since there are plenty more coils and plenty more LED bulbs lying around.
Hi TK. Well, I only counted 11 LED bulbs glowing and one LED bulb that seemed to be connected
but didn't appear to be glowing, in the screen shot of Rick. There might have been one or two more I couldn't see. :)
The bottom line of course is anyone with any understanding of electronics at all will know that you
can't reliably estimate output power on bulbs (of any type) by just looking at their brightness and
taking a guess at their power consumption. :) That at least should be a given in this forum at this point. :)
Also, some cheap LED bulbs can have some inefficient circuitry/components in them for matching
their nominal operating voltage to the voltage of the LED or LEDs inside the bulb, but when you connect such
bulbs up to a high frequency driver circuit, it can bypass any voltage regulating/current limiting circuitry
and cause the LEDs to light up even more efficiently than if you power them with their nominal voltage normally.
The LEDs them self will of course be operating at their typical high efficiency regardless however. Unfortunately, I suspect
that such things will be lost on Rick however, given his various comments here already.
Rick, this is not some 'war' that a person must try to 'win' at all costs using all manner of deflection and excuses,
etc. For at last some people here it is about facts and reality. What is really true, and what is not?
Not about 'winning' or 'losing'. If something is really true, it will be able to stand up to close scrutiny and proper testing
methodology. If you or someone else can demonstrate over unity in a reasonable way showing proper testing methods,
then great, you are in the right place. There are usually people here (or there were) who will be willing to put in the effort to
try to confirm or negate by replicating the circuitry or approach and put it through proper tests. The goal being to determine,
'how is the setup really performing'?
Reality, what a concept! :)
All the best...
One of the first claims that I tested was that the introduction of more coils increased the total magnetic field in the Resonance induction coupler kit. I used a gause meter and it proved positive.
The next thing I tested was the magnetic field on the big coil just out of resonance and in resonance. The result was a MASSIVE difference. A HUGE increase in the magnetic field at resonance.
If you have a plasma ball or plasma tube and use the gaussmeter you will see an even greater magnetic field which is exactly why Don Smith showed a plasma ball ou device.
You need a gauss meter to understand what Rick is talking about.
really prefer to blindly believe instead of making an effort to move forward with actual understanding.
I understand fully … and believe whatever ... and ignore basic measurement and testing principles, etc., but they are only fooling them self in the long run.
Funny. You don't even bother to read short comments before you reply to them, do you. The image below preserves my comment and your nonsensical response.
No, the reason you don't have all the coils connected to all the LEDs with all of them shining is not because you forgot to bring enough capacitors. Perhaps you don't have enough capacitors all right, but not because you "forgot" to bring them. Let's see... you remembered to bring the coils and LEDs but somehow forgot the caps? And that's why you can't provide a convincing or even a very impressive demonstration? What will it be next time, not enough colored clipleads? Until you provide evidence otherwise, the default conclusion is that you simply can't do it, and not having enough capacitors is a convenient explanation for why not.
Cheap power supply digital panel meters, with a tenth of an amp precision, uncalibrated, for OU data? I laugh out loud.
Funny. You don't even bother to read short comments before you reply to them, do you. The image below preserves my comment and your nonsensical response.
Cheap power supply digital panel meters, with a tenth of an amp precision, uncalibrated, for OU data? I laugh out loud.
Funny. You don't even bother to read short comments before you reply to them, do you. The image below preserves my comment and your nonsensical response.
And that's why you can't provide a convincing or even a very impressive demonstration? What will it be next time, not enough colored clipleads? Until you provide evidence otherwise, the default conclusion is that you simply can't do it, and not having enough capacitors is a convenient explanation for why not.
Cheap power supply digital panel meters, with a tenth of an amp precision, uncalibrated, for OU data? I laugh out loud.
You are only acting like someone very pathetic, with this kind of speech.Another false claimant raises his head! I'm ashamed? Nope, everything I say is true and supported by evidence and replication, I have no need to be ashamed. You, on the other hand, are HILARIOUS.
You're just trying to ridicule RF, but with that kind of attitude you look more like a bully.
And for what ? Does that make you happy? certally to many persons not maybe to others make them happy .The slaughter already started a few posts ago.
But you could resist came again, Besides, it's what usually happens all the time.
What contribution do you hope to make with this speech? Interesting in RF work? ??? ??? ??? ? Seems really not, by the many videos that you post glorifying you and ask is this OU ? OHHHHH that is very productive to this thread ......
You're ashamed!
Another false claimant raises his head! I'm ashamed? Nope, everything I say is true and supported by evidence and replication, I have no need to be ashamed. You, on the other hand, are HILARIOUS.What false claims are you refering?
Chet: This also applies to Wesley who claims to have several ou devices.Are you sure about that?? You should check that out with him. To my knowledge, Rick is the only person on this forum claiming that he has an OU device(s).
You are only acting like someone very pathetic, with this kind of speech.
You're just trying to ridicule RF, but with that kind of attitude you look more like a bully.
And for what ? Does that make you happy? certally to many persons not maybe to others make them happy .The slaughter already started a few posts ago.
But you could resist came again, Besides, it's what usually happens all the time.
What contribution do you hope to make with this speech? Interesting in RF work??????????? Seems really not, by the many videos that you post glorifying you and ask is this OU ? OHHHHH that is very productive to this thread ......
You're ashamed!
Hi Nelson. I have to disagree with you on this one.
Rick has been saying a lot of irrational things here and acting very ignorantly towards others here as well.
It is clear to me he doesn't even know how to make basic proper measurements for goodness sake. :)
I normally try to give people the benefit of the doubt if it looks like they might possibly have something unusual,
even if it is just a small possibility, but Rick really has been talking a lot of nonsense here and outright trolling
as well. It's pretty hard to take someone seriously who behaves like that. You can't blame anyone
for speaking out against such things. I'd hate to see well meaning people get lead down the garden path by this guy.
All the best...
I dont care about your disagree with me , you could disagree about what i say , it is you problem , like me you are free to give opinion . To me what is not aceptable is such behavior demonstrated .The truth is, that Rick gives as good as he gets.
Nonsense is what i hear many persons say until now in this thread , only interested to get down a person(RF) . You are free to leave the thread why is you complain Void ? And yes i agree unfortunately with RF when he says that mosts persons in this thread only have a offensive intentions, not interested in understand what he show . And that's the real point .
All the best...
I dont care about your disagree with me , you could disagree about what i say , it is you problem , like me you are free to give opinion . To me what is not aceptable is such behavior demonstrated .
Nonsense is what i hear many persons say until now in this thread , only interested to get down a person(RF) . You are free to leave the thread why is you complain Void ? And yes i agree unfortunately with RF when he says that mosts persons in this thread only have a offensive intentions, not interested in understand what he show . And that's the real point .
All the best...
There are at least three people who have contributed to this forum who have had a nasty visit when they showed what some of the posters here are demanding.That's why he is being attacked! Who's being naive here.
Do the experiments and then attack if they do not work.
Hi Nelson. It looks like we disagree then. I think the situation is the exact opposite
of what you said. If someone is at least making some sense, I would normally try to give that person
the benefit of the doubt, but Rick really has been talking quite a lot of nonsense and outright trolling here.
If he had shown some signs here of being able to interact with others reasonably, that would be quite different,
but that is not the case. Sorry.
I am crushed, absolutely crushed, to hear that Rick doesn't think we watch his videos. While he freely admits that he doesn't have time to watch ours!What people say and what they do are two different things i find, but not with me.
:'(
What false claims are you refering?You cannot refute me, so you attack me personally. That is typical of the false claimant.
Where you read my false claims ?
You are just a poor personality person, Thays choose be a Bully since i met you on this fórum.
Tem vergonha ! Have shame!
Hi Void ,we disagree , and it is true . And só what ? Should i stop respect you by that ?You know, that last thing of yours that I built and tested turned out to be a pretty good receiver of wireless power. I don't think that's a coincidence.
I think not . Did you respect me , even with our disagree about this subject or not ? That’s the point , the real point :
Respect!
cheers
Hi Void ,we disagree , and it is true . And só what ? Should i stop respect you by that ?
I think not . Did you respect me , even with our disagree about this subject or not ? That’s the point , the real point :
Respect!
cheers
we have open source friends here from the Philippines
not a problem to contact them .maybe start a topic ?
Hi Nelson, I give respect where I think it is deserved, but not when people show them self to be dishonest (Rick). Sorry.
You know, that last thing of yours that I built and tested turned out to be a pretty good receiver of wireless power. I don't think that's a coincidence.Your build is impressive. So what is your conclusion??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so5OY5OBoJU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so5OY5OBoJU)
But is it OU?
You know, that last thing of yours that I built and tested turned out to be a pretty good receiver of wireless power. I don't think that's a coincidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=so5OY5OBoJU
But is it OU?
Your build is impressive. So what is your conclusion??1) That the power _transmitter_ is more important than the receiver.
Here are a few more demos of the same 'self sustaining' pulse motor device by Joel Cas Raras:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBrI3rM4Qs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBrI3rM4Qs)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pNOQUmI5W0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pNOQUmI5W0)
and an earlier video posted to a Facebook account:
https://www.facebook.com/madrigalrom/videos/10215575355043773/?t=0 (https://www.facebook.com/madrigalrom/videos/10215575355043773/?t=0)
Did you enjoy make that "copy" of my circuit or not ? Did you find OU ?Is it possible that YOU made an error in your schematic that I copied and that appears in the video? Is what you sent to Jeff Dove really this circuit? How can we be sure? Did you also send him the power _transmitter_ that nobody wants to talk about?
but wait a minute ..... is really a copy of my original circuit, the same mini radiant exciter that i send to my friend Jeff Dove Jeff in USA ??
Is possible that you mistake something when you copy the circuit ? who knows ?
Hi ramset. Apparently Joel Cas Raras is not 'open source', but he may possibly give an in person
demo to someone if they are in his area and contact him through his Facebook page.
Hopefully he would allow people to inspect carefully around the device to look for any possible hidden wires
powering the loads. If he doesn't allow people to inspect for hidden wires outside the device, then the device is fake. :)
we have open source friends here from the PhilippinesChet, check your email! I've sent you something for Itsu. (I don't have his email address and can't attach anything to PMs here.)
not a problem to contact them .maybe start a topic ?
AG quite true you make posts like you just did to hoppy all the time here "PSSSST have a look at this,but its not for here " or make insinuations of knowledge not revealed ..Secrets .....and that is the problem with Ricks unwillingness to help here,and people here see one of the better builders at the forum struggle with the languageWell... OK, I'll just post that little diagram here then and hope Itsu sees it. But we know which forum has the most Private Threads, which is exactly why I left.
and understanding..and instead ,he just criticizes itsu for his handicap..or inability tocomprehend.
to much PSSSST here...
members here read that and suspect that your are indeed consistent.
EDiIT I see you added itsu to the quote and now in bold
HOPPY and ITSU I HAVE SOME THING THAT MIGHT HELP YOU BUT IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE'S EYES.
can i send it to you ?
Nelson..respect has a place in knitting forums ..baking..or maybe poem writing venues as perhaps an excuse to with hold content...when peoples lives depend on the topic coming thru loud .. clear ..and spot on..?
PLEASE...
Is it possible that YOU made an error in your schematic that I copied and that appears in the video? Is what you sent to Jeff Dove really this circuit? How can we be sure? Did you also send him the power _transmitter_ that nobody wants to talk about?
Is it possible that _this_ is really a mini radiant exciter?:
Maybe Mark Dansie is close enough to pay a visit. But these days he seems to be more interested in serious investigations with real possibilities, rather than this kind of thing.
1-Is it possible that YOU made an error in your schematic that I copied and that appears in the video?
It could happen .. or even you not full understand the prupose of the circuit .
2- Is what you sent to Jeff Dove really this circuit? How can we be sure?
Yes i send him the original. You only need to ask him and you will hear their answer
3-Did you also send him the power _transmitter_ that nobody wants to talk about?
No , i did not send because simple not exist . You should not need to send , but receive that is the goal .
4-Is it possible that _this_ is really a mini radiant exciter?:
No just a kacher circuit or some type of variant
Nelson: Can you please explain (again), the difference between your circuit, and a simple Exciter/Kacher circuit?
I am still very interested in your circuit(s), if that particular circuit can self run, or produce OU.
You're the one relying on the PSU panel meters for your claims Rick, we've all seen you do it. Void is simply illustrating how they work and how imprecise they can be. :o
And I don't care what you say... I care what you DEMONSTRATE, and your PHOTO to which I referred in my comment DEMONSTRATES a bunch of coils without visible loads and a few measly LEDs lit to a dim glow, with sufficient power INPUT to your system fully to account what you DEMONSTRATE. It also DEMONSTRATES that you have a lot more coils and LEDs that you want people to think you "could" have connected.
If that's your OU.... you are being laughed at, by a lot more people than just me. You are being laughed at by the real builders and experimenters on at least two forums. I can put a bucket out in my yard and catch water from my sprinkler system. The bucket fills up, and I can even put a dozen more buckets out there and they will all fill up, and without putting any additional load on my sprinklers. That is all you are doing with your "OU".
Demonstrate the validity of your claims. Or admit that you cannot. Think about what Chet has told you, and search deeply within your soul, and ask yourself.... "Is that right?"
Rick,
I am not relying on a panel meters for my claims T. I do use all the meters available, and also the ultimate KW meter that is on the side of your house as I show at my meetings. My claims are about what is happening in the real world.
AG quite true you make posts like you just did to hoppy all the time here "PSSSST have a look at this,but its not for here " or make insinuations of knowledge not revealed ..Secrets .....and that is the problem with Ricks unwillingness to help here,and people here see one of the better builders at the forum struggle with the languageIf you told me a secret would you like it if i published it when you told me not to ?
and understanding..and instead ,he just criticizes itsu for his handicap..or inability tocomprehend.
to much PSSSST here...
members here read that and suspect that your are indeed consistent.
EDiIT I see you added itsu to the quote and now in bold
HOPPY and ITSU I HAVE SOME THING THAT MIGHT HELP YOU BUT IT'S NOT FOR EVERYONE'S EYES.
can i send it to you ?
Nelson..respect has a place in knitting forums ..baking..or maybe poem writing venues as perhaps an excuse to with hold content...when peoples lives depend on the topic coming thru loud .. clear ..and spot on..?
PLEASE...
Rick,
C'mon man this is a futile endless loop of accusations /counter accusations. You have been told not to waste peoples time with long sermons claiming OU, that you are not willing to support with at least a modicum of meaningful data. You are giving as good as you get in terms of ridicule, its a case of the 'pot calling the kettle black'. Folk are naturally going to react if they are preached to by anyone trying to lord over a forum thread.
"If I have any radiation detector I can see what the inductor radiates in and out of resonance. In fact the difference of input is minimal in or out of resonance, but the radiation is phenomenally different.
The input does not change substantially, or proportionately to the radiation and voltage between in and out of resonance. This is a nonconservative relationship, obviously. Now if I was ringing the bell instead of a forced oscillation then that would be even more obvious. But again, all we have to do is compare the input with the output and see what the difference is: Input is about the same in or out of resonance, yet output massively different. hmmm, about the differences between 9V and 1300V. There's that 144 times the difference, and is what we see in radiation difference.
You agree with the radiation difference, but you deliberately leave out the most obvious detail (which is implied by other things you say elsewhere) that the input does not correspondingly change to be 144 times different."
"Remember, I used the metered power supply to run either of these, and see how using the FG with the same power gives lower results, like producing 250V with 9V input. But when I add the gate driver I get 1300V with the same input approximately. This has a faster rate of change. I only say all this because these are the parts in the kits."
"You just assumed that the input would have to correspond to the output voltage and radiation. But it actually doesn't. There is substantially no input difference between running the tank with 9V out of resonance and with running in resonance. That has been my point all along."Now I quote this from your post of #1395 https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg537135/#msg537135 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg537135/#msg537135) :
"The point is that if the frequency generator powered by the metered power supply draws substantially the same power as the gate driver, then we have a gain demonstrated because of the fact of the rate of change and not because of all your gymnastics."
Rick,
When you used the frequency generator to drive the series LC TX circuit, the 50 Ohm output impedance inherently limited the output current. This means that the maximum output current was defined by the generator output voltage amplitude, by the inherent 50 Ohm and by the series LC circuit resistance when the LC circuit was at resonance. And the output current from the generator went down the moment the TX circuit was out of resonance. This is because at resonance the series LC circuit has way less resistance than 50 Ohm and at off resonance the low resistance becomes an increasing reactance beyond the 50 Ohm value, so the overall loading of the generator output reduces.
I apologize, I have always lived by "no stone left unturned" and you have been a diligent investigator here.
I will make sure it gets handled the way you suggest.
respectfully Chet K
ps its stuck in bold type for some reason...not intentional
Rick,
C'mon man this is a futile endless loop of accusations /counter accusations. You have been told not to waste peoples time with long sermons claiming OU, that you are not willing to support with at least a modicum of meaningful data. You are giving as good as you get in terms of ridicule, its a case of the 'pot calling the kettle black'. Folk are naturally going to react if they are preached to by anyone trying to lord over a forum thread.
And in case you missed it - Rick did not patent his claim. He gave it to the world for FREE.
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is
RICK 1, NAYSAYERS 0
EE theory goes nowhere (so far) in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)
And in case you missed it - Rick did not patent his claim. He gave it to the world for FREE.
"In my motors there was a dramatic difference in the output with and without the gate driver while the input power was the same with or without."
"Now it doesn't matter to me if it was merely an impedance issue as that is very important. But it is still an impedance issue in a different way."
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is
RICK 1, NAYSAYERS 0
EE theory goes nowhere (so far) in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)
And in case you missed it - Rick did not patent his claim. He gave it to the world for FREE.
I have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are !
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs
Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en)
and knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output measurements by appropriate instruments
related
"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or
lux/lumen and/or
heat units/ calori)
we do not know about the real output/input ratio.
Other example :
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en)
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)
Before : 100 W lamp consume with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)
lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU
We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is
RICK 1, NAYSAYERS 0
EE theory goes nowhere (so far) in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)
And in case you missed it - Rick did not patent his claim. He gave it to the world for FREE.
The brain is saving (remember) light?Hi Arne,
Did Rick use FWB's as Itsu?
No I don't think so if this sudent follows his master;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAxB-Dtl1U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAxB-Dtl1U)
Arne
Hi Arne,Correct, so you have to take into account the further losses incurred by passing the current through the bridge rectifier.
A.king21 wrote somewhere that Rick uses MR16 type LED bulbs, these are rated between 3 and 12 W or so and made for both 12 V DC and AC and as such they must have a diode bridge inside.
For those not considering that a LED is a diode I notice that when fed from AC voltage a single LED draws current during every second half wave of the AC periods, thus its drawn power from the AC source is much less than in a rectified AC voltage case, so the loaded Q of an LC tank that feeds such LEDs as the attached picture shows may remain relatively high. Also, there is not current draw from the AC source whenever the instanteneous AC voltage amplitude is under a certain threshold level below the forward voltage.
Gyula
I have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are !Exactly !! And this must be done in a clear manner, repeatable by anyone "familiar with the art".
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs
Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en)
and knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Seriell resistors effect : frquency and/or duty cycle divider ? bulb filament actio/ reactio behaviour ?
Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output measurements by appropriate instruments
related
"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or
lux/lumen and/or
heat units/ calori)
we do not know about the real output/input ratio.
Other example :
https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en)
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)
Before : 100 W lamp consume with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)
lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU
We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)
Correct, so you have to take into account the further losses incurred by passing the current through the bridge rectifier.
To those of you new to this; the claim is: At resonance there is a gain and this gain is realised through magnetic resonance. Each receiver coil also creates it's own magnetic field and re-transmits the signal. The procedure occurs because of magnetic resonance. You can also place further coils above and below the current picture. I believe Rick claims that each mr16 light consumes approximately 1/2 watt although I am not sure if that relates to this picture. I find the opposing vitriol unbelievable to be quite frank. This was not the case in the past when people simply accepted a claim and tried to verify it in their own way.
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off. That's why some do not do videos. So we all lose in the end. Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick? The kit is called the Resonance Induction Coupler Kit.
So, what about the rudeness being both given and returned by the inventor! We only lose when we accept claims without reasonable proof. Its called blind faith. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbYmdY8z8vg
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off. That's why some do not do videos. So we all lose in the end. Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick?
So is this overunity ?What, can't you tell?
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipMlSxShaDEE96_4ZzKPhw4mxsnEPe6x2X6S8fVuR7psCwgsRYUhPrILZMIthoLm2w?key=ejNzalBqdzR2WF94dlp5c2hqbEg2MjhkN1U5bF9B (https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipMlSxShaDEE96_4ZzKPhw4mxsnEPe6x2X6S8fVuR7psCwgsRYUhPrILZMIthoLm2w?key=ejNzalBqdzR2WF94dlp5c2hqbEg2MjhkN1U5bF9B)
What, can't you tell?Yes that is interesting, there is the other type too where you touch it and the LEDs or bulb goes brighter.
What about this, is this overunity?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLsOCYPCvGc
I have put now a few more members on moderation as they have been attacking Rick.
This way I can better see, who posts what and if these are slander or defamation postings with notechnical analysis, I will not let it get through and will be deleted...
Regards, Stefan. ( Admin)
Dear Stefan__________________________________________________________________________________________________
While we appreciate the opportunity to post our creative efforts on OU.com, we can't help but notice that forum management specifically moderation at the uppermost level has become overly biased and is no longer operating within the rules of "fair play". This is a disappointment to many of us. We understand the necessity of creating an income driven engine, but when it is done at the expense of quality and fairness, you do your own integrity and the forum in general a disservice.
We hope that you will return to your your original goodwill and sensibility of years ago, lest your forum continue to degrade in both quality content and quality membership.
The smartest people are coming to understand the truth and are jumping ship by no longer posting on OU.com, while searching for other venues with rules that demand proofs when outrageous claims are made. Maybe you have relied on the fact that in the FE game there are always newbies to be had to fill the ranks of the frustrated experienced members that leave, but at the expense of that which only experience can give.
New FE forums spring up every year, and old poorly run dinosaurs that have not upgraded the quality of their advertising or content must go extinct. People are getting smarter and see through a lot these days.
In the final analysis it is your sandbox and you can run it with whatever quality level or lack thereof as you wish, however this 13 year member must refrain from posting until such times as the ships direction is righted.
Regards and good luck
I have put now a few more members on moderation as they have been attacking Rick.
This way I can better see, who posts what and if these are slander or defamation postings with notechnical analysis, I will not let it get through and will be deleted...
Regards, Stefan. ( Admin)
Consider the distance of the mr16s from the transmitter and remember the inverse square law.
Rick has repeatedly said you cannot prove anything over the internet. All you can do is exchange ideas.
This is a letter of protest, and although one man's opinion, I know that it is shared by many.Well said Vortex1!
Stefan do you realize what you are doing? You have gagged two of the very brightest guys you have had on this thread, partzman and gyula. I know these guys are very experienced in electronics, one I know personally and I know his long experience (over 50 years) as well as his exemplary work history and inventions. Apparently you did not take my pm seriously, instead you pander to the likes of RF who actually has provided no technical offering worthy of serious study but lots of talk, hence the protests by the above mentioned.
I am posting my pm sent to you priorly on 7/19/2019 also here in the interest of free speech and so that others can see my opinion on your actions, which you have now, it appears, persisted in.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Now you call anyone who disagrees with what is outrageously being claimed without proof a Naysayer with a capital N
Considering your new version of free speech, I wonder how quickly you will delete this.
Regards
http://rexresearch.com/barbat/barbat.htm (http://rexresearch.com/barbat/barbat.htm)
Hi a.king. Actually from the screen shot posted here, it appears there are coils beside coils beside coils, each coil acting to pass the energy through
to the next coil until the load is reached.
All the best...
Not a very scientific reply I am afraid.
So explain to me how according to the inverse square laws the mr16 is lit at all - when all the intervening coils are also illuminated.
Unless of course Rick's theory that "each coil makes a magnetic copy of the original (at resonance) and retransmits the magnetic field" is plausible.
Methinks some EEs should get a gaussmeter
[
Vortex1: But proof has been offered. You stubbornly refuse to believe it as a possibility. Consider the distance of the mr16s from the transmitter and remember the inverse square law. You immediately have a closed mind approach to the evidence offered. Rick has repeatedly said you cannot prove anything over the internet. All you can do is exchange ideas. That is what this forum is for. Anyway Rick has put his device forward for the 1 watt challenge in either one of his posts or videos ( i can't remember which). That is what should be debated. Furthermore those members who are in the US can go to one of his meetings and verify matters for yourselves. Now THAT come nearer to verification. Also members can be courteous. Courtesy gets you much further than insults. Fortunately Rick can give as much as he gets thrown at him.
Rick has repeatedly said you cannot prove anything over the internet.
Thank you for W.Barbat articles , though I don't agree Hubbard used radium, because it was too expensive in his times.
I have put now a few more members on moderation as they have been attacking Rick.
This way I can better see, who posts what and if these are slander or defamation postings with notechnical analysis, I will not let it get through and will be deleted...
Regards, Stefan. ( Admin)
I agree. Please Stefan re-instate those respected members, who are actually builders and highly experienced researchers. They are telling the truth. It makes absolutely no sense that these people would be put on moderation at all. Yet things like this (https://overunity.com/18285/success-and-loss/45/) are allowed to happen. :-[
It's pretty disturbing to see some of the most respected members here moderated Stefan. I have been attacked many times and educated in the process here. As have many others, we misread or mismeasured and rely on forum like this to have the claims checked. Questioning someone who is making $ off selling devices while claiming OU without clearly demonstrating it is a community service. The ou.com brand is a promise that there will be rigorous debate. I'm afraid you are damaging it by moderating some of the best minds you have at your service.
It's pretty disturbing to see some of the most respected members here moderated Stefan. I have been attacked many times and educated in the process here. As have many others, we misread or mismeasured and rely on forum like this to have the claims checked. Questioning someone who is making $ off selling devices while claiming OU without clearly demonstrating it is a community service. The ou.com brand is a promise that there will be rigorous debate. I'm afraid you are damaging it by moderating some of the best minds you have at your service.
I read this thread, but could not find scheme of Mr. Rick overunity circuit.
I also watched few of his videos but there he does not explain anything.
Can somebody point me or help me find that information of his OU device?
Thanks!
Powering boat for 3 years is enough prove for him to get that prize.
I have pointed out a number of times in the past here that using LEDs or LED lights in OU experimentation
can be very misleading, especially for the inexperienced and those not very knowledgeable in electronics and physics.
LEDs and LED bulbs typically glow quite brightly while consuming relatively low amounts of power. This fools
many a noob. ;D
Use of an incandescent bulb or a non-inductive resistor as a load or loads is always a much wiser way to go.
Also, testing at fairly low power levels leaves more room for measurement errors, so try to avoid doing that
where possible as well. Not that I think my pointing this out yet again will really make much difference.
People with little understanding of electronics and physics will continue to make the same mistakes over and over,
and then they will tell people who do have experience in electronics that they are wrong if they point out
obvious problem areas like this. This cycle keeps repeating, ad infinitum. :o
Nice you stopped by Mannix ..hope all is well with you .and yes you just never know ?
our Friend gyula sent me a note.
Hi Chet,
Well, you mentioned my silence the other day but I do not really have much more to add to this topic beyond what I have done so far and also considering what Mannix just wrote. A couple of my important technical questions have remained unanswered, no idea whether Rick would reply or not. It is up to him of course I do not expect anything. Time will tell the answers.
Nick, my stomack is fine, fortunately I have never had any series problems with it for many decades.
Greetings,
Gyula
end quote respectfully Chet
People are wondering where I am. Well I really don't have the time for this right now. I only lingered on for so long here because I had to bring things to a completion. I spent way more time on all this than I should have. I don't regret it, but I have too much business to attend to to worry about these little children playing games. It's been really funny at times. But it just goes nowhere. If I come back in another 5 years I'm sure everyone will be exactly in the same places as before. Maybe moved on to another personality.what a rude an arrogant comment. It speaks volumes about you as man. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
what a rude an arrogant comment. It speaks volumes about you as man. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Today Rick F gave a gift to the world that will Change our world forever ,tomorrow is the dawn of a new era where wars for oil and resources famine ,drought ..mass extinctions will be in our past ,air pollution Global warming etc....Our children and......Oh
Oh wait ,I'm sorry Rick F has more important things to do
quote I have too much business to attend to to worry about these little children.end quote
see you in Church I suppose Rick ? here in these forums a few hundred thousand people working to teach and change the world ,to save many lives and stop much suffering to end oil wars Mass migrations Starvation Famine mass extinctions and ....
We Wait......
Chet K
JUST BECAUSE I HAVE INVOKE YOU FROM THE ABYSS RAYCATHODE, YOU BETTER BEAre you emphasising your own self importance ? very amusing.
NICE OTHER WISE I HAVE TO NOSE RING YOU..
If I come back in another 5 years I'm sure everyone will be exactly in the same places as before. Maybe moved on to another personality.
Chet, you are talking like you think RF has some secret path to Overunity. But he doesn't! He is Yet Another False Claimant who cannot support his claims with actual properly conducted and monitored demonstrations or evidence of any other kind. He pretends to "teach" but rambles on incessantly and cannot stick to a single topic. He cannot answer simple questions with simple answers -- or deliberately chooses not to, in order to obfuscate and misdirect. Of this there are pages and pages of examples in this thread and in his feature-length videos. He doesn't have time to consider what other people might be telling him or demonstrating, because he is too busy _talking_ about something or another.
So don't worry about RF doing the hit-and-run thing, coming in here and stirring up a wake then chickening out when he starts to get real challenges. We've seen them come and go, he isn't the first and won't be the last. And in terms of being interesting and holding some potential... well, if he hadn't been associated with JB for so long, we'd have laughed him off the forums long ago. It just took a little while longer, that's all.
Well I see that you are happy now that Rick has gone.
Could YOU show us the way to overunity please........
I don't get it guys. You talk so much instead of check Rick claims.
You have so much experience and digital tools to easy disprove or prove if in resonance there is energy gain.What do you waiting for? Just a parallel resonant tank circuit with high gain (high Q) and a stable resitive load. First measure the power dissipated with DC current then do it again in tank circuit. If the input energy is lower yet output energy the same in both cases then there is energy gain,right ?
Forget about Rick and check yourself if there is energy gain in simple LCR tank circuit.Look - if there is energy gain then the seup of many coupled coils is just overcomplication of this simple LCR tank circuit.
Rick was able to lit some 12V LED's in [below] 5 Watt realm total power [as we 'think'] with his gate driver. The voltage across the primary coil/ cap. was 5000 Volt.
If we want to achieve 5000 Watts gathered output power to deliver to our house e.g. . Then the voltage across the .coil/ cap. has to be around
150 000 volt. If I'm right.
Just think that the distances between the plates of the primary [1 nF] air capacitor has to be about 16 mm [2/3 ''].
Arne
First of all. Driving mosfet without gate driver is like forcing horse to run on one leg.
Nothing magical in it. With gate driver mosfet has speed as it should by specs.
With proper pull down resistors.
Without gate driver it is nothing. Only for child play.
Second. Power consists of 2 variables. Voltage and current. Only voltage is nothing.
You can do it with flyback more efficiently, if you need only voltage.
And if you want real speed. SIC diodes and mosfets. Future!
SIC diodes has no reverse time recovery.
SIC mosfets are drived with 20V, you should look their performance.
Silicon Carbide is speed! Low resistance.
I looked at Ricks mosfets, they are medium speed one.
After his 15 years of experience he choose very poorly mosfets and he talks how speed is important.
I can only laugh at his choice. Period.
Today Rick F gave a gift to the world that will Change our world forever ,tomorrow is the dawn of a new era where wars for oil and resources famine ,drought ..mass extinctions will be in our past ,air pollution Global warming etc....Our children and......Oh
Oh wait ,I'm sorry Rick F has more important things to do
quote I have too much business to attend to to worry about these little children.end quote
see you in Church I suppose Rick ? here in these forums a few hundred thousand people working to teach and change the world ,to save many lives and stop much suffering to end oil wars Mass migrations Starvation Famine mass extinctions and ....
We Wait......
Chet K
Well I see that you are happy now that Rick has gone.
Could YOU show us the way to overunity please........
You are right on It is good to see someone telling the real story about how to switch rapidly and other points you made.
From reading your posts, you are obviously well versed in the art,
But it us frustrating to deal with, or try to teach "the man of the hour".
Regards
seaad, why "5000 Watt " and how : as Wattpeak or Wh per day ?
WhatsIsIt : how important is for the speed the " frequency modulation" ?
Mr.Friedrich wrote about motor use : capacitive,resistive,inductive load ( and inrush current/ nominal current ratio)
When 50 Hz represents 3000 rpm rotative and 60 Hz 3600 rpmhow many rotations represent KHz,MHz signal cycles ?
What is BEMF in grid- connected appliances : look for negative power factor
Sometimes fancy knowledge discourage members up to the point they give up because they think they know less.You are right in all you say (and some of us have said most of it before), but there is one point I'd like to clear up: In the coil setup RF showed and talked about interminably in this thread, and which our friend worked on to replicate, he doesn't use a mosfet at all, I thought. He is just using the gate driver directly to drive the LC tank.
It is not true. We are all here in same pot.
Even SG3525, IR2110. IRF 740 basic setup on/of 30/20 ns outperforms any Ricks mosfets he has on his web sale. And it cost peanuts.
I dont want to talk about Rick anymore.
Members of this forum has to unite and share.
When sharing, something always pops up. Thats the point. You need nobody.
And you have everything. Just become all friends and work together.
Nick Z is trying that for a long time.
He does his thing and not depend on some messiah.
I am trying to be fair for anyone. Smallest and biggest. As much as I can.
Can stand critics also if I am wrong.
I am small guy just as everyone else. No big deal!
Dont be frustrated, you all are doing good!
The truth will pop up, if not today, then some other day. It will!
When?
Rick never had any gift to give. Period. End of story.
His only gift to this forum was his exit.
Now maybe serious work can commence without the profuse verbiage.
Itsu made a beautiful replication and accurate measurements that showed no excess power to be had.
Is this OU?
Well I see that you are happy now that Rick has gone.
Could YOU show us the way to overunity please........
Is this OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb1UpX0-Q00
Is this OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb1UpX0-Q00 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb1UpX0-Q00)
Is this OU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb1UpX0-Q00
I am shocked at the attitude of the admin of this forum but we all make mistakes so that should be forgiven as I think he has probably learned from this experience also.
Respectfully,
Carroll
He is just using the gate driver directly to drive the LC tank.
Yes for you it is OU. That Video and your questions convince everyone why you are the big expert here in this forum.You can't prove anything over the internet, remember? I guarantee if you build it right, it will work. Corollary: If it doesn't work... you didn't build it right. QED.
What is the next? that you ask that the lighting on your yellowed laboratory is also OU?
If the gate driver has Schmitt trigger on input, then is possible to use signal from coil as input to gate driver without need of timer.
But you can not control switching frequency. It depends on coil feedback. Is it the best frequency for that task? Hmm.
Without Schmitt trigger gate driver will pick up any oscillation and will switch randomly which will lead to its own burn out.
And gate driver has its limitations.
But, yes, you can power coil that way for a while but not for larger power needs.
Or you can use timers which has also schmitt trigger on input, like simpliest of all, 555, for the same purpose.
SG3525 has also input pin for timing, not sure if it has Schmitt trigger on it. Probably has. Without it it will react on any noise from outside.
TC4420 is resilient low side gate driver which can output 6A pulsed, I think, which is more than enough, giving output of 100mA or so, for that coil.
But your question is an important one. Is the autoresonating frequency the "best" frequency for the task?
You can't prove anything over the internet, remember? I guarantee if you build it right, it will work. Corollary: If it doesn't work... you didn't build it right. QED.
And it's my teeth that are yellowed, not my laboratory.
In autoresonant mode , frequency picked by coil and returned back to mosfet driver is the same frequency as the resonant frequency of tank circuit ? is it shifted in phase ? can we make it the same frequency andin phase with resonant frequency of tank circuit ?
Please experts - give us some tips in that direction. I'm quite sure that if the feedback is on the same frequency and phase and we can adjust it to trigger in some small period of resonant frequency cycle as a burst of one-polarity impulses then the gain would be visible.
Dont be another Rick!
One was enough. Lets forget nightmare!
Hi here is a trailer for JB's Lockridge device, watch it or ignore it, but was it OU?Well that's three minutes of my life that I won't ever get back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AykzfzpmNLU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AykzfzpmNLU)
Has any one got a copy of DVD no 14 I can watch E-mail me?
Well that's three minutes of my life that I won't ever get back.Hi Mr Tinsel K, Was it that good ? ;D
This is an interesting video from the point of view that both legs of the neon are lit up (ac) as you'r a clever
I gather English isn't your first language. You write and understand it very well, but sarcasm and irony sometimes get lost in translation. I am as far from being "another Rick" as you can imagine. Please refer to my YouTube channel if you would like to learn more about me and my work.
For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeQ5WnziKBA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeQ5WnziKBA)
I gather English isn't your first language. You write and understand it very well, but sarcasm and irony sometimes get lost in translation. I am as far from being "another Rick" as you can imagine. Please refer to my YouTube channel if you would like to learn more about me and my work.
For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeQ5WnziKBA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeQ5WnziKBA)
And I'll post a link to this one again, since it once more is relevant in several ways: first, you get a "demonstration" of a complete demonstration with measurements, schematic, closeup pic of the actual build and full instructions, in under 10 minutes, and second, it explains a bit about subharmonics and resonance and may help one decide whether or not resonance may be important in whatever "task" one might be attempting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChV7n0EY2h0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChV7n0EY2h0)
And it may help you understand who and what I am.
8)
This is an interesting video from the point of view that both legs of the neon are lit up (ac) as you'r a cleverAh, but they are not both lit at the same instant! ;)
guy with the amount you build, how would you build a similar device that produces negative only pulses ?
Regards Raymondo
You got me wrong! I watched all your videos before.OK mate, no worries, we are cool!
You have sharp mind and sometimes sharp, almost rude answers.
Loose a little bit, dont behaive like Rick. That is what I ment. Nothing more.
If you understand my post as sarcasm, my apology.
I see in you researcher, so sarcasm has no place in my posts to you! Sorry.
OK mate, no worries, we are cool!
(If I seem rude at times... it is only because I mean to be.)
Ah, but they are not both lit at the same instant! ;)I was thinking in terms of why JBs youtube videos use negative high voltage to drive tesla coils
A high voltage, high frequency rectifier? Maybe even synchronous rectification using more complicated circuitry. Simple DC biasing might be the best way, depending on whom you are trying to troll.
But it is my experience that if one pulses something negatively, somewhere something else must pulse positively if nothing is to be wasted. Sure, one may contrive various clever schemes to drain off the positive pulses to ground, or use them to charge a battery while using the negative pulses to run a motor (as I show in the MHOP video series, the Better-Than-Bedini (tm TKLabs) battery charger/pulse motor).
But is it OU?
I been watching your progress with interest.Hint: If my video is in the "alt.snakeoil" category you can be sure that all is not as it seems. ;)
You did not answer to my post about your coil in water video?
I noticed that bulb light up at bottom of jar.
I presume it is not real, but I am not sure.
Was it your joke about Rick or real thing?
Is it something under table?
I am just curious! Because i trust your videos.
Thanks!
I was thinking in terms of why JBs youtube videos use negative high voltage to drive tesla coilsOK... Maybe Wesley could try his Krytron....
and then the pointer or video gets deleted this also applies to Master IVOs videos witch to my knowledge are still viewable and the main difference being i can think of is electron flow direction as opposed to holes. ::)
There might be another school of thought here and that is impulsing the low turn impulse winding with such a narrow negative going pulse width with out using a spark gap device as one guys suggested using a Russian titanium hydrogen excited thyratron but if negative energy is required to earthy side thyratrons polarity would need reversing, oh such fun ;D ;D
Raymondo
T K does Bedini: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbTy8EVaGI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbTy8EVaGI)[/size]What's your point?
R F does Bedini: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXuEeLUMAug&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXuEeLUMAug&feature=youtu.be)
You decide...
T K does Bedini: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbTy8EVaGI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DbTy8EVaGI)[/size]That's pretty hilarious all right. Who paid for all that stuff? In the long run it was Bedini's customers, right? And did they get what they paid for? Even Rick will probably agree that they did not.
R F does Bedini: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXuEeLUMAug&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXuEeLUMAug&feature=youtu.be)
You decide...
Thanks for the reply, I think I will continue to play just I am not going to spend a lot of money on it at this time I am just going to continue acquiring parts for it from scrap such as a floor scrubber I got some parts off this week that way if I don't see gains at least I won't have spent a bunch of money it thanks.
Hint: If my video is in the "alt.snakeoil" category you can be sure that all is not as it seems. ;)
In this case you may recognize the wireless receiver from other videos where I demonstrate and explain. So even though it is not evident in the video, you could probably bet that a wireless power transmitter is somewhere nearby. Running under water is no trick, even though the water is normally a short circuit, at high frequencies it has a high impedance so does not affect the lighting of the bulb. The behaviour of the bulb, brightening and dimming, is also a big clue.
Don't worry, if one of my videos isn't in "alt.snakeoil", it is totally legitimate.
Hi overcurrent.0,9 MWh ::) : 20 sqm solarpanels with 10% average conversion efficiency ?
I'm pretty sure most of the older hands here cut their teeth on " Bedini " tech.
One member, currently under MODERATION, Hoppy carried out exhaustive battery analysis over a very long period of time, he'd be the one to help answer your question.
I built several motors over the years, one ran for around 3 months, single battery and mechanical commutation with no " apparent " loss. Very efficient but otherwise, useless, as no extra energy could be had without upsetting the fine balance.
Not wishing to deter you in your endeavours, tinkering and a " hands on " approach is a great way to learn about this fascinating subject. Don't forget that there's many here that have already " beaten " this path, quite thoroughly, don't be afraid to ask questions.
Definitely, " Solar " is a good investment, I've just passed the 0.9 MWh in three months!!
Cheers Graham.
What's your point?He is not my hero. I understand his open sourcing information - it has been very helpful to me and I suspect to others who do not wish to get bogged down in the sarcasm and potential vitriol from those who disagree with comments on this forum.
Even if the equipment in Rick's video was his own (which it isn't), and he was in his own lab (which he isn't), so what?
Again, what is your point? It seems as though your only interest here is to discredit anyone who does not consider Rick to be their hero, as you apparently do.
Surely you're not trying to compare TK's and Rick's knowledge and abilities in these realms? If you are, that's laughable.
Rather than trying to discredit others for their fine work, I would suggest you present your own work that supports your hero. Otherwise, knock off the nonsense please.
(snip)Thanks for the flowers. But... not nearly "all" the ways. Just the ones I know about, have fallen for myself, or can dream up. One thing I do know for sure: someone will always find a new way to fool, or try to fool, someone else for money or fame.
Tinsel has shown many times all the ways you can fool people if you were an unscrupulous individual or even at times persons unaware innocent of their measurement error
(snip)
Respectfully
Chet
AKing someday I hope he open sources information that leads to a heretoforeBut he has open sourced everything. You just have to sit through his videos. What we could do with is someone to liase with Rick and Hong Kong to produce those multi coilers 10 times cheaper along with his very effective battery rejuvenators. I think that would make a difference.
unknown anomaly which withstands all scrutiny and can bring Stefan's mission statement here to fruition .
to help all around the globe ,not just one lab or lifestyle.
Chet K
Hi overcurrent.
I'm pretty sure most of the older hands here cut their teeth on " Bedini " tech.
One member, currently under MODERATION, Hoppy carried out exhaustive battery analysis over a very long period of time, he'd be the one to help answer your question.
I built several motors over the years, one ran for around 3 months, single battery and mechanical commutation with no " apparent " loss. Very efficient but otherwise, useless, as no extra energy could be had without upsetting the fine balance.
Not wishing to deter you in your endeavours, tinkering and a " hands on " approach is a great way to learn about this fascinating subject. Don't forget that there's many here that have already " beaten " this path, quite thoroughly, don't be afraid to ask questions.
Definitely, " Solar " is a good investment, I've just passed the 0.9 MWh in three months!!
Cheers Graham.
But he has open sourced everything. You just have to sit through his videos. What we could do with is someone to liase with Rick and Hong Kong to produce those multi coilers 10 times cheaper along with his very effective battery rejuvenators. I think that would make a difference.What is the exact make and model of the LED bulbs RF used in the famous photo? Do they, or do they not, contain the MAX16820 high brightness , dimmable LED controller chip?
Simple free energy mistakes.What, only an _hour_ long video from RF? He's slipping, I expected two hours at least. Can't you just clip out the two or three minutes where he might actually be saying something significant? I seriously have better things to do with my hours than watching Rick's videos. (And so do you, I'll wager.) He really isn't a very entertaining or competent lecturer, and that has nothing to do with his mastery or non-mastery of the subject matter.
1 Getting distracted by bots which lead you away from truth.
2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxzepmaj0yk&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxzepmaj0yk&feature=youtu.be)
Yes, but what Bedini did not tell us (which Rick outed) is that you could have charged several batteries and still ran your motor for three months. That is what he did not want us to know so he had something up his sleeve which he could sell later.Feel free to demonstrate. Please don't point to some old video by someone else. Make your own demonstration that illustrates the truth of your claims.
In an oscillatory set up the batteries' ions would potentialize by voltage only and would self charge. That is why the ions would keep charging the batteries after switch off. This means that your battery woud increase in voltage after switching off the charging circuit - which is the opposite of conventional charging. Also your batteries are charged cold and even colder than ambient in some circumstances.
AKingI make no overunity claims, so there is nothing to discuss.. I am merely pointing out certain matters which are worthy of investigation and have potential for those willing to experiment and add something positive.
Well
It is actually an open invitation here
there are plenty here who are currious and would help.
Chet
a.king,here lecture ,I give special attention to [0012] "...... undesired(desired !)......" and [0024] "resonance" ?!Thanks Stefan and yes i did watch the 'clip' but found it difficult to concentrate getting much information with all the back ground and recording noise, perhaps others will collect more, hopefully to share.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=TW&NR=200727310A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20070716&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=TW&NR=200727310A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=20070716&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#)
and here ( one time more) :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=5264988A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19931123&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=5264988A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19931123&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#)
60 Watt nominal lamp : 130 Volt x 200 Amperes "cold energy"
26000 VpiApi / 60 Watt : 433 times the nominal value = "EMP stroke power"
capacitor: stroke power re-/charge pumping process device
I think a good example of the huge power that the Rick Friedrich circuit delivers is this video:
https://youtu.be/6he58A5xTIQ?t=1562
at around 30 minutes in it, where several high power LED bulbs are lighted up
and the voltage from the batteries did not change during the whole demonstration..
So this is pretty exiting and my friend confirms it in his replication.
Regards, Stefan.
Resonance is a gain. In a series resonance circuit the input amperage remains the same as the circulating current in the resonant coil. At the same time the voltage inside the resonant coil goes higher up to 144 times. So a simple V x A = watts indicates OU of course.
I think a good example of the huge power that the Rick Friedrich circuit delivers is this video:
https://youtu.be/6he58A5xTIQ?t=1562
at around 30 minutes in it, where several high power LED bulbs are lighted up
and the voltage from the batteries did not change during the whole demonstration..
So this is pretty exiting and my friend confirms it in his replication.
Regards, Stefan.
Rick F. is telling (us) in this video how to decrease the current down to zero AND beyond:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik&t=5619s
Just arrange multiple layers of secondary coils around the big main coil primay then insert plenty of ferrite coils in the (main) primay coil. That inserting of ferrites doesn't affects anything else (negatively) just reducing the feeding current below and beond zero
(at 1hour 19 minutes 38 seconds in).
The ferrites did Not even made a retuning of the big coil because of the strong bonding/ lock R F says.
Look a bit into the video from 1H 18 min 15 sec. ==> 1H 20 min 05 seconds.
I think this thread "confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims" is the right place to perform a verification of that above.
Itsu made in his thread at OUR https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.275
post # 280
a first test about this. I thank him for that. ;D
Regards Arne
Rick F. is telling (us) in this video how to decrease the current down to zero AND beyond:Please explain why, if a Rick Device needs _zero current_ in order to operate.... why then can one not be operated at full performance off of just ONE of the receiver coils producing output from a first Rick Transmitter Device? Or even from the summed output of 70 receivers?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik&t=5619s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik&t=5619s)
Just arrange multiple layers of secondary coils around the big main coil primay then insert plenty of ferrite coils in the (main) primay coil. That inserting of ferrites doesn't affects anything else (negatively) just reducing the feeding current below and beond zero
(at 1hour 19 minutes 38 seconds in).
The ferrites did Not even made a retuning of the big coil because of the strong bonding/ lock R F says.
Look a bit into the video from 1H 18 min 15 sec. ==> 1H 20 min 05 seconds.
I think this thread "confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims" is the right place to perform a verification of that above.
Itsu made in his thread at OUR https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.275 (https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3691.275)
post # 280
a first test about this. I thank him for that. ;D
Regards Arne
(snip)I don't think anyone except you and I actually know what Carriage Return and LineFeed characters are, or how both are needed for a hard "enter" new line, and how they must be fed to the LPT1 emulator in the correct order or you get ... garbled links, bad paragraph formatting, and et cetera.
PS the editor appears to have a problem with CR and LF it appears to mix them up witch is annoying and a never ending circle trying to compensate for :) :)
You just forced me to watch that video where Rick determines power just looking at one led.
He said "there is lots of power there", without measuring power.
I can not understand this any more.
Void tried to explain to you how to proper measure the power and how leds can deceive.
This is beyond any fairytale.
At beggining of video he stated that he got HV and with voltage more power. What about current.
I am comming to point that this is bad joke!
Scope + voltage probe + current probe + math on scope. Average power.
Any other card trick is a joke.
Rick, come to your senses! Buy a current probe and start act as real researcher!
This is joke, right? This whole thread?
I mean no insult to anyone. But this is a joke? Somebody tell me that I am dreaming.
I will be happy if I am wrong!
I am going to watch some movie. Any movie is better than this. Star wars, anything!
You are convinced from Void post but criticize Ricks measurement.
Did anyone ever find out the exact make and model of the LED bulbs used, or whether those LED bulbs use the High Brightness, Dimmable LED driver chip MAX16819 or 20.... which chip tries its best to maintain a constant brightness level of the LEDS it is driving, and/or can respond to PWM modulation of the input to produce the dimmable feature.Hi TK,
Rick does not measure anything. He just quessing power of his circuits.
Where you saw that Rick measuring voltage and current on scope and make a math for power.???
Mr. Itsu does that all the time and showing power. Real transient power.
And Mr. Tinsel is right. If zero current is source, then the source is not needed or small cap will does the job.
This thread is joke of ignorance!
Are you blind?
Very nice. I was blind, but had hope that all this Videos from Rick ends in positive results. It is a barrier for people, that only greedy grasp something without do invest some time.
Why did you make a big deal about measurement. It is very easzy to do it very accurate via Watt hour meter (sorry, don't know the correct word in english, it is a DC Watt hour measurement Tool).
First you load your primary battery to maximum and unload it over the Wh-Meter. Now, you know your Wh in your battery ory battery bank. Reload it to the same Cutoff Voltage and start your system. All other batteriess (for example secondary battery bank) should be completly empty.
After your run you can unload all batteries in your sytem over the wh-Meter and can prove for yourself, if your system is over- or underunity. Simply compare the total Wh after your run with the Wh that you have measured before.
You are convinced from Void post but criticize Ricks measurement. Ich have never seen such a flat discharge curve of his statistic in real life. It is simply impossible.
His Videos are made, that you can understand the process that give you gains. You have to replicate it for your own. This Videos are not made to prove anything, only give help for free. If you don't want this information, why you watch it?
99% of you are convinced that Ricks measurements are false. Everyone has confirmed each other in every negative claim about him. Why you are posting this things again and again? I tell you something: Perhaps you feel there is more there. A big truth. And no one should find it? That is the reason, why you are all came in here and prevent a constructive discussion about that topic. I know it, aking knows it and also the whole hole silence readers, that cracked the code.
Very nice. I was blind, but had hope that all this Videos from Rick ends in positive results. It is a barrier for people, that only would greedy grasp something without want to invest some time. That informations are not good for rough people, I think. I can see it on your last comment to Rick..wow!
Why did you make a big deal about measurement. It is very easy to do it very accurate via Watt hour meter (sorry, don't know the correct word in english, it is a DC Watt hour measurement Tool).
First you load your primary battery to maximum and unload it over the Wh-Meter. Now, you know your Wh in your battery or battery bank. Reload it to the same Cutoff Voltage and start your system. All other batteries (for example secondary battery bank) should be completly empty.
After your run you can unload all batteries in your system over the Wh-Meter and can prove for yourself, if your system is over- or underunity. Simply compare the total Wh after your run with the total Wh that you have measured before.
But Stefan, Rick clearly stated :
....
Anyway, if we just have longer lasting batteries on our loads, that is really great...
so instead of running a 3 Watts LED light on a 12 Volts 7 Amphour=84 Wh lead acid battery for 28 hours,
you now can now run it for 100 hours,
that would be a great thing and a good circuit to use !
Don´t you agree ??
So this is probably imho the main focus, what Rick wants to show us, as I understand it....
...
...
Now if we look carefully at your position in these matters with your insistence about measuring LEDs, and your questions to me in that respect, we find that you now show your skepticism bent. Notice I answered your point in that measurement is 0.5W each (it is sometimes 3W when I put the ferrite coil in the transmitter, which also brings down the input to 0.5W) with larger LEDs. There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at the top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input. All 18 people at the meeting could see that I could continue to add more and more coils with loads which only brought the input down.
...
You must be aware that batteries can chemically produce current when they are under rated voltage or depleted.Sorry, I wrote "...should be completly empty.". I meant make it completly empty to the under cutoff voltage like 11V. My comment discribes exactly what big battery labratories do, to test their battery banks. You have to run the batteries into their specs and measure the Watt hour. You can do it for example 3 times and will see, that you have very accurate results, if the discharge rate and temperature of the cells are nearly the same.
Only capacitors can show true situation like Mr. Itsu did. He understood problem.
And he used supercaps.
You will be fooled with batteries.
Dont use batteries to.prove OU. Use capacitors of big capacitance, supercaps.
Why dont you do it and show to everyone OU? Why ask Mr. Gear to do it? Hmm?
Is that the same thing Rick does?
Envolve everyone to solve things for him?
Please do it, take a measurements and come back with results?
Dont take Ricks path of stating and doing nothing!
Thats the worst path!
Why dont you do it and show to everyone OU? Why ask Mr. Gear to do it? Hmm?Please read it again, I have write to Mr. Gear: "After your run you can unload all batteries in your system over the Wh-Meter and can prove for YOURSELF....".
Anyway, if we just have longer lasting batteries on our loads, that is really great...
so instead of running a 3 Watts LED light on a 12 Volts 7 Amphour=84 Wh lead acid battery for 28 hours,
you now can now run it for 100 hours,
that would be a great thing and a good circuit to use !
Don´t you agree ??
Hi TK,Yes, I know, and I also know that there are probably thousands of different types of 12 volt MR16 LED bulbs. Some have COB LEDs, some have discrete 5mm LEDs, some have 3 or 4 or eight emitters... but most importantly SOME are just a resistor and series LEDs, and MANY incorporate the MAX16820 type High Brightness Dimmable LED controller chip inside.
The LED bulbs used are the 12 V version of the MR16 types, made for both AC and DC operation.
See such at ebay what a.king21 included as example here:
https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg533892/topicseen/#msg533892 (https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg533892/topicseen/#msg533892)
Gyula
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik&t=5619s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik&t=5619s)Sure, he _says_ he can use the output of one of his coils to actually run the frequency generator. Aren't you curious at all why he doesn't actually SHOW that?
37 min 00sek ==> 38 min 20 sek
The problem is that Rick NEVER makes any real measurements. All he makes are excuses for why he doesn't make measurements. A flat discharge curve from a battery doesn't mean anything if you don't know the amount of current being drawn from the battery. If a battery has been fully charged and then allowed to rest for a few hours and then lightly loaded it will actually show an increase in voltage for the first few minutes because as the battery is first being used it will warm up slightly and that will increase the voltage. Many inexperienced experimenters are fooled by this.
You are criticizing people that have been working in electronics for many many years. They have put thousands of hours into investigating claims like Rick's. Unless Rick is willing to share more than he has there just isn't any way to verify his claims.
Respectfully,
Carroll
I watched your latest video with the fans and charging circuit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk
Might the decrease in input current be a result of obtaining better efficiency?
To you, is "Free Energy" the same as "Overunity"?
Perhaps you are squeezing "more" energy from the source to the load....this does not necessarily mean it is free or OU.
I am sure I did some circuit simulation testing many years ago with this setup, and achieved the same results you just showed. I will have to see if I can find it.
: "After your run you can unload all batteries in your system over the Wh-Meter and can prove for YOURSELF....".
Even if I could supply a whole city from a button cell, you would say that I have a measurement error. :D
So it makes no sense to proof anything. You are to intelligent or what they call it here "accurate" for me. I don't claim OU. I see only gains for myself.
Even if I could supply a whole city from a button cell, you would say that I have a measurement error. :DIf you measure on your button cell transient power of 1 Watt, and on the line which powers city 10 Watt, then you have OU, and I dont have to trust anything except your proper measurement.
So it makes no sense to proof anything.
(snip)Actually that's right. RF's problem is "you". That is, his problem does not reside in himself. He has no problems. He'd be fine except for all the "youse" who keep asking him to support his claims with evidence rather than anecdote.
problem is you actually (snip)
Until this morning I did not know that Mr. Gear is R&D Simens. His deparment has 136 employes.I have just read all of Gear's posts. Telling Rick off in swear words is not the dignity I would expect from the head of Siemens R and D.
They already this Rick motor test with AC source in the past.
I will not go into details of reactive power, which in Ricks case splits, returning power to battery and motor.
Reactive power returned to motor will increase RPM which results with more output to load which has to be capacitive or inductive. More power to load creates more reactive power and loop is created. It can go to some point.
Sorry, but no OU.
It is better than simple transformer feedback loop but still no OU.
It is replica of big systems of power companies where they use expensive motor/generators for compensation of reactive power and returning power back to grid. More complicated because their generators are AC and phase align is needed for power to be returned to grid.
Rick uses DC battery and simple rectification does do job.
When he saw Ricks video, he laughs and he pointed some things and has banned for that.
He still laughs.
So it is not new thing, power companies use it for a long time.
Rick has to have caps on load to make reactive power.
He said he wish the best to Rick and he has more serious projects to do.
I have just read all of Gear's posts. Telling Rick off in swear words is not the dignity I would expect from the head of Siemens R and D.
He should be fired if that is his attitude.
http://www.patent-de.com/19860717/DE3501076A1.html
What does "Mr.gear" think about it ?
I think the problem here is that nobody show the path to convert high Q into high reactive power and then this reactive power to real output power, basically converting the Q into real gain. also nobody explained how this could be possible. I've found two reasons
Mr. Gear is head of department. He makes the call who gets fired.Well tell him to look into the 4 Benitez granted patents. I doubt anyone from his team can understand them. When you laugh at me and Rick you are laughing at Carlos Benitez and his 4 granted patents. It is YOU who are ignorant and also the Siemens department.
It was his decision to look into this. One of many before.
He sends to you both best regards.
He will tell you and others all of this in person but he was moderated because of number of clicks and not real quest of OU. That are his words.
He called Ricks thread bunch of ignorant people without any knowledge.
He means probably you and Rick. But thats only what I think.
Until this morning I did not know that Mr. Gear is R&D Simens. His deparment has 136 employes.
They already this Rick motor test with AC source in the past.
I will not go into details of reactive power, which in Ricks case splits, returning power to battery and motor.
Reactive power returned to motor will increase RPM which results with more output to load which has to be capacitive or inductive. More power to load creates more reactive power and loop is created. It can go to some point.
Sorry, but no OU.
It is better than simple transformer feedback loop but still no OU.
It is replica of big systems of power companies where they use expensive motor/generators for compensation of reactive power and returning power back to grid. More complicated because their generators are AC and phase align is needed for power to be returned to grid.
Rick uses DC battery and simple rectification does do job.
When he saw Ricks video, he laughs and he pointed some things and has banned for that.
He still laughs.
So it is not new thing, power companies use it for a long time.
Rick has to have caps on load to make reactive power.
He said he wish the best to Rick and he has more serious projects to do.
Well this is all funny until I rotate my batteries around for years. This was only the basic level of seeing some free energy. Improving the efficiency and also charging batteries or running other loads while you couldn't before. All by just simply adding a diode and load. It is a very simple and effective revelation. You are really interested in suppressing this idea I see, just look at all your postings all of a sudden. Filled a whole page with nothing at all. It really gets under your skin.
You are good guy and trust too much. In every circuit you must measure input power and load power.
Otherwise you will be misslead into falxe thing.
I wont go into deep of topic. Lots of guys here done it and saw mistakes.
Nobody here is telling you that as a joke. They also been misslead many times and learned the lesson.
Measure input, output, thats the only way.
Dont trust nobody until you do your measurements.
Most realible measurement is transient one. You must have scope, voltage and current probe and ability to make math on scope.
Every other method sometimes can lead to nowhere.
There is no magic negative power which feeds lots of load. No. You measure how much your load consume. That is correct way.
Always measure! It will also show your mistakes as well!
I dont mean to discourage you.! Always take the measures the proper way!
Sorry to dissapoint you about Rick.
But Stefan, Rick clearly stated :So Gyula,even better, then we get 10 times running time out of the batteries ! Yes, that can be possible...My friend will show soon his replication...
So he claimed COP > 10 performance between the resonant TX and RX circuits.
Gyula
Have you replicated it yourself with the original parts from Rick and replicated it ???
My friend has and has got the same results as Rick ! lol...So far regarding the measurements...You are just a skeptic, that has probably never done any good measurements yourself..
Regards, Stefan.
. You are really interested in suppressing this idea I see, just look at all your postings all of a sudden. Filled a whole page with nothing at all. It really gets under your skin.
Hi Stefan. If your friend got the same results as Rick showed, then that is not so good.benfr,a.king and the Admin adviced about the "special written information in Mr.Friedrichs' his booklet",so not his,RF, videos gives the right way to explore the possible success !
Rick did not show anything at all convincing, as has been pointed out already.
Try powering some non-inductive resistors or incandescent bulbs of at least 5 Watts rating,
or better yet self loop it as Rick claimed in one of his videos should work. I would really like to
see an honest attempt by Rick or your friend to self loop the setup. Keep in mind that if I power
12V Lights directly with a 12V battery, that the efficiency is effectively 100%. There is no point to
Rick's circuit if it is not COP > 1.
All the best...
Hi Stefan. Here is the issue with this.Sure I undertand this, if his LED lights light then only due to the RF bursts only with maybe half of the rated output power,but he can connect several LEDs like 10 x 3 Watts LEDs and they shine at maybe 1.5 Watts each and you can run these LED bulbs for 10 timeslonger on the same battery with his circuit, than a single 3 Watts LED at full 3 Watts output, that would have generated then15 Watts x 10 times longer...
If I connect a 12V MR16 LED bulb to a 12V battery directly, it will light with an efficiency of 100%,
minus any losses of any internal circuit components which may be inside the bulb itself.
Unless Rick's setup is OU, then it will light 12V LED bulbs with less efficiency than connecting
the bulbs directly to a 12V battery, due to losses in his driver circuit and in the other components in
his setup.
All the best...
benfr,a.king and the Admin adviced about the "special written information in Mr.Friedrichs' his booklet",so not his,RF, videos gives the right way to explore the possible success !
Stefan,I am moderating all the skeptics here in this thread now, so I can better answer them...So we have a better understanding... Thanks for your understanding...I don´t wnat the skeptics to ruin this thread...
Please, remove moderations from Gear.
I am trying to convince him to help, and he is half willing to do it.
He has army of people and SF tech behind him.
He was maybe rude at the times but he is great asset.
It is not goal to disprove Rick. Goal is to improve what he does if it is possible.
Your choice!
Thanks!
Sure I undertand this, if his LED lights light then only due to the RF bursts only with maybe half of the rated output power,but he can connect several LEDs like 10 x 3 Watts LEDs and they shine at maybe 1.5 Watts each and you can run these LED bulbs for 10 timeslonger on the same battery with his circuit, than a single 3 Watts LED at full 3 Watts output, that would have generated then15 Watts x 10 times longer...
It seems the batteries are required in these circuits as they play an important role, so you just can´t run the circuit just on supercaps...
Maybe the energy is directly converted from inside the battery then...
This is, what we still have to find out...Regards, Stefan.
Stefan,User Gear only made also rude comments....
Please, remove moderations from Gear.
I am trying to convince him to help, and he is half willing to do it.
He has army of people and SF tech behind him.
He was maybe rude at the times but he is great asset.
It is not goal to disprove Rick. Goal is to improve what he does if it is possible.
Your choice!
Thanks!
Sure I undertand this, if his LED lights light then only due to the RF bursts only with maybe half of the rated output power,but he can connect several LEDs like 10 x 3 Watts LEDs and they shine at maybe 1.5 Watts each and you can run these LED bulbs for 10 timeslonger on the same battery with his circuit, than a single 3 Watts LED at full 3 Watts output, that would have generated then15 Watts x 10 times longer...
It seems the batteries are required in these circuits as they play an important role, so you just can´t run the circuit just on supercaps...
Maybe the energy is directly converted from inside the battery then...
This is, what we still have to find out...Regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan. If your friend got the same results as Rick showed, then that is not so good.It seems these battery circuits need the batteries ! Maybe the additional extracted energy is generated inside the battery cells...
Rick did not show anything at all convincing, as has been pointed out already.
Try powering some non-inductive resistors or incandescent bulbs of at least 5 Watts rating,
or better yet self loop it as Rick claimed in one of his videos should work. I would really like to
see an honest attempt by Rick or your friend to self loop the setup. Keep in mind that if I power
12V Lights directly with a 12V battery, that the efficiency is effectively 100%. There is no point to
Rick's circuit if it is not COP > 1.
All the best...
Stefan,
Rick has to unterstand that nobody is against him.
But he must start to participate.
What you suggest to do next? Continue without measuring?
Just build the thing without knowing what is really happening and how much we can pull from that system? And if we can pull more than we put in?
Because we can not find common point, can you be the one and make some decisions as neutral person. ??? ?
Suggest next steps?
Make some rules?
It seems these battery circuits need the batteries ! Maybe the additional extracted energy is generated inside the battery cells...
So closing the loop without the batteries is not possible...
So if you charge up a 12 Volts battery with 80 Wattshours and you will get out of it with Rick circuit 160 Wattshours, what do you call this ??
Some people call it OU , some call it better efficiency out of batteries...lol...
Have you built it ?
My friend has..and so has Rick..
So when my friend is ready with his new parts we will show it...
You just keep on flaming here... and you don´t add any technical details or analysis yourself.... so you keep being moderated, so I can much better answer...
Hi IancaIV. Rick stated in his video that he could take the output from one of theIf he said this in his video and one coil output is sufficient for the frequency generator he can use as intermittent energy source
output coils and use that to power his generator in a self looped mode.
I was merely asking for Rick or someone else to demonstrate this claim made by Rick.
I would suggest using a large filter capacitor instead of battery for the power source so
we don't have to leave the demonstration running for a day or more... ;)
All the best...
(snip)Thank you thank you thank you!
Also see:
https://www.bulbtown.com/Less_Than_1_Watt_s/1015.htm (https://www.bulbtown.com/Less_Than_1_Watt_s/1015.htm)
Here are their 3 watt incandescent bulbs:
https://www.bulbtown.com/3_Watt_s/449.htm (https://www.bulbtown.com/3_Watt_s/449.htm)
All the best...
Thank you thank you thank you!Send some to Rick! ;)
A great selection and great prices.
Send some to Rick! ;)Rick can get his own dim bulbs.
Stefan,
Rick has to unterstand that nobody is against him.
But he must start to participate.
What you suggest to do next? Continue without measuring?
Just build the thing without knowing what is really happening and how much we can pull from that system? And if we can pull more than we put in?
Because we can not find common point, can you be the one and make some decisions as neutral person.????
Suggest next steps?
Make some rules?
That's a big part of the problem Aking... folks making assumptions about how much current, voltage, and/or power their LED's are using.
I can tell you from experience, and by comparison to the background lighting, that none of those LEDs are anywhere near their full brightness. Try lighting a discrete LED with 5mA of current...I think you may be shocked at how bright it can be.
So, it is more likely 2mA, x 1.8V = 3.6mW
and... 3.6mW x 50 LEDs = 180mW.
-OR-
5mA x 1.8V = 9mW
x 50 = 450mW
Good grief.
Assuming each red led is at 2 volts and 20ma = 40 mw consumption per red led = 0.04 watts.
Therefore 25 red leds = 1 watt consumption. We have over 50 of these so we have to add a further 2 watts output to our calculations in addition to the 1/2 watt lit mr16s. (he he)
I only see 11 leds being lit. I agree there are probably 50 coils but most of them don't seem to be connected to anything. So the claim of lighting 50 leds doesn't seem to be correct.Again an assumption without any facts. If you could be BOTHERED to go to the video, Rick disconnects his camera and does closeups on the coils so you can see the leds lit.
Carroll
Nice red herring fallacy.
Stefan: the notion of batteries in the circuit is an important one. If you go to Rick's video on the Heavyside component heMy hope for the future is that these developments
explains the science there. And again it is a secret revealed.
The use of capacitors as comparable is just ignorance of the experimenter who knows nothing about this ou science.
When it coms to capacitors there is much experimentation to be done. For example reforming capacitors and conditioning them and conditioning batteries is an important aspect of this science.
Assuming each red led is ...
You guys are just against OU.
Hi you lot :D …
Hi you lot :D lets stand back a moment and ask what are the risks ir Rick F comes out and declares full blown that he has free energy devices in kit form for sail hmm?That's strange idea to post since Rick has already said in his video that you could power the input with the power from one of the outputs. So he is already claiming OU. But he refuses to offer any evidence to support that claim. I am not doubting there are those that don't want free energy or OU to be widely available to the masses. But Rick's videos so far don't support his claims of OU so I don't think he has anything to worry about.
This site is open to any one to view on the plant, and only recently John Badini and his brother have left the planet under mysterious
circumstances and then you have Steven Greer talking about free energy devices being directly related to the existence of ET's and anti gravity and the 'Men in Black' appearing out of know where in open spaces and using so called death threats
and inventors disappearing or eradicated ect.
I mean would you behave much different to Rick Richard M Fried Hmm for F sake ? be realistic so if it works or not you ain't going
to get proof with the way things are! :-X
VOID: I can tell you this. If I had a setup which I thought was showing OU, I would 100% try to self-loop it.
Re: Split Flux Transformerpercent Efficiency
« Reply #55 on: January 09, 2019, 11:52:50 PM »
Quote
Today I have conducted some tests with the aim of better accuracy and comparison.
1) I did first a test with the original 5 leg trafo measured with both my Fluke multimeter and with my Oscilloscope. See below.
2) Then a test with a Special 5 leg trafo where the two cross flux legs (U-cores) are fitted between the primarys and the secondary.
This rises the output voltage but lower the OU effect!
3) And at last a test with a normal transformer konfig,.
All tests are at 10 kHz. And the load resistos are chosen so they reduces the free "swinging" output voltage to about halv that voltage, in all tests.
1a) 5-leg FLUKE IN: 1,95 V 0,95 mA 74 degrees OUT: 1,162 V 107,1 % 10KHz Load 2469 Ohm
1b) 5-leg SCOPE IN: 3,4 V 3,4 mA 74 degrees OUT: 2,04 V 105,8 % 1,68 mW 10 kHz Load 2469 Ohm
2) 5-leg Special SCOPE IN: 3,37 V 3,0 mA 70,4 degrees OUT: 2,72 V 104,75 % 3,56 mW 10 kHz Load 2080 Ohm
3) Normal trafo SCOPE IN: 3,11 V 10,85 mA 58,25 degrees OUT: 2,99 V 98,9 % 17,56 mW 10 kHz Load 509 Ohm
In all fairness, and giving the benefit of doubt to RF, I believe his statement from the video says that he can power the _frequency generator_ with output from one or several receiver coils. But recall that the FG is just supplying the clock signal to the mosfet driver chip, yes? And the main power being switched by the mosfet driver chip is coming from a power supply or battery, am I right?
So the claim isn't actually a claim of complete self looping, if he isn't claiming to power the _whole system_ from just the output of a few coils. That is, if I am interpreting his statement correctly. All he is claiming is that the frequency generator itself can be so powered.
But I still don't think he can do even that.
Please correct me if I am wrong! I would be very happy if RF is actually claiming to be able to run the whole system from the output of one or several receiver coils... because I know for sure he certainly cannot do that!
Rick when this topic hit the forum..it had nothing to do with batteries AKing told us you had soosed ? or sorted Don Smith...and kapenadze
etc etc ?maybe even the TPU..?
this was the secret to all these devices? nothing at all about needing batteries [was my impression]
plenty here have done battery swapping experiments .could never see a Magic gain when hooked up to appropriate equipment ?
that being said ,yes it is easy to juggle batteries ...let them rest and work within battery friendly load conditions and not have to charge them as much .
..one member commented that this cycling of batteries was an old Ham radio trick from many years ago. ...So we buy more batteries to run big loads ?
how many to run a 1KW load ?[continuous ??}
since now its about the batteries ..
People are wondering where I am. Well I really don't have the time for this right now. I only lingered on for so long here because I had to bring things to a completion. I spent way more time on all this than I should have. I don't regret it, but I have too much business to attend to to worry about these little children playing games. It's been really funny at times. But it just goes nowhere. If I come back in another 5 years I'm sure everyone will be exactly in the same places as before. Maybe moved on to another personality.
Again an assumption without any facts. If you could be BOTHERED to go to the video, Rick disconnects his camera and does closeups on the coils so you can see the leds lit.
And here is another fact. Rick's leds are much dimmer than comparable leds, which is why I swapped them for superbright leds.
However Rick's leds are more durable. I have only lost one of Rick's leds but several superbright ones. If you make a supposedly scientific comment then you should double check your science or you do not come over as credible.
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.
These points are settled because of my contribution to this forum. This is no small contribution. They are fundamentals to energy forums which most people have been mistaken on since the beginning of the Internet. Some of you are still contradicting these truths directly and indirectly and are wasting everyone's time with your assumptions otherwise. I have not been given any credit for pointing these things out and have instead been subjected to coordinated personal attacks. Little if no retractions have been made by people who have contradicted these points which means thousands of posts have filled this thread based upon faulty assumptions that contradict these. Each person that continues to stand by their contradictions in these and related matters and is not willing to admit they have been fundamentally wrong is insincere and no doubt a troublemaker.
How can an image of YOUR POSTS be a "fallacy"? Seek help, Rick.
Meanwhile, either demonstrate the truth of this claim, or admit that it is false:
Quote from: rickfriedrich on Today at 06:15:37 AM
"You guys are just against OU."
Hi Rick. That is just plain silly. Actually, members here who have a lot of experience at analyzing circuits have made it clear that without proper measurements there is just no way to really know how those circuits are actually performing. Really though, there should be no reason why these setups can't be self-looped, as that is a no nonsense test which separates the wheat from the chaff.
I can tell you this. If I had a setup which I thought was showing OU, I would 100% try to self-loop it.
I would do this because I am actually interested in knowing what the actual truth is. It really should be relatively simple to setup, and you have said yourself in one of your videos that self-looping your setup should be able to self-power your generator.
Any demonstration using LEDs and which does not at least show proper measurements is pretty much pointless. Is that really so hard for people to understand? It should really be self-evident here.
That's strange idea to post since Rick has already said in his video that you could power the input with the power from one of the outputs. So he is already claiming OU. But he refuses to offer any evidence to support that claim. I am not doubting there are those that don't want free energy or OU to be widely available to the masses. But Rick's videos so far don't support his claims of OU so I don't think he has anything to worry about.
In all fairness, and giving the benefit of doubt to RF, I believe his statement from the video says that he can power the _frequency generator_ with output from one or several receiver coils. But recall that the FG is just supplying the clock signal to the mosfet driver chip, yes? And the main power being switched by the mosfet driver chip is coming from a power supply or battery, am I right?
So the claim isn't actually a claim of complete self looping, if he isn't claiming to power the _whole system_ from just the output of a few coils. That is, if I am interpreting his statement correctly. All he is claiming is that the frequency generator itself can be so powered.
But I still don't think he can do even that.
Please correct me if I am wrong! I would be very happy if RF is actually claiming to be able to run the whole system from the output of one or several receiver coils... because I know for sure he certainly cannot do that!
Hi Rick. All the false and misleading statements and deflections and excuses in the world will not
ever change the facts of the situation. Unless proper measurements or self-looping testing is done, then the actual performance of any such setups remains unknown. The use of LED lights in such an arrangement is no real practical help at all. If it is claimed that the LED lights are consuming about 1 Watt or more, then there should be no reason that those LED lights can't be replaced with 1 to 3 Watt incandescent bulbs. I have posted a weblink here to a web store which sells such small incandescent bulbs.
Resistance is futile... the truth will prevail. Only proper testing will show how these setups really perform. ;)
P.S. If you or others are not making any claims about seeing more average power out than the average input power with such a setup, then I don't understand what the point is here.
This is overunity.com, and this is an open source forum. :)
GROUNDS FOR ELECTRICAL OVER UNITY RESEARCH:
"The conventional Maxwell theory is a classical linear theory in which the scalar and vector potentials appear to be arbitrary and defined by boundary conditions and choice of gauge. The conventional wisdom in engineering is that potentials have only mathematical, not physical, significance. However, besides the case of quantum theory, in which it is well known that the potentials are physical constructs, there are a number of physical phenomena—both classical and quantum-mechanical—which indicate that the Aµ fields, µ=0,1,2,3, do possess physical significance as global-to-local operators or gauge fields, in precisely constrained topologies." Barrett 2008, Topological Foundations of Electromagnetism.
2. "Tesla's approach to electrical engineering addresses primarily the 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 single body systems. It is fundamentally a nonlinear approach and may be contrasted with the approach of mainstream electrical engineering, both linear and nonlinear. The nonlinear aspects of mainstream EE are based on feedback in the resistive field, whereas the nonlinearity in Tesla's approach is based on oscillators using to-and-fro shuttling of energy to capacitive stores through non-circuit elements attached to circuits. These oscillator-shuttle-circuit connections result in adiabatic nonlinearities in the complete oscillator-shuttle-circuit systems (OSCs). As a development of this approach, 3-wave, 4-wave...n-wave mixing is proposed here using OSC devices rather than laser-matter interactions. The interactions of oscillator-shuttles (OS) and circuits (C) to which they are attached as monopoles forming OSCs are not describable by Kirchhoff's and Ohm's laws. It is suggested that in the OSC formulation, floating grounds are functionally independent and do not function as common grounds. Tesla employed, rather, a concept of multiple grounds for energy storage and removal by oscillator-shuttles which cannot be fitted in the simple monolithic circuit format, permitting a many-body definition of the internal activity of device subsystems which act at different phase relations. This concept is the basis for his polyphase system of energy transfer. The Tesla OSCs are analogs of quaternionic systems.... It is shown that Tesla's OSC approach is more appropriately (succinctly) described in A four potential form, than in E, H, B and D field form or by Ohm's law. That is, the boundary conditions are of crucial importance in defining the functioning of OSCs." Tesla's nonlinear oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) theory. By T. W. Barrett. 1991. Compared with linear, nonlinear-feedback and nonlinear-element electrical engineering circuit theory.
IMPLICATION:
All reasoning and metering that limits all circuitry or systems to such "resistive," "singular" or "linear theory" is arbitrary, circular, immature and unscientific. This is the substance of most disproof claims on this thread. My responses have exposed this as such.
Isn't it amazing? The most amazing property of Rick's OU is that it can tell the difference between test equipment with calibrated loads, and random fans, batteries and LEDs! The random fans, batteries and LEDs all show OU according to him, but the test equipment doesn't and actually _cannot_, apparently.
But can Rick actually power his Frequency Generator from the output of one or several receiver coils, as he himself said in one of his videos? Or is he too busy running away from Red Herrings?
Ok Red! I'm running! :o
Fazit : there is a need to measure and calculate : Joule/ cycle
You guys might be interested in this John Badini videoVoid AG was interested in showing us these two videos and JB's video 7 but the second video is important
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4tO0kBOzqk&t=116s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4
I'm running!
Ok Red! I'm running! :oYou claim in your Red Herring graphic that my videos are "fictions". Yet everything in them is supported by demonstrations and checkable facts, and full information is provided for anyone to repeat what I've shown. Of course you would not know that since you have not watched them.
About
Here I got som tip's from lancaIV once:
https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg528437/#msg528437 (https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg528437/#msg528437)
https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg528443/#msg528443 (https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg528443/#msg528443)
And I started to build and test these.
percent Efficiency
I tried to loop 1 a, b) with a single BC -transistor after that (but I don't remember exactly how).
Kick started it with a short sinus burst and it oscillated then for 15-30 seconds.
The two input primaries (5-legged trafo) can be series or parallel
All coils 100+100 turns, 0.3 mm (#28).
(And it dosn't matter that the coils are much wider than the cores, only for test purposes here. Tighter is better of course)
Cores : KÖNIG ELECTRONIC FAT100, Smooth blank ferrite
This is confirmation-of-OU-devices-and-claims
Is this OU? Try it!
Regards Arne
N.B. No LED's !!!
Yes, that has been obvious for quite a while already. ;D
I asked for a basic schematic and any essential build details for a basic setup which
could show OU or anything unusual at all, so I could build it and test with it, and got nothing
back in response from Rick...
Running... from the truth, it would appear... ;)
Really, self-loop testing is nothing to be afraid of at all, unless of course you already know it will fail
such a test, so that is why you are avoiding showing such a test.
Hopefully Stefan will show such a demo... I will be interested to see the results of a self-loop test.
This is not a Red Herring, it is an unambiguous claim that Rick can run his Frequency Generator on the output of one or several of his receiver coils. A claim that is unsupported by even the slightest attempt at demonstration.
So Rick Friedrich can just make all kinds of wild claims, post his RED HERRINGS to try to distract everybody from the FACT that he cannot do what he claimed to be able to do. That's a new standard for OU, for sure!
Void AG was interested in showing us these two videos and JB's video 7 but the second video is important
I suggest you make a point in watching it.
Red,Ah, but everything I have posted is directly relevant to the topic under discussion, which you might be able to see if you actually bothered to watch any of my videos. Other people have watched them and know exactly what I am talking about. You can name-call and use ad-hominem fallacies all you like, but it will not change the uncomfortable fact that you cannot support your claims with valid demonstrations... and I can.
You either have serious problems or are trying to pull another red herring! ::) I mean, I said your highlighting of my post's "you" words was a red herring because you diverted from the points I made. You once again posted something of no significance while diverting from important things mentioned in this ongoing debate. That is a red herring. And that is what you do.
The frequency generator point is also a red herring as we all admit it takes nothing to do that and a video was posted over a year ago doing that with the kit doing that.
So you have earned the name Red, for red herring fallacy man. This is what you do here.
Seaad made a claim of anomalous energy [post 1770 in this topic] ,it got bypassed here and I am bumping the spot where it first got posted ,seems a Thane Heinz derivative ,and if I am not mistaken
Seaad wrote here somewhere he has filed for a patent on this claim. [if I am wrong please correct me]
topic here https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg537900/#msg537900 (https://overunity.com/17279/split-flux-transformer/msg537900/#msg537900)
Chet K
You claim in your Red Herring graphic that my videos are "fictions". Yet everything in them is supported by demonstrations and checkable facts, and full information is provided for anyone to repeat what I've shown. Of course you would not know that since you have not watched them.
That is, my videos are not "fictions".... but yours definitely are, since nobody can reproduce what you claim, your information is incomplete, and your delivery is amateurish and boring.
Again, it is already demonstrated, and it makes no difference. I will share what I want when I have the time to do that. But why would it matter anyway. You don't believe any of this anyway. Like I wrote, if there was nothing important here you guys wouldn't be so consumed with all this and there wouldn't be 135,000 views here.
Now, are you going to demonstrate running your FG from the output of one or several receiver coils, or are you going to admit that that claim was a great FICTION and you cannot do it?
Ah, but everything I have posted is directly relevant to the topic under discussion, which you might be able to see if you actually bothered to watch any of my videos. Other people have watched them and know exactly what I am talking about. You can name-call and use ad-hominem fallacies all you like, but it will not change the uncomfortable fact that you cannot support your claims with valid demonstrations... and I can.
No, we don't all "admit" that it takes NOTHING to power your Function Generator, because it does not in fact take NOTHING to power it. And why don't you just post a link to that "video posted over a year ago" showing your Frequency Generator powered by one or several of your receiver coils, if that claim is true.
And now that you remind me... you also claimed that ZERO CURRENT was flowing during one of your demonstrations. But you cannot just use a charged capacitor to provide the voltage.... because current is in fact drawn and a cap will run down much faster than a battery would. So that is Yet Another bogus claim you have made without any support or even any attempt to demonstrate the truth of the claim. Because you cannot!
I must admit I am stupified by the idea that you can't teach on the internet ...I had no idea....
maybe somebody should let the world know ??
sounds fishy to me ??
He can't do it.
Void AG was interested in showing us these two videos and JB's video 7 but the second video is important
I suggest you make a point in watching it.
Jeg what has a deep hole to do with don't tell me you been to the lido centre in Koln 8) 8) ;D ;D ;D
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.
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 !!
Hey Rayscope shot
I thought you were speaking about JB's idea that as we go up in height the inductive kickback grows up. He said he tested that at 2500ft and he saw an increasement due to the elevation difference from sea surface. But the reference of his coil was also at 2500 ft and not at the sea level...
What are you actually showing with your scope shot?
scope shot
Driver is CD4047 with squ wave output driven into MosFet electrons self excited for peek BEMF
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 ?
Rick maximus Friedrich,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.
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 ?
Rick separating teaching from Proving is something which is not in my frame of reference .,in a world that can put two people on opposite sides of the planet into the same room ,Car or street corner at the push of a button ...looking and talking together?
.... a Forum does the same thing on steroids if you really want it too...
we have different goals and that makes us chose different paths .
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 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.
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.
You make a claim. You cannot provide evidence that your claim is true. And I've just picked the most simple and blatant one, out of a bucket of unsupported and even proven false claims you have made. You can't do it! You won't even try, because you know you can't do it.
You can call me all the names you like, as you project your own failings onto others. That does not change the FACT that you have made claims you cannot support with evidence, nor the FACT that many of your claims have already in FACT been disproven soundly.
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. ;D
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...
Rick Quote you can't prove anything on the internet !!end Quote have you ever tried ? ... sent a PDF thru the internet to a replicator to build and report back ?or post same PDF on a forum to replicators ..everything needed to replicate ? if you have ...then something was wrong IMO I find the internet a place where trust is in place everyday ,quite certain you ship product on this trust in your internet banking [proof. Here there are claims which have no definition , just generic statements from video clips . I agree 100% Using "your" methods ...and generic non teaching Videos with no schematics coil specs or PDF document for replicators to follow along ..I agree.. you can't prove anything that way on the internet to anybody. I will post no more in this topic to you...and wait for the fellow who Stefan is working with.Chet K
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.Well It's not the sort of answer one would expect unless as he says, if i was in a pub, well thanks for that but I don't frequent pubs on the other hand as you didn't bother to point me to what your thinking of don't you think your behavior is lacking of appropriate seriousness or earnestness here? any way I have more serious issues to get on with thanks.
Hi Rick, No, you haven't. That is the problem. :)
You could easily silence any critics by simply showing a reasonable demonstration
which includes proper measurements or which is self-looped, showing something unusual going on,
but you do not do this. It should be no surprise if people are skeptical in such a case.
Rick quote
But this is a coordinated effort by real trolls with a mission. For anyone with any real desire to know these things does not act the way that several of you are acting. Neither does anyone who thinks it is all nonsense.
end quote ....No Rick this is what it looks like when you walk into an open source builder group and say "Build this" .[if thats not what you were saying or implying ? ...its what we heard !!]Its why open source forums thrive ...The model speaks for itself... needs
no critique or endorsement .
Very true ...we took you to heart and listened ..thought you would lead with Build info [PDF]
But instead just drop crumbs to some plans ...Reality is you are in an Open source venue ...its not your fault.
You have different priorities which don't fit here [open source]..or this conversation would be different and all of these open source fellows would just be saying thank you instead of "HUH"?
I will wait for Stefan to open source ,and then ...watch the internet teach and share.... Chet K
PS..Please no more same old same old ...I will not write here again ,just waiting on Stefan
Actually Rick, based on many years of experience, I am very much aware of what people do in the real world,
and that is why I maintain a healthy skepticism about sketchy claims. :)
I am a reasonable person. If I see something which appears reasonable, I will be much more receptive to it.
Well It's not the sort of answer one would expect unless as he says, if i was in a pub, well thanks for that but I don't frequent pubs on the other hand as you didn't bother to point me to what your thinking of don't you think your behavior is lacking of appropriate seriousness or earnestness here? any way I have more serious issues to get on with thanks.
Raymondo
Rick Please site a post where I was rude of chased persons away
or discouraged persons from sharing experiments here or anywhere.EVER !!
Just one will do !!
Dang Rick, can you please stop with spamming this thread the same nonsense over and over?
For clarity I don't intend to post another word here towards Rick beyondwhats written below
Rick surely you jest I wrote similar posts here after that one at OUR .
Dang Rick, can you please stop with spamming this thread the same nonsense over and over?How about using 5 to 30 watt incandescent bulbs instead?
From what I understood from Stefan, Stefan said his friend will be doing some sort of demo,
so I hope they considered my suggestions to try using 1 to 3 Watt incandescent bulbs in
place of LED bulbs, and I hope they show what happens when they try to self-loop it.
I will be interested to see how that goes... :)
How about using 5 to 30 watt incandescent bulbs instead?
Just fiddled around for some hour.Hi Seaad,
Ohh, remember nothing can be proved at this forum . . . . .
Seaad, Talking with a few builders on your other topic,[a few topics actually]Hi guys the last time i saw this device was in the 80s at a Bristol Siddeley convention now RR, on a NASA film clip where they wanted to find a way of testing for a planets or asteroids gravity or magnetic qualities they more or less showed how to make this type of harvester. You might still find the clip on youtube.
seems this should get its own thread ? lately in this thread tsunami's of text show up and push things into the abyss .
what are you calling this device ?[category ??
??LancaIV writes It seems seaad is developping a RESONATOR type EM-Ranque-Hilsch-tube ??
thx Chet
8) by the end you develop the compressorfree magnetocaloric fridge( counterpart to the microwave owen) ;)Hmm seen this some where else too on Daily thread talk to Grumage, it's going back a few years now.
BTW: testing the device in cold ambient ( freezer/fridge) and before/after measurements results comparison ?
Is positive voltage electricity hotter/ colder than negative voltage electricity ?
When there is no negative power factor phase ? In AC current is ever also DC participating
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19981001&CC=TW&NR=342155U&KC=U# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19981001&CC=TW&NR=342155U&KC=U#)
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=47&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19880712&CC=US&NR=4757419A&KC=A#
Measurements Input: V x I x cos angle Output: U2/R n=Output/Input (watts)I refer you to my video of testing the Partzman Bifilar Transformer.
NO LED's ! ;D ;D
Arne
RaymundoYes, but i refer to the unstableness of none clarity of the situation you guys appear to be finding on this thread
Generic statements ofter no clarity , what truth do you refer to ? take the bull by the horn‘s
What are you actually saying ?
Your last two posts or three posts could definitely use some focus and clarity
I apologize if you’re native tongue is not the Queens English .
Astroid planet gravity field flavor shavers ??
Feel free ?
Your comment on seaad contribution ?
Is this your information ?
Back in early 2006 I worked extensively with Eric Vogels on this stuff. Eric did some nice pulse motor builds and I did the coil driver designs. After many variations and testing, we never observed any gains, or extended battery charge.Hi there Poynt99, presumably the Hall is hooked up to the coil of unknown value and oscillates, i would like to see this in action
This was back when I incorrectly referred to inductive kickback as "cemf" (like most others). The attached design is basic but worked well. I was also looking ahead for a better process, as seen in the version 7 drawing, but work on this ceased after it was determined there were no gains.
...I'm not sure why, but I can't post pics here...
Hi there Poynt99, presumably the Hall is hooked up to the coil of unknown value and oscillates, i would like to see this in actionIt looks like Rick is redoing his videos in shortened format.
so how is the coil wound and what is it's value ?
Chet I can't see a circuit diagram on Rick / A.kings hour long clip, is it me or shouldn't i mention it (seriously) ?
other wise I would try and knock one of my old fans up as he has.
Regards Raymondo
This was back when I incorrectly referred to inductive kickback as "cemf" (like most others).
No, Dick has posted OU _CLAIMS_. Obviously nothing can be proven on the internet, remember? As we have learned, though, nobody who actually knows how to measure Joules in versus Joules out has confirmed these CLAIMS, though many have tried. The only people who think they have verified his claims are his customers, and these are people who apparently cannot even wind their own coils.
Certainly you can keep rotating the batteries if you wish, until all of them are totally flat. You still won't get more Joules out than were in there in the first place. If you care to claim otherwise, go ahead and demonstrate it for yourself. Don't point to another hours-long video from the person who has already discredited himself here.
Meanwhile we are still waiting for Dick to demonstrate that he can run his frequency generator from the output of one or several of his receiver coils. But I don't think anyone is holding their breath waiting.
Raymondo
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
….
I am not certain this is just one man’s opinion
A king
Since you watched the video
Can you put together a list of components necessary for a replication ?
As well as the claims it runs for one hour One year or whatever the claim is
Please do not just say generic pieces of equipment with generic components
Please I beg you
part numbers everything
If required a schematic [yes please
whatever it is ..wire gauge.. terminal connector specs...type and size of batteries [smaller the better for other replicators to follow.
can we do this In you’re Aking investigation thread ? ask for Build info so there will be no issues Please
or a new topic ??
Back in early 2006 I worked extensively with Eric Vogels on this stuff. Eric did some nice pulse motor builds and I did the coil driver designs. After many variations and testing, we never observed any gains, or extended battery charge.
This was back when I incorrectly referred to inductive kickback as "cemf" (like most others). The attached design is basic but worked well. I was also looking ahead for a better process, as seen in the version 7 drawing, but work on this ceased after it was determined there were no gains.
...I'm not sure why, but I can't post pics here...
Chet!'rickfriedrich' Please stay cool and explain, i'm not your enemy ??
Chet!
Why
are
you
leaving
so
many
spaces?
Are
you
drawing
attention
to
yourself? 8)
_____________
Quote from: ramset on August 02, 2019, 08:06:52 PM
Raymondo
….
I am not certain this is just one man’s opinion
q
RaycathodeQuote
I'm actually working on a device Jb style with a row or Neo magnets mounted on square steel section over a steel threaded section all north on one side and south on the other side but no slip rings used, instead I used 2 hall effect this gives a half circle magnetic effect that changes over every 180 deg. the circuit is a JB design that's supposed to recharge the battery. Unfortunately this design does not give any null point (dead zone) considering it's supposed to be an over unity generator ! It cant do both at the same time. I don't thing its funny !!
Raymondo End Quote
=================================================
Raymondo
You see this problem you’re having right now
Seems you purchased information or read information or whatever??
and assumed a result which you are not experiencing on the bench
And yes it’s not funny
Please be aware I did find a solution to this problem which I have not implemented yet as it's on a 'bread board' layout
what it involves is to use one of the quad nand gates or a nor gates which involves a cap a resistor and a direction steering diode
to shorten the on time or off time depending on the user of the gate in order to allow BEMF you have kick back time.. no doubt i will get round to building it on a
pcb as It will need two sets one for each hall output and perhaps a red green LED to make it look good.
Would you have preferred that you could have researched this information here at this forum where experimenters have done
the experiments and share the results openly for others to compare
perhaps have learned not to waste your time there if that is indeed what you are saying I’m not certain?
For clarity no such information is available anywhere to my knowledge
That is to say such a database supported by a group of membership that is available if need be to engage .....or perhaps through
representatives to engage (ask questions)?
This is my dream for this venue
and all these builders being helped by this community to do other experiments ...real science perhaps?
in my opinion with all our resources and connections to universities scientists EE,s specialists in all fields and amazingly gifted
builders worldwide
Stephen has a tiger by the tail ..and can bring his mission statement to fruition.
Here we have thousands of YouTube and other kinds of videos that need to be categorized
Persons who have very good test equipment and show and share their results.
With Complete transparency for discussion.... always
In case something was missed ?
What you witnessed here these last weeks were many of those same person’s and there need to be sure nothing was missed on
their own benches
Others are more confident perhaps much more experienced but always ask for enough detail to experience this claim
themselves
Here it is a system of checks and balances so no one person can take the stage and make a claim which holds no water , For or
against a claim .
If the forum has that kind of reputation that is to say where nothing is dismissed without proof
there is little concern for Hidden agendas of secrecy .... or similar nonsense claims.
Some one will find a way if they are frightened of release themselves to get the information to others to investigate or try or at
least discuss .
And that needs to happen in a venue where there are many men of like mind For checks and balances so that no one man once
again holds all the information of the claim and it is discussed within a group of like-minded individuals .
Here I emphasize an open source venue.
Here we can build such a place and maximize our time and efforts
And we have plenty of good builders with much experience to help vet claims
As a community ...I feel and have always felt those builders need to be helped in some way
So as to not carry so much burden themselves When they work for the benefit of all.
There are a few things right now from these last few days that need a more thorough explanation
You have to understand this will be a lot of work for Stephen ....to make a section where members teaching videos Are shared or
discussed
Perhaps someone has an algorithm which can input questions into a database of videos ??
I am unaware of such , however I am certain it exists .
Sorry for such a long post but we need to fix this and move forward .
I am not certain this is just one man’s opinion
q
SIDE VIEWHigh have you got this to work, some guy (the guru to you)( a guy with a north german accent), says he got slung off you tube
'rickfriedrich' Please stay cool and explain, i'm not your enemy ??
of course if you so wished as you appear to moderate the moderator you could just
ask Stefan for moderator control of your very own thread and halt all input accordingly.
I Just thought i would leave you with that thought.
Raymondo
As mentioned, we have access to a Lab in Orlando which for many years has tried to get FE techs out
to the world.There is a man who volunteers there and has helped there and elsewhere for quite some time.actually several volunteers there. If you will make a brief PDF ,members here will do the rest [get whatever is needed there]and all will be shared here and elsewhere. Or we can hire an independent test lab which will use Certified and calibrated equipment all documentedand a certified test report ,which is standard operating procedure for them every day ,there reputations
and integrity is on the line. I agree with Ray you could work here as Wesley and Bruce TPU and a few others Do.
EDIT to add/I have worked all my life with test labs ,in extremely sensitive and high liability areas /where many many persons lives depend on the results being accurate /.NYC,Boston and all along the Northeast corridor of the USA/Both as a field rep and freelance ...always using certified equipment with upto the minute calibrations/These reports are not allowed to be inaccurate ,lives and reputations rely on that /respectfully/Chet K/Ps/I put a slash everywhere I dropped to the line below in this Edit /And here you read how the forum wrote this post,The problem varies every time ./IMO not everyone wants open source out there.
.will respond in a few days ,this response above confused me more than helped me,also completely confused by Military comments as they apply to the request.
Did not want to bump the thread ,but see the time window has past for posting back there.I don't understand your comment here. I am not into moving systems. If anyone out there has one of these fans they can easily do an energy audit.
and You posted again , I have no idea about posting names of persons you sold machines to ,Nor was it ever my intention .It must have something to do with you not allowing a demonstration of this simple claim at your customers Lab..again the subject of the Energy Audit here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s)
will just pay attention for now,and keep trying to find someone who will share .maybe a member here will Share?
Maybe A King will get something working or Stefan's friend.and then a demonstration will happen at the Lab there in Orlando and all the members here can Build it.
in the mean time there are other secrets to investigate ,and honestly I am not mocking you Rick ..about your comment that you help some poor the last 15 years...does that mean we don't need to Bother ? FE forums... hundreds of thousands of members to build and share..
Not mocking just Stupefied ! I need some tape to hold my Jaw closed now...
Did not want to bump the thread ,but see the time window has past for posting back there.
and You posted again , I have no idea about posting names of persons you sold machines to ,Nor was it ever my intention .It must have something to do with you not allowing a demonstration of this simple claim at your customers Lab..again the subject of the Energy Audit here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s)
will just pay attention for now,and keep trying to find someone who will share .maybe a member here will Share?
Maybe A King will get something working or Stefan's friend.and then a demonstration will happen at the Lab there in Orlando and all the members here can Build it.
in the mean time there are other secrets to investigate ,and honestly I am not mocking you Rick ..about your comment that you help some poor the last 15 years...does that mean we don't need to Bother ? FE forums... hundreds of thousands of members to build and share..
Not mocking just Stupefied ! I need some tape to hold my Jaw closed now...
..again the subject of the Energy Audit here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=1s)I have done this yesterday and it works exactly as Rick shown. I never tried this setup before with the complete conventional fan ciruit in it (only self triggering setups).
would be amazing to see this .... Hopefully Stefan's friend will share ....or someone else here.Why you are waiting for someone. DO IT FOR YOURSELF, START AND MOVING ONE DIODE!!!
Sorry I could not talk last night , Thought your "OK" response meant we would talk prior to more postings... at 5:30 this AM I noticed you posted [was surprised] and wanted to Talk priorto making a fresh post [or bumping the thread ] went to the last post I made to leave a Note there for you to read [I do this often to not just keep Bumping the topic with more info or posts.]But this forum has a time limit and that option stops and you can no longer Post.
So I just posted......as always from my heart. One thing I want to say,the fellow who volunteers at that lab and helps..is just an older [87 years young] retired engineer living in Florida on his pension..I understand after talking to you that you feel uncomfortable with someone with a past in the military sector [his higher classification or experience] ,but I don't want persons to think that Lab is connected in anyway to such a past ,the owner did also let QEG [Morocco Hope girl] have full access to the lab when they were supposedly sharing with the world,but removed them when it became apparent there were issues with the claim.For many years they have helped test ideas and do experiments .IMO a great asset and anyone who carries water for this open source cause is a friend .
We shall see what the future brings here regarding the Gain mechanism mentioned in your Video and on the phone [again]
looking forward to that,...I personally feel there is much confusion around this and has been for many years ,would be amazing to see this .... Hopefully Stefan's friend will share ....or someone else here.
Was good to talk again ,Chet K
.
I have done this yesterday and it works exactly as Rick shown. I never tried this setup before with the complete conventional fan ciruit in it (only self triggering setups).
I have identical results: Air Flow is the same, my power consuption is slightly lower, but I have also another output to load secondary batteries for free! Why you are waiting for someone. DO IT FOR YOURSELF, START AND MOVING ONE DIODE!!!
poynt99, Void
May i ask you guys why is there any problem of calling inductive spikes as counter emf when the equation which calculates both is the same?
cemf=-L*ΔΙ/Δt
After all, an inductive spike is a result of opposition to current change isn't it like that?
Rick,
I'll also mention that my assertion that you've grossly over-estimated the output power of your LED's is just that, an assertion or technical opinion. It is not a lie.
You seem to be confusing lies with opinions. I have no reason to lie about anything.
Referring to the attached pic from Rick's brushless DC fan video, and the one baudirenergie replicated, I have a question:
From the perspective of the person conducting this experiment, what signs should they be looking for to indicate that the experiment is a success?
I have no issue nor argument about the identical fan output in both circuit configurations, as that is obvious from the schematic. What I do question is whether including the second battery in the flyback loop (and its charging effect) constitutes experimental proof of overunity.
In the first scenario (left circuit configuration), the unused energy stored in the motor coil is burned off in the flyback diode and the winding resistance of the motor coil. In the second scenario (right circuit configuration), the unused energy stored in the motor coil is burned off in the diode, the battery, and the winding resistance of the motor coil.
Unless there is some heretofore unknown "process" that takes place inside the battery due to the pulses that super-potentializes it (or something), there is no OU effect taking place with this circuit configuration.
So I ask my question above; how does one "know" when they have hit success with this experiment?
And as an aside Rick, I want to address the fact that you have called me a liar here in at least one post. Although there is always the possibility that I am wrong that this circuit configuration (or any variant of it) does not produce overunity (which I doubt), I most certainly have not lied with that assertion; I have no reason to.
Darren,
That is exactly my point. Conventional systems ignore all the potential that is available as you do to in saying the energy is equally "burned off" with or without the battery. I am just showing the super basics here. And as a result the motor draws significantly less input energy and produces additional useful output. The purpose is to open a door for people to ask why isn't this being done? You should be saying, well that is cool Rick. But you will never give me any credit. I also have solved one of the biggest environmental problems on earth, which also solves one of the biggest alternative energy problems as well: battery replacement. I guess that earns no respect either.
In light of Brad's attempt to trash me on my youtube channel about claiming this fan is 50% efficient, today I called the owner of that company who makes that fan (and over 5000 models), and he said that fan was 94% efficient. BLDC motors are generally considered to be between the range of 80-96% efficient.
Once people understand this kind of engineering then they can multiply these processes again and again as I have shown. You can actually create endless additional reactive loops off of the motor coil negative loop. That is the same kind of thing Benitez did 100 years ago and what Barrett was getting at here:
"Tesla's approach to electrical engineering addresses primarily the 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 single body systems. It is fundamentally a nonlinear approach and may be contrasted with the approach of mainstream electrical engineering, both linear and nonlinear. The nonlinear aspects of mainstream EE are based on feedback in the resistive field, whereas the nonlinearity in Tesla's approach is based on oscillators using to-and-fro shuttling of energy to capacitive stores through non-circuit elements attached to circuits. These oscillator-shuttle-circuit connections result in adiabatic nonlinearities in the complete oscillator-shuttle-circuit systems (OSCs). As a development of this approach, 3-wave, 4-wave...nwave mixing is proposed here using OSC devices rather than laser-matter interactions. The interactions of oscillator-shuttles (OS) and circuits (C) to which they are attached as monopoles forming OSCs are not describable by Kirchhoff's and Ohm's laws. It is suggested that in the OSC formulation, floating grounds are functionally independent and do not function as common grounds. Tesla employed, rather, a concept of multiple grounds for energy storage and removal by oscillator-shuttles which cannot be fitted in the simple monolithic circuit format, permitting a many-body definition of the internal activity of device subsystems which act at different phase relations." Tesla's nonlinear oscillator-shuttle-circuit (OSC) Theory. T. W. Barrett. 1991. Compared with linear, nonlinear-feedback and nonlinear-element electrical engineering circuit theory.
I know this may be hard to read and understand but I am trying to illustrate these advanced concepts in simple ways. Like I said, if you go back to Faraday and Maxwell (and here Tesla) you have free energy as permissible in these ways. Or you can continue on with establishment lower level electrical engineering and pay for your electric. Have you not realized that the Maxwell equations were truncated so that everything would be symmetrical and under unity as a result? Like I wrote, if you are not willing to deal with the foundations of electrical history, theory, and practice, then there is no point to saying you are searching in OU research. Conventional Maxwell theory is linear theory in which the scalar and vector potentials appear to be arbitrary and defined by boundary conditions of choice gage. It must be extended, or generalized to a non-Abelian form. The potentials have more than mathematical significance, they have real physical significance. As Barrett specifies above, when extended to higher symmetry forms, Maxwell's theory possesses non-Abelian commutation relations, and addresses global (i.e. nonlocal in space), as well as local phenomena with the potentials used as local-to-global operators. When thus extended we have the ability to venture beyond the closed resistive under unity field existence. It is like a blind person seeing for the first time. Conventional theory/circuitry is only part of the picture and that is why they clamp off this negative energy and treat it as meaningless. And this is why suppressors are there (and I mean both snubber systems and so-called experts). There is no place for Faraday's "electrotonic state", Maxwell's "free energy" equation, Tesla's real shuttle circuits, Benitez free "Generation of Electrical Currents", etc. That science is forbidden because it eliminates the selling of power. And yet these are the founders of modern electrical systems! Yet what they actually found was much more than what you are taught today.
You have to come to grips with this before you try and critique OU claims. Because if you are arguing from conventional theory, as you have been, then you have no foundation or basis as that is only a part of electrical phenomena and processes. Once you come to grips with the fact that the world is bigger than the arbitrary limitations the profit-based institutions have put on you then you will be free indeed to see much more (as these founders did). Then you can see that the A potentials have real physical significance as Maxwell wrote, and you can make use of that information as I have. You will then not try and make everything symmetrical but exploit disequilibrium relationships. You won't mock and suppress asymmetry but maximize it. The fan is just the slightest sliver and hint introduction to this other world you haven't begun to understand. This technology is real and it is used. It is not understood by college level engineers who are crafted sheeple to perpetuate such limitations.
I haven't been arguing so much from theory, as much as real world past observations.
As such, it comes down to the bench; if one builds your brushless DC fan setup with a charge battery, how does one know if they have succeeded in producing free energy?
That's all very nice Rick,
But when it comes down to the bench; if one builds your brushless DC fan setup with a charge battery, how does one know if they have succeeded in producing free energy?
I've just received mail from Mr. Gear.So what sense makes it, if they just said, they did the test and will not show any evidence of it ??? lol...
His team tested Rick's two and three battery system and measurement showed underunity in both test.
However, they also purchased through third person Rick's kit and will analyze it and make transient power measurement within next few days, along with some more complicated tests involved looped reactive power.
For the tests been precise, team has been split into two.
Every group will conduct its own methods with state of the art equipement.
Result of each group will be evaluated by Mr. Gear and his consultants.
The goal of test is determine does motor/load kit is COP>1, or OU, and if not, how efficient they are.
I dont have information what kit they purchase and Mr. Gear explaimed that he will reveal only test results, but not data and videos made during test.
Data and videos will remain in company possesions and can be viewed only through bussines agreement, after Rick will be contacted if test will be positive.
At least he will release final conclusion in public, which can not hurt company interest.
I think this is fair from his side. At the end he represents company interests and even final conclusion is much.
If test show positive results, Rick will be contacted and he will be presented with bussines proposal.
From his words test will be conducted very professional and with top gear which exists.
He mentioned possible complex measurements involved reactive power loop, but lots of what he spoke is out of my league.
So, stefan, you asked me to build it. I cant.
But found person who can and it is not problem for him.
Actually, I will be glad if results turns positive, and this whole story ends well.
Finally, Mr. Gear has possibility to do.it and I believe he will.
He said that every investigation of his which turns out even partially success was good for company and bussines deal has been made.
Until now he did not find true self runner but he found few very clever solutions which company paid well and inventors were satisfied.
True results were published through real patents which can actually be build and work.
I hope this will help,
Cheers!
(snip...)But notice I wrote the other day that you all need to understand what the real efficiency of a motor is before you go into this. I wrote that days before that comment was put on my youtube comments today. So then when you have determined that the input energy is causing mechanical work to be done with very small percentage of losses--say motor is 98% efficient at 30W--and you modify the circuit so that it runs the same but additionally puts out (in an independent loving path loop) 10% or 50% or 90% of the input energy, then you know you have free energy Darren. But that is why I also wrote that you guys will probably never agree upon the efficiency of a motor so that no matter how much electrical output is generated in addition to the motor drive it will always be considered as a fraction of the input energy.(snip...)I'm totally fine with any efficiency motor you choose. If it is a 98% efficient motor to start with, then fine. It has no bearing on the final outcome as far as I am concerned.
I'm totally fine with any efficiency motor you choose. If it is a 98% efficient motor to start with, then fine. It has no bearing on the final outcome as far as I am concerned.
Now concerning the highlighted portion of the quote, I ask the following:
How does one determine the percentage of input energy being put out in the flyback loop?
...and you modify the circuit so that it runs the same but additionally puts out (in an independent loving path loop) 10% or 50% or 90% of the input energy, then you know you have free energy...The above quote is from your post (your phrasology and use of the "percentage of input energy" reference, not mine).
The above quote is from your post (your phrasology and use of the "percentage of input energy" reference, not mine).
How does one determine the percentage part of your quote?
The "independent loving path loop" is the flyback loop consisting of the flyback diode, the charge battery, and the coil winding, is it not?
Hi Jeg, They are related in that they are both voltages generated by a coil, but there is a major difference.
If I apply a voltage Vi to a coil, the coil then generates a voltage that is in opposition
to the applied voltage Vi. Since this generated voltage is in opposition to the applied
voltage Vi, it is referred to as 'counter EMF' or 'back EMF'.
Now, if I then disconnect my voltage source Vi from the coil, the coil no longer has a voltage
applied to it, The magnetic field around the coil collapses and creates a voltage spike which
is the same polarity as Vi was (in other words this generated voltage spike is not in opposition)
and which acts to try to keep the current that was flowing in the coil going. This inductive switching voltage
spike is an assisting or aiding voltage. It is not acting counter to the original applied voltage Vi, so it shouldn't
be referred to as 'counter EMF' or 'back EMF'.
All the best...
So what sense makes it, if they just said, they did the test and will not show any evidence of it ??? lol...
...
Regards, Stefan.
Yes the coil is part of that loop if I am understanding where you are going with that question. But it is out of phase and the negative energy is, if resulting in more work done than what can be accounted for from the input energy (100W minus the work of the motor and losses), shows that it is truly independent and above unity.
When the voltage source is disconnected,the magnetic field now starts to collapse and cut through the windings in the opposite direction. This causes a voltage inversion across the coil,but the current will continue to flow in the same direction through the coil.Hi Void, Brad
Oh,i see the open source Koala is behind OU.com bars"extraordinary technology"- devices challenge :
::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
Anyway,im currently looking for one of those fans Rick is using,so as i can replicate Ricks device setup,and crunch some numbers.
I have done this yesterday and it works exactly as Rick shown. I never tried this setup before with the complete conventional fan ciruit in it (only self triggering setups).
I have identical results: Air Flow is the same, my power consuption is slightly lower, but I have also another output to load secondary batteries for free! Why you are waiting for someone. DO IT FOR YOURSELF, START AND MOVING ONE DIODE!!!
That's actually incorrect Void.
When the source is disconnected from an inductor,and the magnetic field collapses around the inductor,the voltage across the inductor invert's,and is of opposite polarity to that of the source,as the inductor is no longer the sink,it is the source.
When a voltage is dropped across an inductor,current will start to flow,and a magnetic field builds.
When the voltage source is disconnected,the magnetic field now starts to collapse and cut through the windings in the opposite direction. This causes a voltage inversion across the coil,but the current will continue to flow in the same direction through the coil.
Brad
That's actually incorrect Void.
When the source is disconnected from an inductor,and the magnetic field collapses around the inductor,the voltage across the inductor invert's,and is of opposite polarity to that of the source,as the inductor is no longer the sink,it is the source.
When a voltage is dropped across an inductor,current will start to flow,and a magnetic field builds.
When the voltage source is disconnected,the magnetic field now starts to collapse and cut through the windings in the opposite direction. This causes a voltage inversion across the coil,but the current will continue to flow in the same direction through the coil.
Brad
Rick Friederich : not Joule/cycle but Joule/signal(=pulse) I accept as measure method !
https://www.google.com/url?q=https://fbadhusha.weebly.com/uploads/3/8/9/5/3895546/ele-pulse-power.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiLsv2I_e7jAhVOUcAKHbJ_C2oQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw15n2Y3-tIhLqGJNmmXXoLp
We can and ( let) do cycles ( signal-/frequency-/time-generator)and signals( dutyfactor) becomes different !
15000 VA pulsativ ~ 144 Watt DC : this means calculative and measureable " pseudo-Overunity-factor 100+" !
There is no magic !
And that was my point of my comment on your video Rick.
In your video,your input energy was jumping all over the place,so how did you calculate your input energy?
Second-you do not know how efficient your fan motor is,so once again,how are you making your energy calculations?.How much energy dose it take to move X amount of CFM's of air?,and how much energy was your fan using to achieve this?. Your motor may have been using(i believe in the video,the best i could make out was 24v @ 1.2 amp's) 28.8 watts,but how much energy is required to have an air flow of(i think it was) 1600 CFM at atmospheric pressure.
Third-You had no output measurements at all as far as your inductive kickback output go's,so once again,how are you making your power measurements to claim OU?.
So lets say your fan is 80% efficient(highly unlikely),and your inductive kickback output is 10%. You still have a loss of 10% to heat,and this is a best case scenario. In actuality,your fan would be 50-60% efficient at best,and we(including yourself)have no idea as to what your electrical output was,nor do we have an accurate P/in for your fan either.
So, we have no P/in measurement--
We have no fan efficiency value--
We have no output measurements--
But you claim OU :o
You also claim the EE guys have no idea what there talking about.
You say we live in a sci-fi make believe world ::)
I think you have it all backward Rick,as it seems that it is you making claims of the (know so far) impossible,and you do this without any data at all to back up your claim's.
No Rick,it is not us living in the land of make believe ::)
Brad
That is not to say the battery does not gain voltage because it does . Surface charge is the term used by those who are influenced by this in the "real world".
We can run different loads as well.
Indeed. Where might we see this?
While that was A point it was not THE point you were making. I do not tolerate rude or baseless accusatory comments. Your point was to call the video and all my videos fraud. And you assumed the motor was 50% efficient when the company said it is 94%. You are always assuming the worst in a very arrogant way.
No the video doesn't have the input jumping all over the place. Obviously it is an impulse motor however. Ideally a battery is better for this experiment but this was what people wanted. The point was that the comparison/conversion was the same. Also, the point was to show one change with advantageous results. That was done and you just can't accept it. Instead you just can't keep yourself from attacking. But who made you the king? Again, you just keep putting your foot in your mouth.
By the way you come across you would have to already know the answer to your questions. Sounds like you are just repeating what you have heard from other people. But when you do that Brad, you destroy your credibility.
The CFMs reading was just in the same spot to do the comparison to show that it was exactly the same with the two fans. It was not showing all the CFMs because I was only on one area.
I make my own power measurements in many ways. Yes I have all the appropriate power analyzers that I don't show in my videos. It is up to everyone to do that for themselves. What I did show was that I was reducing the input energy and also charging a battery significantly. It was not as much as with my other motors with improved circuitry, but it did show that for the same CFMs it took less input and did some charging. Someone else did this and got the same results.
What I got into the battery over time is relative to the size and condition of the battery as I have always said. See my last post for details about that being nonlinear. But if I get anything, then that is an improvement over nothing. Yes if I can run this off a battery and rotate batteries around then that is amazing. That I have done for 14 years now with such fans with a variety of different circuits. That is old news Brad. As I wrote, thousands of people have used these fans all over the world. One guy makes his entire living selling them (and I don't get anything for showing that).
You don't get it Brad. If the fan was 80% efficient then that is not the point. If you can make it take less energy and also put out more work than that is free work. Yes I know that we want self-runners here and the whole bit. But you won't even appreciate any improvement. You don't know what percentage it is. But you do know that it is more work than normal and that was my point. It also allowed for you and others to mock me for showing a significant gain. That was also my point. Now we can see your attitudes that automatically reject positive demonstrations. You guys demand meters and I showed a meter with a controlled experiment that is easy to do and which someone already did here. So that proves that meter readings mean nothing to you guys. If I pull out my Fluke power analyzers you will just reject anything I show in the same way. All will just be one circle argument that it is impossible to have over unity.
You are wanting too much all at once Brad. You just blindly rush into a China shop like bull and have no regard for details. The object is not to prove anything with a video. It is for others to do such things for themselves. There was nothing hard in that. I said that could be done with all the BLDC fans. What you are looking for is something to disprove. You are not at all interested in learning about OU or expanding your experience. You have figured out everything you expect to learn as your words imply. You have a very over simplistic electrical theory and it is not open to the real world.
If the fan is 94% efficient then reducing that input energy makes it even more efficient. Now the losses are still there. The negative energy does not mean that there is no heat produced as before. So the battery charging is not part of that forward loop calculation. That is the other point you don't get. It wasn't used before. And now it is. But read my last post and realize that there is a vast difference between looping it back with a diode and powering a load. And the size of the load also changes because this is nonlinear. And all these words do not even properly represent how the energy works.
Now I do know what the electrical output is when I know the exact capacity of my batteries and charge them and discharge them over time. Or I can use various capacitor banks also. Or I can use transformers, etc.
You have part numbers as I wrote.
You have efficiency numbers as mentioned. But that is not important.
You have your own output measurements. In your case it is whatever you assume beforehand.
I claim OU in the real world for myself. Such things can only be determined in the real world Brad.
The EE guys are a dime a dozen. I know more EE guys than I can count. Apparently there is a difference with the guys that you know and the EEs I know. I know regular and higher level EEs (some of which are at the very top). There is a big difference. Just as there is with those working with linear processes and those working with nonlinear advanced projects. If you can't understand Barrett's works that I have mentioned then you are not in a place to talk about EEs. I have no problem with what any EE says as I will agree with it. It is not what the common EEs say, but what they are not aware of because of their limited studies and experience. I know very specialized EEs doing very critical work in industry and military that work with this processes. Again, if you are open to learning that then read Barrett on electromagnetism as he is a leading authority at the advanced levels (not college level like most people are limited to).
Yes you live in a syfy world as you keep assuming and expecting a video to prove OU. Too much tv and chat time. You need to get to the bench and spend time with others on the bench. But only after you understand how to evaluate your own methodologies and assumptions. Study the history of electromagnetism for a start. Actually read Faraday and Maxwell and hear them out in their own words. Do the same experiments. Then notice what others took away from what they wrote. Actually read Tesla. You complained that people like me misrepresent him. Well I have read everything he wrote that is in the public domain very carefully. And I have done his related experiments and demonstrated them to others. Again, read Barrett on that. This is already proven out Brad. Yes I am just trying to make it easier because I doubt that most or possibly any of the active members here could fully understand those words or experiments. While I wish someone more capable than I could do this instead, at least I am trying to help here.
No Brad, we all make claims in life, in fact every day. Rarely do others expect you to prove the claims you make. And they would find you very strange if you went around addressing them as you do me when they make claims. "Prove to me Bruce, that it was a white male who spilled coffee on you at lunch." :o "Prove to me Rick, over the internet, that you do power measurements while proving OU!" "Prove to me Brad, that you even exist!" You are so incensed that you can't even give up on that delusion. Really, all you want to do is try and disprove OU. That is your mission. For you can easily show these things to yourself. That's all I ever hope to do. I don't need recognition. I really don't care what people claim they prove or disprove over the internet. I'm only interested in the real world. I love to get information over the internet as we all do. But that is something different than proof. The only proof we can have here is what you guys have proven so far with this silliness. You keep demonstrating it over and over. And that's the point I can prove...
I agree with all that Brad has posted. I am sad to say I have lost all respect for Rick. I was really hoping he had something useful to show us. But it appears all he has is the same old snake oil salesman crap. He has posted nothing of any actual substance to back up his claims. He won't even post such simple information as the actual part numbers for the LEDs he is using.
While I am disappointed in Rick I am actually shocked by the actions of the admin of this forum. To put people on moderation because they asked for some technical data to back up the claims is going way over the top. This will be my last post in this thread. I will still make posts in some threads by Floor about magnet interactions. When those threads are finished I will be done with this forum. This forum has degenerated into another Energetic Forum to promote apparently false claims and products.
Carroll
Well somewhere in the real world ::)Hmm, I was expecting that since you said your device can run loads other than batteries, that surely you had a video demonstrating this.
Brad said that one of Rick's devices was 50% efficient. A blatant lie. He is the one pushing false claims against Rick.
Hmm, I was expecting that since you said your device can run loads other than batteries, that surely you had a video demonstrating this.
If you don't, that's fine. I'm not surprised.
it will be for nice people who actually appreciate me for giving information.
Are you going to go running off to Stefan and have me moderated as well?,as it seems that all the long term members here who disagree with you keep getting moderated.
In fact,i have never seen so many members moderated here at one time for telling it as it is. Most of those have been doing this sort of stuff for far longer than you Rick,including myself.
So to say that i should try your setups for myself is laughable,as i have been doing this very thing longer than you have.
You have nothing new Rick--even your !loving path! circuit is Bedini's ssg circuit,which was designed by some one else back in the early 70s.
So Rick,you only make your self look stupid when you think that most of us have never experimented with your setup's. And to call people like Poynt liars is a true example of your stupidity.
You might be able to baffle some with your bullshit,but you will never dazzle most with your brilliance.
You continually claim OU and free energy,but you have never shown it. The reason you can't show it,is because you do not have it-and you never have. Nothing you have Rick is OU or free energy.
So i dont know what you got going on with Stefan to have all these long term-well educated members moderated,but i have decided to get to the bottom of it.
In fact,you and your systems are now my top priority,and i will be testing all of your setup's,and disclosing all my findings on the forums and my youtube channel. But mine will also have accurate power measurements and battery analysis with each test-unlike yours. And i will also be discussing things that have been taking place here at OU.com,regarding the moderation of all these long term members. So if you read this Stefan,you might like to give an explanation as to why the top guys on this forum are being moderated for doing nothing more than telling the truth.
So Rick,as i said--it is not us that is living in a fantasy land--it is you.
So Stefan,i now ask that Rick be made to supply OU.com with the relevant data to back up his claims of overunity,and prove that all the members that objected to his claims were justifiably placed on moderation.
Brad
I agree with all that Brad has posted. I am sad to say I have lost all respect for Rick. I was really hoping he had something useful to show us.
Indeed,as i stated earlier in this thread.
But Rick was here years ago,doing the very same thing--big claim's ,and not one shred of evidence to back up those claim's.
https://overunity.com/15366/new-free-energy-conferences-in-hamburg-and-chicago/
Thanks to another member at OUR for the above thread link.
In that thread,you will hear Rick moaning about all the troll's (trolls are now those that ask for accurate power measurements from claimants of OU devices)in this forum,and how bad this forum is-->and yet,here he is again ::)
Rick's !loving path! circuit is just John Bedini's SSG circuit--nothing more.
But it isn't even JB's circuit,as that very circuit was designed back in the early 70's.
Both are nothing more than an inductor being switched on and off,and the flyback sent to a load.
Neither John or Rick actually know what they are looking at,or how to understand the simplicity of what they are doing. Neither seem to understand that the energy of the flyback came from the source in the first place,but rather call it some bullshit like energy from the vacuum,or negative energy. Yes,this is the extent of there understanding.
It is funny to watch--
JB takes some one else's circuit,and calls it his own,and then Rick takes JB's circuit,and calls it his own ::)
So just remember guy's-->trolls are those that seek truth, ask technical questions,and ask for data that can verifi the claimants claim of having an OU device.
Trolls are also those who replicate said OU device,but where the OU just dose not show up after careful analysis and power measurements-->you are now a troll and a disinformationist.
You have all witnessed in this thread that John Bedini's blood still flows strong through Rick's veins,and the very same tactics are still being used today by Rick as he used when in a business partnership with the Bedini camp-->a tigers stripe's never change. Brad
Ok Mr a.king21
It is now up to you to show the efficiency of that fan motor,and prove your claim i am a liar.
First you must measure the actual air flow for a given amount of P/in to that fan motor.
Then you have to find out how much energy is within that flow of air-->what is the actual energy value of that flowing air the fan is moving.
Once you have done that,and you have the energy value of the flowing air,and the actual value of electrical energy the fan is consuming,then you can come back and show us all exactly how efficient that fan motor is.
This time,some bullshit efficiency claim by Rick will not cut it.
This time you are going to back up your claims against me with hard data and accurate measurements.
Knowing you and the way you work,you will not deliver any sort of accurate data or measurements,as it has become apparent that you are no different than Rick,where you just make false claims and accuse others of lying without having anything at all to back up those claims and accusations.
So,enough with the bullshit a.king--time to back up your claim's and accusations,although i really believe that any sort of accurate power/energy calculations from you is far above your pay grade.
It's all well and good to call me a liar,but lets see you back it up.
Brad
Ok Mr a.king21Ain't calling someone a liar a bit strong not to mention what looks like verbal humiliation, what's wrong with a more gentleman's approach like 'mistaken' come on lads lets cool it from back street street wise agresion, all this rudeness! many thanks the verbal moderator! :o you all need to observe the correct code of acceptable code of practice or you will be reported.
It is now up to you to show the efficiency of that fan motor,and prove your claim i am a liar.
First you must measure the actual air flow for a given amount of P/in to that fan motor.
Then you have to find out how much energy is within that flow of air-->what is the actual energy value of that flowing air the fan is moving.
Once you have done that,and you have the energy value of the flowing air,and the actual value of electrical energy the fan is consuming,then you can come back and show us all exactly how efficient that fan motor is.
This time,some bullshit efficiency claim by Rick will not cut it.
This time you are going to back up your claims against me with hard data and accurate measurements.
Knowing you and the way you work,you will not deliver any sort of accurate data or measurements,as it has become apparent that you are no different than Rick,where you just make false claims and accuse others of lying without having anything at all to back up those claims and accusations.
So,enough with the bullshit a.king--time to back up your claim's and accusations,although i really believe that any sort of accurate power/energy calculations from you is far above your pay grade.
It's all well and good to call me a liar,but lets see you back it up.
Brad
Void has posted a circuit which is not overunity. He demonstrates that a battery under load exhibits no visible voltage drop for a whole hour. Which I suppose we all know. (I mean I test my circuits 24/7 for weeks lol)Interesting, why are the cables go underneath and not in the box? :)
Nonetheless comments would be welcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1ZS_2wYR8
This is a very important point he makes which reveals how these forums are usually worse than useless. What is the bases for any of you making conclusions from pictures, videos, or words presented by other people? There is no way to demonstrate that anyone else is really doing what they claim they are. Even video of people saying something cannot be trusted that the person is really the person you think it is as inexpensive 20 year old tech exists that mask so. . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
So it is true that there is no way for anyone to trust any claim from anyone on this forum. So what is the point of this forum? What use is it? I will continue this next post...
Got to love the humor ;D
I have worked closely with batteries all my life, and for the last 15 years with battery charging. I think I know a thing or two about surface charge. I probably have at least one conversation every day about related subjects.
You have to understand how to properly determine the actual capacity of a battery. I have 6 industrial chargers that do that with multiple resistive loads and programing. Once you know the battery's actual capacity then you can do full test runs and see this. This is why I can't do YouTube videos of proper tests that take days or weeks. But I have recorded very long videos.
We are not dealing with surface charge. You may be dealing with desulfating processes, or pushing up voltages on batteries that have no real capacity.
We can run different loads as well. But with batteries you need to run over time when you know what you are doing.
Interesting, why are the cables go underneath and not in the box? :)
Will he proof overunity over the Internet? Will the "experts" now also ask for exact measurements, Scope Shots and calculations?
Seaad
That is a very good starting point
Trust absolutely no one... if that works for you .
Prove everything yourself in front of you .
How do you suggest it be changed ?
Of course what you describe would seem to be unique to this forum
As everywhere on the planet people exchange and build and share
And move forward .
As a point of fact someone sends you something that they charge you for with plans and directions
I would imagine you would expect a refund if it didn’t work?
Here on the Internet word-of-mouth(internet texting) is the single biggest vetting process for consumers
anything you buy of any value at all ,,,you absolutely rely on Feedback from satisfied users
you investigate others experiences you look and search everywhere you possibly can for satisfied customers. Or problems recalls issues etc. etc. etc.
To say ....in my opinion this model Doesn’t work here at this unique particular forum and several others?
Well that would be amazingly disingenuous
After all there are no published plans ,no part numbers , yes I agree you have to buy the kit and thankfully we have members that have bought the kit and are willing to share the results (Stefan friend)
so I suppose this is all hearsay or assumption until such a person steps forward with actual feedback from the actual product .
so yes I agree under the terms you describe absolutely 100% you cannot prove anything.
If you refer to your work ? is that what you were referring to?
Since you recently shared it ....the forum has been an absolute mess
members can’t post
people are afraid to write
Please be brutally honest with exactly what you mean?
Chet
It is astounding that you, of all people would ever need any type of battery charger.
I would suppose that they are all gathering dust with dried out caps by now .
C'mon Rick the guys here are asking for your best shot at proof even though you and I know that it will be picked apart.
A smart guy like yourself should be able to make a case with the details that conventionaly taught people understand.
That may well give problems for the less educated and vise versa.
So far all of your info is broken, incomplete, with some real but perhaps honest mistakes .
All we have here is a long debate where you win many irrelevant battles but fail in the war department.
Void has posted a circuit which is not overunity. He demonstrates that a battery under load exhibits no visible voltage drop for a whole hour. Which I suppose we all know. (I mean I test my circuits 24/7 for weeks lol)
Nonetheless comments would be welcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI1ZS_2wYR8
I think there must be a language barrier here. Void says his build is not overunity - but I agree that he could have posted a circuit diagram.
Perhaps Rick could also post a circuit diagram for the fan setup.You've just proved my point. You know nothing about the efficiency of the fan and neither do I. However you said it was 50% efficient - which is something you could not have known. Therefore you made it up. In my book - if you make something up it is a fabrication ie a lie.
And how are those efficiency measurements comming along for that fan--the one you accused me of lying about.
Brad
Yeah I have many videos before YouTube, on YouTube, and also not online.
I'm not going to bother posting links for all you want to do is attack me one way or the other. You guys are not in control of me here and I will post and/or make videos when I want and never for you. If I do a video about anything it will be for nice people who actually appreciate me for giving information. Your attitude is obvious Darren, you always assume the worst and like a troll you attempt to insult to get information. Obviously if a battery can be charged up then other loads can be run instead.
Obviously it can drive other loads aside from batteries, and it's also obvious why it won't be shown.
You've just proved my point. You know nothing about the efficiency of the fan and neither do I. However you said it was 50% efficient - which is something you could not have known. Therefore you made it up. In my book - if you make something up it is a fabrication ie a lie.
It certainly is not scientific - that's for sure.
He has posted a circuit diagram. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=11s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pWApv7jdk&t=11s)
That's all anyone needs.
What I find hard to understand is why people do not just take the information freely given and test it out.
Instead their is a barrage of attacks for no reason.
You cannot apply EE theory to this tech. You have to get into Steinmetz - which enables you to understand Tesla- and then later Barret .
You could start here of course - but I doubt if you can follow it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQnSz_e7jvc&feature=youtu.be
Perhaps Rick could also post a circuit diagram for the fan setup.
And how are those efficiency measurements comming along for that fan--the one you accused me of lying about.
Brad
My claim of 50% efficiency comes from years of experiance working with such fans and motors,where as your accusation of me lying comes from nothing but your own ignorance.
You-like Rick,have no idea as to how to go about measuring the actual efficiency of that fan,where as i could give you an accurate efficiency within 30 minutes of that fan.
So this means that neither you nor Rick has any idea at all as to the efficiency of Ricks fan system,as you don't even know how to measure the fans own efficiency in the first place.
Both yours and Ricks inabilities are starting to shine through,but that is something most of us knew right from the start.
Again, why don't you do something constructive rather than just be a useless critic of everything?
And on that note, this will be my last post in this thread; I have those productive tasks to tend to, and I'm sure Stefan has his finger on the moderation trigger aimed my way anyway.
I wish you the best in all Rick, and I hope we can part with no animosity (there is none from me anyway).
Its been......well lets leave it at that.
Cheers.
Why Brad, you already know what it is. Since you said it was around 50% then that MUST be the truth. Like I said, the owner said it was 94%. It really doesn't matter to me as I have used these fans for years and rotated the batteries back and forth. It wouldn't matter if it was 30% or 80% or 94%.
You always avoid the actual point at hand, that the input was reduced and there was added output. In this simple modification we have gain because the coil has a dual purpose which is suppressed by people like you and mainstream theory and practice. Instead of saying, that's cool Rick, you just attack.
If you can't follow instructions then I can't help you. I did a longer video before with the whole process. But you guys just insult me for showing a long video.
I'm sure Brad. Prove to us in video that you have such years of experience. Come on. I expect to see that in 5 minutes or you can't do it. :o
Again, you are just embarrassing yourself. But you just want to distract from the point as I wrote.
All you do is repeat the same all statements over and over again. You never respond to a single point but just call it names. You are being childish Brad. You argue in a circle and set yourself up as the judge and authority. "You can't do this, You can't do that, because Brad said so." ::)
Nice comparison to 3 phase. Wow! :o Maybe you mean you were fazed!
Why Brad, you already know what it is. Since you said it was around 50% then that MUST be the truth. Like I said, the owner said it was 94%. It really doesn't matter to me as I have used these fans for years and rotated the batteries back and forth. It wouldn't matter if it was 30% or 80% or 94%.My dear Rick a picture paints a thousand words or so they say so why does the camera point at you and not a close up of the object you have in focus, i'm asking not attacking.
You always avoid the actual point at hand, that the input was reduced and there was added output. In this simple modification we have gain because the coil has a dual purpose which is suppressed by people like you and mainstream theory and practice. Instead of saying, that's cool Rick, you just attack.
If you can't follow instructions then I can't help you. I did a longer video before with the whole process. But you guys just insult me for showing a long video.
My dear Rick a picture paints a thousand words or so they say so why does the camera point at you and not a close up of the object you have in focus, i'm asking not attacking.
Regards Raymondo
Well first up,you only have to look at my youtube channel to see what i do,and the test equipment i have.Hi Tin man have you got a build video you can post. regards
But i'll tell you what Rick,i'll just build a small one tonight,as i have a few of them brushless DC fans lying around. They are only the small cooling fans for computers,but you did state in your video that any brushless DC motor will work,and give us free energy.
At least from this you will be able to see how accurate testing is carried out,instead of your style of testing and measurements you try to make in your video's,where no output energy was measured at all other than a batteries voltage rising slowly,and where your input power shown by the display on your power supply was jumping all over the place. That is just pure junk,and shows nothing at all,but still you claim free energy--just like your friend JB did for many years.
Brad
Well first up,you only have to look at my youtube channel to see what i do,and the test equipment i have.
But i'll tell you what Rick,i'll just build a small one tonight,as i have a few of them brushless DC fans lying around. They are only the small cooling fans for computers,but you did state in your video that any brushless DC motor will work,and give us free energy.
At least from this you will be able to see how accurate testing is carried out,instead of your style of testing and measurements you try to make in your video's,where no output energy was measured at all other than a batteries voltage rising slowly,and where your input power shown by the display on your power supply was jumping all over the place. That is just pure junk,and shows nothing at all,but still you claim free energy--just like your friend JB did for many years.
Brad
Perhaps you can share with us how you your self have calculated the correct efficiency of the motor,like any good experimenter would do when making claims of free energy.
I mean,i'm saying an efficiency of around 50% from years of experience,and the guy you bought them off says an efficiency of 94%. So how have you confirmed the claimed efficiency of 94% Rick ?--could you run us through your efficiency confirmation test procedure ?--iust so as we all know that you have confirmed the efficiency of the motors you claim give free energy.
Brad
Brad,
I'm not doing any of this for you, nor will I do what you demand. While I do things for other people who are not so hostile I find you fairly predictable in your arrogant hostility.
The efficiency of the motor is not the point. You keep committing the ignoration elenchi fallacy and divert to something else that is really related to the subject. If we were focusing on efficiency here, or more importantly COP then I would be doing a different circuit than merely the diode modification. I would also use another motor. You are looking for me to be proving something else here. You fail to take the time to even read what I have written or listen to what I have said.
If the motor was 10% efficient, and the world used it that way, then if I make it more efficient while also resulting in battery charging (say 10% extra work on top) than that is a useful gain. I know that this is not what you want, but I don't care about what you want me to be doing here. We are not addressing the same thing. You are missing the point as always. You have committed yourself to attacking me about your own misunderstanding of what I am doing here. It doesn't matter what the efficiency of the fan is so long as the result has a gain over normal setup. This is just a tiny step in the right direction. The first step is for people to realize that things are not as good as they could be. Can you not agree with that? You would say we should be using more efficient motors. And I agree. You would say we should be using more efficient circuits. I agree. I have shown a simple way to make such widely used fans more efficient while allowing for a small electrical load in addition to that (while the motor has the same CFMs (with less input energy). We obviously disagree with the why and how of this and that is the point of debate. You have made the efficiency of the motor to be the debate because you refuse to consider what I have been saying.
Now I know that if I had presented a self-runner system here that it would be easier for you to see this. But I didn't actually make that video for this forum or to satisfy that desire. It was again mentioned here by someone else. But it still makes a point that needs to be considered: why is no one doing this when these motors have been around since the 70s? Well I am doing that, but always much better (I never use just a diode, and just show it here as an easy thing to do). The bigger point other than making things more useful or efficient, is the fact that I am showing a many-body asymmetrical circuit that uses a floating ground. This is just a tool to begin considering these things. It would like a practical application to what Walter Lewin was showing merely with the reverse volt meter in his lectures about Kirchhoff's loop rule being a special case of Faraday. Can you understand that even if you don't agree with me or Lewin?
I didn't by that from the owner of that company, I bought it from Digikey. Maybe you've heard of that US company. It has the "world's largest selection of electronic components." Maybe that isn't good enough for you. IDK. Again, I decided to call the company and the owner actually called me back and looked up their testing for that fan and they determined it was 94%. It doesn't matter to me if it is less than that or more as I can make the fan run continuously with the other circuits anyway. But it is a nice off-the-shelf practical fan that I have used for many years now.
Now you will divert from the subject and make a big deal about all your skills and tools to try and save face here. You have made many blunders so far and now you are desperate to prove your value on this forum. You recently said you were thinking about giving up because of your many blunders in similar discussions. So now you are desperate to put me down as a tool to show how superior you are to me. That is really sad to see. I have several friends who have watched you from the first days and have actually liked your videos. They are watching you do this and are really disappointed with your hostile attitudes and closemindedness. We all agree that you are a highly reactionary person. You hate Aaron and Bedini so much that you automatically reject anything they mentioned. And that is just immature. Now you are doing the same against me. You stated yesterday that you are on a mission to destroy. That doesn't sound like science but revenge for being embarrassed. But that was your own doing. You made this into a war from the start. You admittedly were prejudiced against me because of former associations with Bedini. Then you apologized for doing that. Then you eventually just went with the tide of attackers and said a whole bunch of foolish things against me again. Then I responded again in great length and you were in the dust and ashes and wrote that you were thinking about giving up all of this. Then you flip flopped again and started saying that I was misrepresenting Tesla when I was actually quoting him. Then you started all over again and said yesterday that I am just Bedini just because I recognized that he said some truth about some matters. I mean really, bedini believed transistors were switching devices, so I guess because you believe that that means you must be Bedini and should be rejected, etc. ::) You have no dialogue skills and are just a reactionary person. You want to control me but that's not going to happen. I am not reactionary but always benefit from any discussion, even if you heap abuse on me. I can learn from you as well Brad, even if it is what not to do. A mature person can realize where warning parties agree with each other. An unreasonable person just assumes that the other party is wrong in everything (which is actually impossible). You are right in many things. All I'm saying is that what you have experience and believe is limited. The same is true for me. I know very little. Electrodynamics is still in relative infancy because of the prejudices and corporate/institutional greed. But I do know that there is a vast difference between mainstream limited electromagnetism theory and practice and advanced electromagnetism that is used in special systems (like Tesla used) not well known to the general public. Some of that is within many products all around the world for many years. But most of the time these kinds of processes are in anything but energy generation applications.
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
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.]
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.
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
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.
There is a proper and improper way of self-charging.
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.
The circuit is not entirely the same as the SSG so you don't know again.
So you attack the SSG type circuit and claims and now you refer people to it. :o Wow!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
I WILL BET YOU A PACK OF 40 SWAN TINNIES IF YOU COULD PROVE ME WRONG,,
SAND GROPER.
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.
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.
Aprox
3watt input charges it’s own batteries runs external load
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0sjqoshznU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0sjqoshznU)
Self feedback systems is something real . not something new . ""input charges it’s own batteries runs external load"" ?????
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_eja4gmpcY
Nelson
I suppose trying to understand
Since no sharing of actual circuits is being done here
resorting to trying to understand...
I also try to understand the world I live in !
walking around are people for 15 years they could change the world ...according to Rick !
Why absolutely not one of them has come forward ever ...all the years I’ve been associated with OU not one has come forward.... anywhere.
15 years ?? I cannot imagine this it is beyond my frame of reference .
Sorry if I posted that and it upset you , this conversation that I’m reading here ...15 years the world ,our home all of our homes.. to say it makes me sick to my stomach to think that for 15 years there are people that could fix this and they make money or they don’t share ...to say it makes me nauseous would be an understatement .
Sorry if the tinsels little movie upset you Nelson,I would feel much better about all of this if it was a lie
This was the problem I had with the other forum.. that B_edi-no used.
How heartless and callous and indifferent to life ..
They also claimed they were trying to help ...help what?help who?
For the first time I just looked at the website of the man posting here $30 worth of parts and pieces for thousands of dollars
Sorry if I upset you Nelson
I hope you fellas sleep well at night, with your secrets and Rick with his bank account
Such evil I cannot comprehend
End of story
Nelson
I suppose trying to understand
Since no sharing of actual circuits is being done here
resorting to trying to understand...
I also try to understand the world I live in !
walking around are people for 15 years they could change the world ...according to Rick !
Why absolutely not one of them has come forward ever ...all the years I’ve been associated with OU not one has come forward.... anywhere.
15 years ?? I cannot imagine this it is beyond my frame of reference .
Sorry if I posted that and it upset you , this conversation that I’m reading here ...15 years the world ,our home all of our homes.. to say it makes me sick to my stomach to think that for 15 years there are people that could fix this and they make money or they don’t share ...to say it makes me nauseous would be an understatement .
Sorry if the tinsels little movie upset you Nelson,I would feel much better about all of this if it was a lie
This was the problem I had with the other forum.. that B_edi-no used.
How heartless and callous and indifferent to life ..
They also claimed they were trying to help ...help what?help who?
For the first time I just looked at the website of the man posting here $30 worth of parts and pieces for thousands of dollars
Sorry if I upset you Nelson
I hope you fellas sleep well at night, with your secrets and Rick with his bank account
Such evil I cannot comprehend
End of story
Nelson
Yes things keep me up at night ...maybe that’s my problem not yours ?
One thing that doesn’t keep me up at night is putting my head on the pillow
when I have something which could save someone’s life.
There are people doing things on the planet that keep me up at night and make me worry for my children and grandchildren
Recently in America... people do things I cannot comprehend ?
And here in America Rick does something else I absolutely cannot comprehend .
I cannot imagine what that looks like to people that really need this technology ?
And here it plays like a game ?
And you have no problem with any of this ?
Rick makes a business last 15 years ...it’s all just business to you ?..it’s all good ?..is that what you’re saying ?
I am very confused by what you’re actually saying?
Also the excuse
I can’t believe the things you just wrote ...other people stop this ...?other people needed moderation that’s why you didn’t share ?
that’s why Rick isn’t sharing ?
Sorry language barrier must be confusing me ..
Here we’re not exchanging baking recipes and knitting Secrets ..this is just going in circles
Read the mission statement Stefan wrote .
Nelson
here the membership has purchased (together through donations) oscilloscopes and equipment
here there are people in the membership who donate equipment to people who experiment
It is only open source ...and only to people who open source their work
So yes absolutely you can take that to the bank if you’re going to open source and you need equipment
just as in the past it will happen again.
There is something very strange in this conversation and I don’t know if it’s language barrier or something hidden
it needs to be spoken
brutal honesty is the only way forward
Nelson
I understand yes it seems confusing ,I think we should talk ?
How to move forward?
On the other subject I did speak With Stefan just now About my discussion with the lab this morning And I asked him also for an update on his friends Work.
I have to be honest I hesitate to type these words, but my long experience here with different members and their claims makes this easier for me .
Yes the man at the lab did have a machine that he used to do job site work, it ran for a month and a half and used batteries .
The batteries had to be negatively conditioned (took 4 months to “treat” the batteries) and were extremely annoying to manage .
So little power for so many batteries , he was happy to be finished with the machine and glad when they were able to hook up to the mains .
Today I asked him wouldn’t it be nice to understand the mechanism that was at work , could we investigate this deeper ,We talked a bit about how to do that.
It is hoped that this will happen here , I will be speaking with him again tomorrow about this .
Also Stefan will be coordinating with his friend for that replication video ..to hopefully
Be shared here.
Respectfully
Chet
Well we have a starting point.
1 OU confirmed
2 All the Naysayers who were moderated were correctly moderated because they attacked without proof.
Now we have proof. Get over it Naysayers. You lost the battle and the war
And I was right to promote Rick after I did my due diligence (over 40 hours of watching his videos and talking to him on the phone).
I did all that for you.
So I repeat what I said months ago. We have a real treasure to mine here. Be nice to Rick cos he has the goods we are all looking for.
Now it's time for me to get on with that Don Smith replication as I have also been sidetracked battling my corner. (and Rick's)
Here the man that Rick shares his work from , who’s work it actually is ?
I have no idea
This claim predates the Internet .
But here something drastic has changed ...here it has apparently become all right to watch people starve..to watch animals go extinct ...to watch a planet be destroyed or damaged , drought ...or consequences of toxic chemicals to try and sustain crop yeilds ? (Reefs disappearing oceans estuaries
Starving for oxygen
Huge deforestation ...undrinkable water.. so many things that could be fixed with Ricks technology !
( indoor stackable hydroponics .. Just one such example .Unfeasible .....except with Ricks technology
Turning deserts into paradise ...desalinating sea water ,Unfeasible ....except with Ricks technology.
All So Rick and his previous boss could sell us the secrets ??
Something has changed ...the mindset ...if the secrets are true..what does that say about humanity ?
I can sell oxygen or watch a man suffocate for lack of it ?
Where Are all the customers the last 15/20 years that were taught the secrets ? how do they sleep at night?
If this is true ..it’s an abomination in my opinion ..a crime against humanity on a global scale which I could never even contemplate ?
And I could never never ever put my head on the pillow at night with such a secret
end of story .
So Nelson
yeah if I’m wrong I apologize ..if you disagree with what I just wrote then you’re right
We definitely see things differently
If you need equipment to open source ...don’t hesitate to ask the community .
Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
And I truly hope Stefan will open source this technology !
When his friend shares the video here.
Rick
you have your hair up for no reason, The batteries had to be treated / conditioned for four months prior to use
Then he used the system for 1 1/2 months and it was a difficult thing to bring it back-and-forth from the job site every night with all the batteries .
After all 2000 W on a job site ...one nice circular saw or chop saw and a drop light is what will run .
I state the facts and you accuse me of hostilities?
Over the years I’ve heard other people mention odd behavior with batteries and I think it needs to be looked into
David Bowling comes to mind member Ciftfa had an anomaly
And of course all this we read here with batteries and your old boss .
I am hoping many more people come forward and share their stories and experiences (Stefan’s friend)
but first things first ...we try and understand what’s happening with the batteries ?
If you would like to help ?.. that would be wonderful ..if not that’s OK too.
Not looking for any more conflict ,had plenty of that here already .
Definitely hoping more people come forward and share their experiences ,hopefully help others get there too.
And for additional clarity
when we first heard about your system From Aking 21 there were no batteries mentioned?
(that we were aware of )
To be absolutely clear... yes we don’t like batteries here
sure for a while it’s OK ...until we totally understand the gain
Mechanism.
1 OU confirmed
2 All the Naysayers who were moderated were correctly moderated because they attacked without proof.
Now we have proof. Get over it Naysayers. You lost the battle and the war
And I was right to promote Rick after I did my due diligence (over 40 hours of watching his videos and talking to him on the phone).
I did all that for you.
So I repeat what I said months ago. We have a real treasure to mine here. Be nice to Rick cos he has the goods we are all looking for.
Now it's time for me to get on with that Don Smith replication as I have also been sidetracked battling my corner. (and Rick's)
author=a.king21 link=topic=17491.msg538360#msg538360 date=1565653726
Lies
No OU has been confirmed.
Please post link to confirmed OU device,where accurate measurements have been made.
The one's that should have been moderated are those making claim's,but could never back them up with real data.
You have no confirmation or proof of an OU device.
You live in la,la land.
No,you were wrong.
Oh yes,we have all seen what you had part in,and that was getting good people moderated because they questioned Rick's claim's--along with your own.
Rick has nothing,and has shown nothing.
The only treasure that was delivered was an empty chest.
Oh please.
At OUR you stated you couldn't even measure the power in and out in your own system,and now you claim to be building a Don Smith power waster.
Not one single device or person you and Rick keep quoting has a self running OU device--and that's a fact.
Rick's claim's have died--no one is interested in 100 more pages of nothingness,and that is all you and Rick have delivered.
In fact,you and Rick have done more damage to Stefan's forum than anyone else before you's.
This forum lost a lot of great experimenters due to you and Rick.
Thankfully at OUR you were put back in your box before it got out of hand.
Brad
Agree 100% with tinman.
ramset - don't let RF's BS get to you and it seems that is his purpose - he probably hopes you will go away as he posts all his attacks. I never thought I'd see the day when someone was attacking one of the most helpful people here who has done nothing but try to get free energy to the people. We know you are the good guy Chet.
Hey Rick this machine must be what you have been talking about all this time! :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=FnhXZTi-Hso
Raymondo
OK
Hopefully a good experiment that can show a gain can be modeled , after speaking with the man at the lab , The best possible circuit to show the maximum surge in the proper direction while utilizing the proper battery To collect ...will be assembled ,Hopefully some sensors giving input data to an arduino
Or other method to collate the data And manage the cycling will be established.
The rest should be self-evident .
RE recent comments
had heard years back that there were machines sitting dormant ..was always confused by this ?
And honestly thought they were Johns machines ,When I read here that they were your machines
And now I read that John worked for you !
I felt an opportunity exsisted to advance this knowledge into the community .
But now that the machines are gone ..?
I’ve written many times why I work open source , to me the biggest asset is the people and they will also benefit the most , A great motivator
You have made it clear why you don’t work open source .
I take a very strong stance that lives and so much more depend on this technology and you seem to have come to peace with the cost of withholding and prioritizing your well being ... and a much slower path ,So far it’s been 15 years and you have 50 variants of OU ?
As I have mentioned many times ,there are hundreds of thousands of members in these FE forums
I see people that can help Bring change ...And feel no need to micromanage ... I trust that they will understand a well presented experiment with a clear schematic and very specific claims
Claims which will withstand all scrutiny.
That is the goal here
And we have amazing resources to investigate this .
author=a.king21 link=topic=17491.msg538360#msg538360 date=1565653726
Lies
No OU has been confirmed.
Please post link to confirmed OU device,where accurate measurements have been made.
The one's that should have been moderated are those making claim's,but could never back them up with real data.
You have no confirmation or proof of an OU device.
You live in la,la land.
No,you were wrong.
Oh yes,we have all seen what you had part in,and that was getting good people moderated because they questioned Rick's claim's--along with your own.
Rick has nothing,and has shown nothing.
The only treasure that was delivered was an empty chest.
Oh please.
At OUR you stated you couldn't even measure the power in and out in your own system,and now you claim to be building a Don Smith power waster.
Not one single device or person you and Rick keep quoting has a self running OU device--and that's a fact.
Rick's claim's have died--no one is interested in 100 more pages of nothingness,and that is all you and Rick have delivered.
In fact,you and Rick have done more damage to Stefan's forum than anyone else before you's.
This forum lost a lot of great experimenters due to you and Rick.
Thankfully at OUR you were put back in your box before it got out of hand.
Brad
author=a.king21 link=topic=17491.msg538360#msg538360 date=1565653726
Lies
No OU has been confirmed.
Please post link to confirmed OU device,where accurate measurements have been made.
You have no confirmation or proof of an OU device.
You live in la,la land.
Oh yes,we have all seen what you had part in,and that was getting good people moderated because they questioned Rick's claim's--along with your own.[/font][/size]
Rick has nothing,and has shown nothing.That is because in my book when you have no input you do not need to measure. ::)
The only treasure that was delivered was an empty chest.
At OUR you stated you couldn't even measure the power in and out in your own system,and now you claim to be building a Don Smith power waster.
Not one single device or person you and Rick keep quoting has a self running OU device--and that's a fact.
Rick's claim's have died--no one is interested in 100 more pages of nothingness,and that is all you and Rick have delivered.
In fact,you and Rick have done more damage to Stefan's forum than anyone else before you's.
This forum lost a lot of great experimenters due to you and Rick.
Thankfully at OUR you were put back in your box before it got out of hand.
I posted this on OU.com but apparently it needs to be repeated here.If you read my post fully I concluded that it was a good start. I added that the batteries would have to be rotated for at least one month to be sure. Do you not agree with that analysis?
Aking,
Those small changes in voltage mean NOTHING! You seem to know almost nothing about battery chemistry. Voltage level of a battery is a very rough approximation of what is going on with the battery. A few degrees of change in the room temperature can make a difference in the battery voltage. And conversely a minute charge current of only a few milliamps will not raise the temperature of a battery. The only accurate way to gauge what is going on within a battery is to use a battery analyzer which measures the capacity of the battery and the internal resistance of the battery and gives a much more accurate reading of the charge level of the battery than just a voltage reading.
It is statements like yours and others from Rick that make those of us with real electronics experience just shake our heads. I am not meaning to put you down but you really need to take the time to properly learn about electronics and in this case battery chemistry if you want to be taken seriously. I don't at this point see any hope for Rick but I am hoping that with enough time you will wake up to the real world so that you can seriously study and work toward OU if it is possible. I believe it is, but have yet to find it. Unfortunately I have seen enough of Rick's word salad to know he is not leading you in the right direction. I at one time was also led down the garden path by Rick's mentor John Bedini and his cohort Erron. My own research and study and years of experience helped my to see they were leading me in the wrong direction.
Respectfully,
Carroll
Again, it really doesn't matter what is shown, demonstrated, etc.,
because you guys all have an agenda here to silence and disprove OU.
Ramset confirmed it
No,you were wrong.
Ramset confirmed it
[/font][/size]
I had nothing to do with anyone being moderated. Another Tinman wrong assumption.
That is because in my book when you have no input you do not need to measure. ::)
Rubbish.
WAS I?
Let's examine Itsu's results:-
" Post by Itsu on OUR : concerning the charging of a battery using the HV of the big coil, it went nowhere, so i removed the 3 satellite coils surrounding the big coil.
Now some more HV is available to charge the battery as the charge current went up from 2.2mA to now 6.53mA.
The voltage went up in a few hours from 12.83V to now 12.87V.
Hopefully this extra power is enough to start "conditioning" the battery.
By the way, the input to the big coil / gate driver is now 12.59V @ 12mA (was 7mA with the 3 satellite coils).
Itsu
Running overnight, the charge battery is now at 12.92V (@ 6.48mA) and the primary battery at 12.56V (@ 12mA).
Itsu "
So let me see: In put battery went from 12.59 volts to 12.56 volts a loss of -0.03 volts.
The charging battery went up from 12.83 volts to 12.92 volts a gain of + 0.09 volts
You also detected that the battery did not increase in temperature. That means it was charged by cold electricity as a battery should increase it's heat signature when charged.
So we have an overall gain of +.06 volts.
These are your figures according to your highly scientific test.
Obviously the batteries need rotating for at least a month to ensure the results are accurate.. But it's a good start....
You are looking stupid Brad....
The only one looking stupid here a.king is you,as you seem to think that V across a battery is some sort of indication of a batteries state of charge.
You also think that because the batteries temperature did not rise-with a mere 7mA of current flowing through it,it was charge by the mythical cold electricity.
And then we have the old Friedwick time delay trick,where very large batteries must be used,and rotated for many months.
You two are clasic Bedini nuts.
Brad
I did not ask anyone to do a replication. I was merely looking for additional ideas to extract real power from reactive power. So I discovered that the RICK could be used to charge batteries. I was not sure abut the output because as you say it is small. None the less some energy was extracted. So far no-one has suggested any further experiments. How about using your considerable experience to assist the process of investigation and experiment rather than to condemn every experimental attempt?
At least I have shown that the resonance induction coupler kit can also be used as an experimental and safe battery charger. Itsu was really fearful of trying the experiment at first because he feared the voltage. I told him it would be OK so he tried it and lo and behold nothing was damaged and it worked.
I also suggested that it could be used to recharge non-rechargeable batteries,, but that experiment was not tried.
So it's obvious you are against all experiments because the great Tinman knows all the answers.
Well the good news is that you cannot stop me or anyone else from experimenting and trying out new ideas.
It is called "research", my friend. ;)
Hi baudirenergie. The issue is whether these type of setups might be 'OU' or not, however.Sure these motors have some ohmical losses, they are only 95 to 97 % efficient in their best building types...
Energy in inductive switching spikes which normally may be dissipated in windings in the fan
or in other components in the fan such as diodes, can be redirected to pulse a secondary battery, but this still
in no way in itself necessarily indicates anything about OU. I have experimented quite a bit with using inductive
switching spikes in pulse circuits to pulse secondary batteries and unfortunately, no OU. In all my experiments
I have found that the energy is coming from the source battery driving the pulse circuit. Even if you are swapping
the batteries back and forth, the batteries start to run down if you leave it all running long enough.
If there are special exceptions to this where such an arrangement shows possible indications of actually being OU, I have
not ever seen a convincing demonstration of it anyway.
This is the point which some people here have been trying to get across here.
It is an incorrect assumption to think that because you can direct energy from inductive switching spikes,
or similar, to charge a secondary battery or batteries, that this somehow indicates 'OU'.
Such an arrangement actually in no way necessarily at all indicates OU.
Only by doing a proper comparison of average output power to average input power, or by self-looping such
a setup in some way and leaving the self-looped setup running for a suitably long enough time, can you understand
what the real performance of a given setup is in regards to efficiency. If using a battery to power a self-looped setup,
then the suitable run time needed to determine if the circuit might be OU or not depends on the current draw from the battery
in comparison to the battery's Amp-hour rating.
If some people are not understanding and acknowledging the above points, which should all be givens at overunity.com,
then they are only demonstrating that they don't really understand what they are doing. Sorry, but there is no nicer way to
say it. That is just the plain reality of the situation.
Hi Brad, You need to read more carefully. :) I did not state anywhere that the voltage across the coil remains the same polarity. ;)Brad was correct, that the voltage gets reversed... !! but not the current through the coil. You mixed that up...
I stated that the voltage across the coil when the magnetic field collapses is
the same polarity as the original applied voltage Vi, so it acts to try to keep the current flowing in the same direction
in the coil that it was flowing in before Vi was cut off. It is not of a polarity that is in opposition to the original applied voltage Vi,
so it is definitely incorrect to call it 'Back EMF' or 'Counter EMF'. Exactly as I wrote in my previous comment. ;)
Sure these motors have some ohmical losses, they are only 95 to 97 % efficient in their best building types...
But let´s just use an example:Take a 12 Volts 7 Amphour battery that is fully charged and then contains 84 Watthours of energy.
Now power one of the Fanmotors from Rick.
My friend has the same and they draw about 0.37 Amps in the normal mode unmodified.
that is about 4.44 Watts.Now if you run this on the 84 Wh battery this would give you about 19 hours run time.
Now when he had modified the motor as Rick did with removing the snubber diodes and using fast diodesto redirect the BackEMF pulses to a second 12 Battery, which was charged this way, the motor drew only then 0.35 to 0.36 amps and had the same torque,measured via a airflow meter.
So now do you agree if the motor now runs longer than 19 hours and also a few hours on the earlier empty second battery which was charged up and then will also run the same
motor also for another few hours ?
So what do you call this now ? OU or hyperefficient ?
There is no doubt that !some! motors can be made more efficient with some simple modifications.
The question is-->how efficient was it in the first place?
So,i would start out first getting actual efficiency measurements of the fans in question.
To do this,you will have to calculate differential pressures on each side of the fan,and know the actual flow rate of the fan at a set RPM. This can be calculated if the blades size and pitch on the fan is known,along with the RPM. This will then give you an accurate CFM figure. Once that is obtained,then you will need the differential pressure across the fan. These values can then be used to calculate the energy required to move that volume of air at that pressure. Waving one of those little plastic CFM meters around like Rick dose will give you a very inaccurate reading,and will not give you the differential pressure needed to make the calculations.
The simplest way at this point in time is to measure RPM to P/in in standard mode,and then again in modified mode. Stick with the RMP per mW value's,and leave those cheap air flow meters out of it,as they will give you all sorts of readings depending on as to how you hold them in the stream of air.
Brad
Sure these motors have some ohmical losses, they are only 95 to 97 % efficient in their best building types...
But let´s just use an example:Take a 12 Volts 7 Amphour battery that is fully charged and then contains 84 Watthours of energy.
Now power one of the Fanmotors from Rick.
My friend has the same and they draw about 0.37 Amps in the normal mode unmodified.
that is about 4.44 Watts.Now if you run this on the 84 Wh battery this would give you about 19 hours run time.
Now when he had modified the motor as Rick did with removing the snubber diodes and using fast diodesto redirect the BackEMF pulses to a second 12 Battery, which was charged this way, the motor drew only then 0.35 to 0.36 amps and had the same torque,measured via a airflow meter.
So now do you agree if the motor now runs longer than 19 hours and also a few hours on the earlier empty second battery which was charged up and then will also run the same
motor also for another few hours ?
So what do you call this now ? OU or hyperefficient ?
Quote from: Void on August 06, 2019, 04:33:43 PM
Hi Brad, You need to read more carefully. I did not state anywhere that the voltage across the coil remains the same polarity.
I stated that the voltage across the coil when the magnetic field collapses is
the same polarity as the original applied voltage Vi, so it acts to try to keep the current flowing in the same direction
in the coil that it was flowing in before Vi was cut off. It is not of a polarity that is in opposition to the original applied voltage Vi,
so it is definitely incorrect to call it 'Back EMF' or 'Counter EMF'. Exactly as I wrote in my previous comment.
Brad was correct, that the voltage gets reversed... !! but not the current through the coil. You mixed that up...
Void wrote:
"Quote from: Void on August 06, 2019, 04:24:43 PM
Hi baudirenergie. The issue is whether these type of setups might be 'OU' or not, however.
Energy in inductive switching spikes which normally may be dissipated in windings in the fan
or in other components in the fan such as diodes, can be redirected to pulse a secondary battery, but this still in no way in itself necessarily indicates anything about OU. I have experimented quite a bit with using inductive switching spikes in pulse circuits to pulse secondary batteries and unfortunately, no OU. In all my experiments I have found that the energy is coming from the source battery driving the pulse circuit. Even if you are swapping the batteries back and forth, the batteries start to run down if you leave it all running long enough.
If there are special exceptions to this where such an arrangement shows possible indications of actually being OU, I have not ever seen a convincing demonstration of it anyway.
This is the point which some people here have been trying to get across here.
It is an incorrect assumption to think that because you can direct energy from inductive switching spikes, or similar, to charge a secondary battery or batteries, that this somehow indicates 'OU'.
Such an arrangement actually in no way necessarily at all indicates OU.
Only by doing a proper comparison of average output power to average input power, or by self-looping such a setup in some way and leaving the self-looped setup running for a suitably long enough time, can you understand what the real performance of a given setup is in regards to efficiency. If using a battery to power a self-looped setup, then the suitable run time needed to determine if the circuit might be OU or not depends on the current draw from the battery in comparison to the battery's Amp-hour rating.
If some people are not understanding and acknowledging the above points, which should all be givens at overunity.com, then they are only demonstrating that they don't really understand what they are doing. Sorry, but there is no nicer way to say it. That is just the plain reality of the situation."
Stefan wrote:
Sure these motors have some ohmical losses, they are only 95 to 97 % efficient in their best building types...
But let´s just use an example:Take a 12 Volts 7 Amphour battery that is fully charged and then contains 84 Watthours of energy.
Now power one of the Fanmotors from Rick.
My friend has the same and they draw about 0.37 Amps in the normal mode unmodified.
that is about 4.44 Watts.Now if you run this on the 84 Wh battery this would give you about 19 hours run time.
Now when he had modified the motor as Rick did with removing the snubber diodes and using fast diodesto redirect the BackEMF pulses to a second 12 Battery, which was charged this way, the motor drew only then 0.35 to 0.36 amps and had the same torque,measured via a airflow meter.
So now do you agree if the motor now runs longer than 19 hours and also a few hours on the earlier empty second battery which was charged up and then will also run the same
motor also for another few hours ?
So what do you call this now ? OU or hyperefficient ?
There is no doubt that !some! motors can be made more efficient with some simple modifications.
The question is-->how efficient was it in the first place?
Herein lies the problem Stefan--we just cant seem to get any base line efficiency numbers from Rick(or anyone) as to the actual efficiency of those fan motors.
We have heard Rick say that the guy i got them off said they are around 94% efficient,but that is nothing more than hearsay.
claiming OU is very easy,but actually being able to present the required data to back up those claim's seems out of Rick's reach. This is data that is critical toward our research into OU.
No one enjoys having there time wasted,and as you know,a lot of us here have spent a lot of our time and own money replicating claimed OU devices. The difference most time's is we have a clear schematic or diagram to go by,but in Rick's case,information is very scarce.
So,i would start out first getting actual efficiency measurements of the fans in question.
To do this,you will have to calculate differential pressures on each side of the fan,and know the actual flow rate of the fan at a set RPM. This can be calculated if the blades size and pitch on the fan is known,along with the RPM. This will then give you an accurate CFM figure. Once that is obtained,then you will need the differential pressure across the fan. These values can then be used to calculate the energy required to move that volume of air at that pressure. Waving one of those little plastic CFM meters around like Rick dose will give you a very inaccurate reading,and will not give you the differential pressure needed to make the calculations.
The simplest way at this point in time is to measure RPM to P/in in standard mode,and then again in modified mode. Stick with the RMP per mW value's,and leave those cheap air flow meters out of it,as they will give you all sorts of readings depending on as to how you hold them in the stream of air.
Brad
These guys will never admit to anything being OU unless it is self-running, which means one would have to have 2 times the work done than normal (depending on how you define efficiency, COP, etc.).
Quote from: rickfriedrich on August 14, 2019, 05:49:18 PM
"These guys will never admit to anything being OU unless it is self-running, which means one would have to have 2 times the work done than normal (depending on how you define efficiency, COP, etc.). "
Luc writes:
Sorry Rick but that is incorrect!... you do not need twice the output to self loop a device.
All you need is isolation between input and output and the output power only needs to be 1% over the input power.
If those conditions can be continuously maintained (no fluctuations) then that is enough to sustain self loop conditions.
If you don't believe me just say so and I will prove you wrong and show you how it's done. I will even demonstrate it without any doubt in a way you say it is not possible by making a video demo on the internet.
You have had advice from the best of real Experimenters that I know of, like Tinsel Koala, Itsu, Guyla, Partzman, TinMan, CITFTA and you still keep repeating unsupported claims we have all heard of and tested in the past from the supposable knowers of the secrets which you can buy from guys like Aaron just to find in the end they really have nothing.
So if you want to validate your argument stop arguing and put out the proof just like I'm willing to do to prove you wrong about needing twice the output power to self loop.
However, know this is a two way exchange, so if you're dead set on never providing any proof to your claims then it's clear you have nothing like Aaron and have lost this ridiculously long for nothing argument.
So if Rick is not willing to work in a two way exchange, then I ask all researchers to stop wasting time in this topic unless you have real proof to share and not just words.
Regards
Luc
I called the lab ..I find out about the motors, that you have them now or sold them ...? I asked about the motors and how they worked and what they did , would seem the 1 1/2 months was all they were ever used for and it was felt The batteries were quite a nuisance .
So The machines were sitting there collecting dust .
No idea what all that other stuff you wrote is about ??
I posted hear what I was told I did ask permission first before I posted here
I did not add about the 45 W solar panel that was also on the job site
But I posted what I was told ...2000Watt output for 1 1/2 months The machine and batteries are on the job all day and the machine charge the batteries at night
And yes the man was happy to get the power on and just use electricity to run the job and be done with back-and-forth machine transportation every day
I thought you would be very happy with this ...the only problem is it was hearsay
It would appear that Rick has dug himself into a hole and is
trying desperately to defend his hole with rash accusations.
It's behavior we see time and time again with those who
claim to have found real overunity.
Matt Jones, Dave Bowlin and now Rick Freidrich are singing
the same refrain which goes something like this:
"My science is good, it's all of those who question
my claims who haven't the ability to see the greatness
of what I've accomplished!! They're bad people who are
against Real Science and who are determined to prevent
the path to overunity being realized by anybody!!"
If those who are making their premature claims of overunity
would meticulously abide by the Scientific Method in establishing
their "proofs," without letting their egos get in the way, they'd
surely see the folly of what they are doing.
Or, perhaps not. Those who are deceived often resort to
hostile ugliness to defend their error.
When and if Real Overunity or Free Energy in any electrical
circuit or device is actually discovered, the phenomenon
should speak for itself in Truth. The Overunity should be
foolproof rather than capricious; always available rather
than sometimes it happens but usually not.
Those who claim to have found Overunity should be able
to show what its source is, how it is being harvested and
why it works. So far, this has not been done conclusively
with any claim anywhere. Apart from the obvious exceptions
of course, such as wind, solar, and water power.
While the free energy able to be made manifest by Daniel
Pomerleau is indeed real, it cannot be explained by Science
as we presently limit it. It is energy that comes from a place
we are reluctant to consider. It is being exploited, however,
in Secret Programs with the assistance of certain entities
whose existence is generally denied.
Disclosure is coming but not yet. One day we will all know.
It is plainly obvious that your knowledge of this subject
is lacking and you completely misunderstand Tesla.
It would appear that Rick has dug himself into a hole and is
trying desperately to defend his hole with rash accusations.
It's behavior we see time and time again with those who
claim to have found real overunity.
Matt Jones, Dave Bowlin and now Rick Freidrich are singing
the same refrain which goes something like this:
"My science is good, it's all of those who question
my claims who haven't the ability to see the greatness
of what I've accomplished!! They're bad people who are
against Real Science and who are determined to prevent
the path to overunity being realized by anybody!!"
If those who are making their premature claims of overunity
would meticulously abide by the Scientific Method in establishing
their "proofs," without letting their egos get in the way, they'd
surely see the folly of what they are doing.
Or, perhaps not. Those who are deceived often resort to
hostile ugliness to defend their error.
When and if Real Overunity or Free Energy in any electrical
circuit or device is actually discovered, the phenomenon
should speak for itself in Truth. The Overunity should be
foolproof rather than capricious; always available rather
than sometimes it happens but usually not.
Those who claim to have found Overunity should be able
to show what its source is, how it is being harvested and
why it works. So far, this has not been done conclusively
with any claim anywhere. Apart from the obvious exceptions
of course, such as wind, solar, and water power.
While the free energy able to be made manifest by Daniel
Pomerleau is indeed real, it cannot be explained by Science
as we presently limit it. It is energy that comes from a place
we are reluctant to consider. It is being exploited, however,
in Secret Programs with the assistance of certain entities
whose existence is generally denied.
Disclosure is coming but not yet. One day we will all know.
Rick bases his technology on proven patents by Carlos Benitez.
Luc,
It would be good to read first what exactly Rick means on a COP > 1 performance, for instance ? How he defines COP. He mentions work done which sounds good for a start...
Gyula
Luc,
It would be good to read first what exactly Rick means on a COP > 1 performance, for instance ? How he defines COP. He mentions work done which sounds good for a start...
Gyula
Perhaps from your perspective it may seem to be an
"attack" but what I've done is focus on behaviors
which can be modified or corrected.
There is certainly nothing wrong with what Rick is
striving to accomplish. His kits may indeed help
those who are curious to become better acquainted
with the science of electricity and electronics.
Hopefully, those who pursue Overunity or Free Energy
will become intimately aware of the Scientific Method
which strives to find TRUTH and let go of any thoughts
of deceiving the masses for either fun or profit.
Does anyone find it rather strange that those who
are most vocal about having found Overunity or Free
Energy is that they seem to have these things in common:
they're relatively new to the science of electricity and
electronics and are not particularly good at accurate
measurement techniques and not particularly good at
explaining what they believe they have "discovered"
and why it seems to manifest "Free Energy."
The Scientific Method demands that until such time
as replication with instrumented proof of measurement
we should all be skeptical as we seek to comprehend.
We should also be particularly careful to not make any
claims prematurely or in error.
Sadly, most who we see proclaiming that they've found
the secret to Free Energy or Overunity are doing so
very prematurely or with the intent to deceive for either
fun or profit.
Why does it seem that honesty and integrity are
lost in the process for too many proclaimers?
:o ;) ::)
I see that you've apparently fallen into that hole too.
As with all things under the sun; time will tell. 8)
I've studied Benitez and Tesla. They both have made premature
claims without sufficient comprehension of what they had
observed. This was also true (erroneous claims) of many other
researchers from years ago. Time will always tell.
You may not get your 20 minutes back but you'll be wiser for
having expended the time. Over time as we acquire more and
more understanding our opinions change. Yours will too.
As of this year 2019 there has not been a single soul in all of
humanity who has developed any electrical or electronic device
which will produce a sustained power output greater than its
input power requirement.
Daniel Pomerleau has been given access to a source of Free
Energy which is the same source accessed by the Secret
Programs. Looking for Overunity or Free Energy in electric
and electronic devices is not where it is. It is possible to
recover "wasted" energy in such devices by making them
more efficient by minimizing losses and much effort is devoted
to that pursuit. Overunity it is not.
Think Alien Encounters. Then you'll be close to the target.
Rick,
It appears that you're suffering mightily from some sort
of emotional sting and have lost what should be an
objective outlook. :'(
Your responses are the typical, highly emotionally charged
denials of all who have gone before you. Many words
conveying emotional hurt without anything scientifically
substantive to support your position. ???
It is only a temporary dilemma. Time heals all wounds. ;)
By the way, what are your thoughts on the Scientific Method? ???
Do you scrupulously utilize the Scientific Method in your
research efforts and allow it to guide you as you make
proclamation? :P
There is reason to wonder. ::)
What's with all the psychological games here? Just a big red herring again.
Aetherholic posted this 08 October 2018
So trolls and "debunkers" have a use after all!!!!.
One thing I would like to report at this stage is that my part G core as built is overunity without any feedback. The COP is between 1.2 and 2.33 depending upon load conditions. If anyone wants to debunk that then build one for yourself. It took great effort to build it so the same effort is required to debunk it. In operation its characteristics are a rectifier+magamp+battery+AC modulator+amplifier.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/clemente-figuera/?order=all#comment-113491cc-bb60-469a-9725-a88f0122b9ec
Void,
HI Stefan. In my quote which you included in your reply, and which you were replying to, I made it clear that I never stated that the voltage across
the coil did not change polarity. Again, I never stated that anywhere. What I stated about inductive switching spikes versus
BEMF/CEMF is correct. :)
Void,Stefan please don't be offended here but if that is true why is the flyback diode the other way round? ;D
Have a look again at this circuit:
http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/ac_theory/images/Protection-Diode.gif (http://www.learnabout-electronics.org/ac_theory/images/Protection-Diode.gif)
For sure the voltage at the coil did change, otherwise, the diode can not conduct and suppress the BEMF voltage pulse!
I guess you mixed something up.
The current through the coil does not change direction, it is just flowing into the same direction, but now through the diode, when the transistoris switched off...
Regards, Stefan.
Stefan please don't be offended here but if that is true why is the flyback diode the other way round? ;Dhttp://www.learnabout-electronics.org/ac_theory/images/Protection-Diode.gif
Stefan please don't be offended here but if that is true why is the flyback diode the other way round? ;DAmazing! This post was dated the 19th and 20th of August How come it has taken till now the 7th of September to appear?
t's a nice try but for it to be any use you need to stop the BEMF going back into the coil winding as it would keep ringing until exhausted and is all you can do with that energy is pump it back into the supply where it came from but because of its polarity it was generated with will always be less than it's supply.
But if you wanted OU BEMF you wouldn't do it like that.
However as with a relay coil or motor usually that doesn't matter.
PS for what the been done to OU you might as well erase my log in as it's utterly useless value now. bye!
Regards AG