@Feynman:
Well, I am not entirely certain about the claimed "negative energy" thing...
I have read/studied Beardens books and dvds "Energy from the Vacuum",
as well as the special edition "Free Energy Generation" which contains
Bedinis original and later motor/charger designs and Bedinis own theory,
and I have exchanged some email with Bearden discussing the topic.
There is some room for discussion there.
Bearden has decided for himself that there must be "negative energy"
involved, although he does not really substantiate that very well.
He comes up with an extensive theory involving "Dirac sea holes",
which are to space/time what normal "electron holes" a.k.a. "deficit electrons"
are to a (semi)conductor. So basically where normal "holes" are points
in the material matrix where an electron used to be but has just left that
position so a relatively positive spot remains, these "Dirac sea holes"
are points in space/time that are relatively positively charged, but
in contrast to normal "holes" these "Dirac sea holes" are not an artifact
of the material matrix, but rather an actual anti-charge in space.
And of course, as is the case with al "Dirac" particles, they only have a
very brief period of "existance" before annihilating with their antiparticles
like Dirac sea particles do all the time.
All nice, but according to Bearden we can basically "shock" these "Dirac
sea holes" into existence long enough to use them as actual positive charges.
Now this is where Bearden pulls in Bedini, as Bedinis motor/chargers seem
to produce an extraordinary positive charge pulse right after the original
pulse of hV DC.
Bedini himself appears to refer to this as a "positive potential spike".
The main trick here, as described by Bedini and Bearden, is apparently
to generate a very brief and strong hV pulse, and make sure you have a
circuit that can "isolate" that pulse from the following "positive potential spike"/
"negative energy pulse". Bedini does this using a timer circuit and/or a sensor
component and/or an oldschool mechanical commutator connected to the motor shaft,
to ensure that the section of the circuitry that is supposed to collect this positive
pulse is effectively disconnected from the rest of the circuitry during the time period
in which the original "drive" pulse is applied, and as soon as this normal energy pulse
has passed the selected "double action" section the connections are switched
so that the positive pulse ("negative energy pulse") cannot follow the original pulse
into the main "driver" circuit, but is forced to take the only other available path,
which leads it to a capacitor that receives this "positive charge" and as a result
also pulls in negative charge a.k.a. electrons on the other cap plate.
now that all sounds nice, but one may wonder what the reality is of "holes"/"deficit
electrons" that are not structurally part of a material...
In fact, it's a return to the old view that one can still find in certain very old electrophysics
books, where electrical current is not just a matter of electrons moving through a conductor,
but where they actually treat current and charge as if there are truly two opposing charge carriers:
the positive charge carrier, responsible for the + charge and + pole, and the negative charge carrier,
which attract each other.
In later views, the positive charge carrier was replaced by the "hole", or local electron deficiency in the
material matrix. That works, and many of the explanations involving positive charge carriers are still
valid for "holes", except forthe fact that they are no longer seen as actual particles but rather as a
non-particle with a non-charge, which is only positive relative to an actual negative particle, but has no
absolute charge at all. Funny enough, these non-particles with non-charge still flow through the material
matrix in reaction to electric fields, and they also collide with electrons moving through the material,
so it remains a bit of a shady area... Non-particles bumping into particles? Sure...
Now what Bearden says is basically that the establishment threw away the baby with the bathwater
when they did away with positive charge carriers in electrodynamics and replaced it with the "hole"
concept. He claims that "holes" are a reality, but not the only "positive charge carrier", and that
the "Dirac sea holes" are in fact actual positive charge carriers in space/time.
Positive charges, alright, I can work with that.
But negative energy is something else, I think.
When energy is some measurement of how much force can be exerted,
then energy can never be negative. After all, how do you want to exert a negative force?
You can push something forward, and you're clearly using a positive amount of energy to do so.
Now if you pull the object back, are you using negative energy to do so?
No, you're not. You're still using a positive amount of energy, but you have directed it oppositely.
Does the same not apply to these "positive potential spikes" (Bedini terminology) or
"negative energy pulses" (Bearden terminology)?
If you push a lot of electrical charge into a conductor, you are inputting positive energy.
But if you pull electrical charge out of a conductor, are you inputting negative energy?
No, you're still using a positive amount of energy.
Is the electrical charge pulled out of the conductor now "negative energy"?
No, the electrical charge is still charge, which can still be used, and will still turn into
a positive amount of energy.
Negative potential a.k.a. a relative deficiency of electrical charge, is not automatically
a negative energy form.
This in my opinion is where Bearden takes a bit of a leap.
He clearly claims that such a "negative energy pulse" will absorb more energy while
traversing a conductor, and grow in strength and energy content.
I don't see Bedini make that leap, by the way.
But it seems to me that a true negative energy content would simply be nullified
when it absorbs positive energy forms, just like a "hole" and an electron cancel
eachother out chargewise.
That said, there are ways to explain why the observed positive potential spike
seems to grow when traversing a conductor, but they have to do more with
the actual spatial movement pattern of the various charges and their fields,
and this borders heavily on if not barges straight into the realm of...
RF!
And here we go, there we link into Stefans post again: radio freq.
For a description of such a pattern, basically a vector pattern in spacetime,
I would have to write a lot of text, multiple pages, which I shall not do now.
Those of you with a good imagination should be able to imagine what vector
pattern goes along with a generated high voltage pulse that is followed by
an oppositely charged voltage "pulse" according to said pattern.
I hope all that is informational and not just plain confusing.
Kind regards,
Koen
