Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

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

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83907
  • *Latest: Vi

  • *Total Posts: 524044
  • *Total Topics: 15602
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor  (Read 60852 times)

Offline PMM Dave

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #45 on: June 09, 2008, 06:28:55 PM »
A "newbie" with extraordinary knowledge and tons of experience at building these devices, is yet again "stirring the pot"
Guys, how many times do I have to say this? I make NO CLAIMS one way or the other about my levels of knowledge, experience or education!!! How hard can it be to grasp this simple concept?

I guess I should also add that I ain't telling whether I work for the oil companies or any kind of intelligence operation either!

Honestly, what part of "NO CLAIMS" do you not understand ???


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #45 on: June 09, 2008, 06:28:55 PM »

Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #46 on: June 09, 2008, 06:58:51 PM »
@Evil Roy Slade,

>>Firstly, I will decide what questions I wish to pose.

It was a matter of speak. English is not my first language. I will defend your rights to free speech with my life,
and you can pose all the questions you like. Did you not see the smiley at the end of the sentence?

>>OU is NOT proven. Never has, anywhere. Please quote a source for such a remarkable statement.

Now here is the main problem. If I said to you that I have seen o/u two times during my 8 years research,
would you believe me? I do not think so. Because the research done by ordinary people is under documented
and not peer reviewed. A YouTube video will never be proof enough, neither will a post in this forum. How it is
possible to quote a source from a non-exsisting source?

Groundloop


Offline Evil Roy Slade

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2008, 03:26:21 AM »
@Groundloop

You are correct in saying that I would not believe you. But thats not because I don't like you, or any other personal reason. In fact you seem a very decent person.

My request for evidence of the OU claim, or any other, would be the same if your name was Steven Hawking or Albert Fert.

In this case the focal point is Mr Bedini. I see no reason to exempt him from the obligation to provide evidence.

Science is based on evidence. It is religion that is based on belief.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for encouraging people to have ideas and theories not matter how outlandish. I have had lots of ideas that seemed to be great at the time but turned out to be 'dogs'. Once the reality hits that the overwhelming evidence does not support the underlying theory one must accept it and move on.

A rehash of a well known Donald Trump saying that I often use is:

It's not personal, it's just science.

ERS

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2008, 03:26:21 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Groundloop

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1736
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2008, 07:31:23 AM »
@Evil Roy Slade,

>>I see no reason to exempt him from the obligation to provide evidence.
>>Science is based on evidence. It is religion that is based on belief.

Well, I'm a kind of super skeptic myself. :-) But I do try out different ideas
and estimate that there is a possibility to extract power from ambient
heat or electromagnetic radiation. I reckoned that along the way of testing
different electronic circuits I will pick up new ideas and can use those
ideas in circuits that will at least reduce the amount of energy we use.

I do not think that man fully understand all of the secrets in our universe.
The main reason for this is that math is such a poor tool to explain
everything in all dimensions. But math is the only tool we have and I guess
we are stuck with math for a long time. Math can give answers to many
situations but can never predict in advance the existence of over unity.

Take nonlinear circuits. In those circuits most math is a bad tool. In
one instance you have you oscillation going and in the next some unknown
factor detune you circuit. Think of a power oscillator and the input will try to tune
itself away from the best power transfer point when you load the output. Non
linear circuits is a pain in the a.. to work on but when you get everything right
then the reward is a circuit that spend a very little energy on heat. (I'm not
talking about switch mode supplies.) Another field that need some research
is transmittion line (delay line) circuits that use Soliton waves. So far, I
have found in my research some very promising result with such circuits.

What I'm trying to say here is that we must aim high, do the practical research and
along the way who knows what will be discovered. A good starting point is indeed
a Bedini motor and battery charger. We can not just play around in a math world and
say, no, this can't work or this is impossible. Only hard work and real circuits will
provide the truth as nature will show us. And, it is really fun to create something. :-)

Groundloop

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2008, 07:54:47 AM »
In this case the focal point is Mr Bedini. I see no reason to exempt him from the obligation to provide evidence.

Science is based on evidence. It is religion that is based on belief.

so, do you, being scientific and all have some sort of evidence to provide as to whether or not john bedini made such claims? since you seem to think he has some sort of obligation to you...

it's not personal, it's just science.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2008, 07:54:47 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Ren

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 284
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2008, 08:24:48 AM »
Firstly, I will decide what questions I wish to pose,

The answers to your questions are No, No and No.

I spend a significant amount of time and money trying to do my bit to alleviate the problems you outlined. Using mathematically and empirically proven science facts will yield far better results than hanging on the totally unproven words of Mr Bedini and others like him. Most of the people here have good hearts and are hard working. It annoys me to see them being misled so I am trying to stop it in my own little way.

OU is NOT proven. Never has, anywhere. Please quote a source for such a remarkable statement.

The Bedini motor does NOT work as an OU device.

As for your last statement, understanding something doesn't make it suddenly disappear!

@WilbyInebriated
I would be most happy to debate Mr Bedini in this forum for all to see. I am quite sure we would all learn something.

ERS


ERS I am interested in your definition of so called "overunity". If you are saying OU has never been proven, EVER, then I ask where all your documentation is from the beginning of time regarding every device/concept ever built?

Can you honestly say you have studied and explored all avenues to the letter, or are you just saying you havent heard/seen it proven?

In regards to Bedinis device (by the way which device are we reffering to? He has built hundreds)  I ask where your  documentation and build specifics are proving this device doesnt work as claimed.

As far as I am aware, NO ONE bar Jim Watson has built the machine spelled out in his 1984 booklet. Dont even start on the MythBusters so called "replication" that thing was a joke.

I see some sense in what Loner posted when he spoke of "closed minds" and how they will never get it. Free energy is all around us yet people still squabble over getting more out than they put in. If you dont have to physically pay for the input and you get useable output is this not overunity? Or is it just COP over 1? Is their a difference?

Im tired of people sledging peoples ideas and designs without any hard facts themeselves. If you were an expert and had years of research and replications to back up your findings then I would respect your opinion much more. Funnily enough JB has been working in this field for quite a while now, at least he has done his homework.

I have built over 9 of his devices and they all do what they are supposed to. COP over 1 can be seen in even the simplest of his designs when all factors are considered and they are built properly.

Feynman, you really opened up a can of worms here mate. ;) How is your little build going anyway? I thought Id ask cause no one else seems to be on topic.

Offline willitwork

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2008, 10:12:15 AM »
Bedini OU Test
 
It does not seem that the Bedini motor is an over unity device. The 2 battery configuration setup appears to be an inefficient pulse charger. Bedini experimenters have observed benefits of pulse charging but little else.
 
Here are two simple OU tests.
 
Test One
 
Assume we are using 12 volt batteries, assume the batteries are the same type and age, assume the batteries are near the same temperature each time you do the test.
 
Fully charge both batteries and wire them in parallel.
Clip a 10 - 15 watt bulb across the pair and measure the voltage.
You will need two identical lamps, we will use the second one later.
Note how long the bulb will stay lit before the voltage drops to 10 volts.
Repeat the action 3 or 4 times and average your results.
Do the same with one cell at a time.
 
Be patient, we are talking about several charge and discharge cycles, it will be worth it.
 
Document discharge times for each cell with the same bulb.
 
Depending on the load curve, internal battery heat, cell fatigue and comparative cell quality, the discharge time of one cell should be about half that of two strapped together.
 
For this example, lets assume that the two strapped together batteries give two hours of light before they drop to 10 volts and each cell on its own gives one hour of light before it drops to 10 volts.
 

Recharge both batteries.
 
Connect to Bedini motor
Connect one lightbulb to each battery.
Start your Bedini motor.
You can start the Bedini motor first if you want.
 

This is a crude but important method.
 
If the system is operating over unity the total 'on time' before 10 volts should be greater while the Bedini motor is running than otherwise. In other words the two lights should stay on together for more than one hour.
 
My Prediction:
 
The Bedini draws current and each lamp draws current resulting in less light time than if you just charged the batteries and put a light on each one.
 
What will this demonstrate?
 
a) The Bedini is operating way under unity BUT is demonstrating an effective way to charge or maintain a battery.
b) No more work can be done by placing the Bedini between the batteries than just using the batteries

Test Two
 
Assume we are using 12 volt batteries, assume the batteries are the same type and age.
 
Acquire two 1 FARAD capacitors, like the ones used in high power car stereos. These are not cheap. If this experiment fails you will want to install a whopping big stereo in your SUV to justify their purchase.
Before starting the Bedini, clip one cap across each battery. (Be careful as they will spark on contact)
Start the Bedini.
Unclip the batteries but leave the caps in place.
 
Note: Electrolytic capacitors charge more efficiently than batteries, they won't hold as much but they are efficient.
 
While the Bedini is running, unclip the batteries from the circuit but leave the caps in. If the unit is running over unity the power source cap will run down and the charging cap will stay up. Then swap the caps as you would the batteries.
 
If the system is over unity you will be able to keep swapping these perpetually.
 
Perhaps a switch mechanism could be built to keep swapping the caps easily.
 
Prediction
 
The system will run down very fast.
Once swapped there will be enough charge in the newly swapped in cap to run the system for a while but it will only impart a feeble anemic charge into the discharged cap. The source cap will sputter miserably down to about 10 volts and the target cap will reach about 8 or 9 volts, the motor will stop.
 
What will this demonstrate?
 
That the Bedini is a glorified and highly inefficient pulse charger.
 

What conclusions can we draw?
 
a) We could build a solid state autotransformer pulse charger for about 10 bucks that will outperform the Bedini as a battery charger. (in fact if you take the time to plan you could build a pulse based battery reconditioner that can be used on the same battery that is powering it.)
b) The rotating magnets are a waste of valuable energy ? but have high entertainment value
c) Claims that the Bedini motor is an OU device are fanciful at best and outright lies at worst.
 
The Bedini is likely to draw between 60 - 500 MA. Depending on tuning. The reader may be tempted to say that this power loss is enough to overcome any over unity gain. Resist that temptation. When the system was running as a battery pulse charger the load of the Bedini was never considered.
 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #51 on: June 10, 2008, 10:12:15 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Ren

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 284
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #52 on: June 10, 2008, 11:49:52 AM »
willitwork you ignorance amuses me.

To start with Bedini never said the SG was an overunity device, NEVER! This has been stated time and time again, but people keep jumping on the band wagon to discredit it not being OU, they clearly do not understand its function or purpose.

Funny thing is your first testing method is not unlike the methods proposed in the Monopole forums. Basically the experimenter charges and discharges the battery multiple times and records the data. Many people, myself included, have completed this test and found similar results. The battery charged by the SG not only charges faster over repeated cycles, but holds its charge better and thus powers its load longer. All this has been documented many times in other forums, with strict conditions and criteria including control groups charged conventionally. Some people have done over 50 cycles straight. Your lack of knowledge regarding battery lonlevity is also apparant from your suggestion that voltage be reduced to 10 volts each cycle.

The Bedini ENERGISER (it aint no motor in its simplest form, JB says so countless times) has always been under unity, its Co efficient of Performance is only apparaent when one factors in what is captured in the battery and the small amount of free mechanical. Every circuit has losses. The amount of work the charge battery can do is where the learning starts

I laugh at your post that first sets an innapropriate test senario then sums it all up with not only a Prediction but conclusions! Your tests to start with are totally unrelated to the principles of the Energiser and incorrectly place it into the box your mind has already prepared for it. The box of faliure before an understanding of even the basic principles are grasped. May as well build a car without wheels then say it doesnt roll so cars dont work.... ???

"That the Bedini is a glorified and highly inefficient pulse charger." lol more ignorance to laugh at. Infact it is perhaps one of the most efficient not to mention simplest pulse chargers available which not only charges from the same or LOWER source voltage but does so in a way which not only maintains battery life, but increases it over time!

"The rotating magnets are a waste of valuable energy ? but have high entertainment value" lol again! Describe to me how these rotating magnets are wasting valuable energy, Im keen for some more laughs. You obviously dont understand their purpose yet again!

I am highly interested to see your $10 dollar pulse charger that is powered by the battery that it is charging, of course if one wants scientific evidence then that battery must undergo repeated load tests just like the SG batteries to see if over time the battery is being killed and if the charging action is decent.

"Electrolytic capacitors charge more efficiently than batteries, they won't hold as much but they are efficient." <- Blanket statement once again shows your lack of knowledge.

"When the system was running as a battery pulse charger the load of the Bedini was never considered." I dont understand what your are getting at here, I really dont. The Charge battery IS the load, the energiser cant run effectively without it!

When all the misinformed indivduals finally understand what the basic SG is perhaps I can stop repeating myself about it. THE SG ISNT OVERUNITY. IT NEVER WAS CLASSIFIED AS THIS BY ANYONE WHO HAD A CLUE. JB's free energy generator from the 1984 publication was a whole different kettle of fish and was claimed to keep the run batteries topped up while delivering useable output. People are forever confusing the two.

Your suggestions and comments inform me that you have NEVER built the devices mentioned, let alone studied them at length. Another mythbuster in the making....



Offline alan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2008, 01:07:01 PM »
Willitwork's testplan is a very good startingpoint to systematically test the device, maybe too conventional for some :P . Using caps like that is a good idea, batteries have too many variables. Many have claimed excess energy in caps which were being pulsed, so don't say ' caps will NOT work' without any info. See nul-points' Tesla thread.

What bedini did claim, was a high efficient device that creates back emf and capturing it in a cap or batteries.
_The_ 'radiant event' in the battery, where 'energy from the vacuum' is converted, is the overunity effect which is being discussed here, someting like that.
The motor is used for timing the signals and spikes, not for torque, his commercial devices are all solid state, but, quoting Bearden:
"These first Bedini systems just now entering very limited production are not overunity, but do incorporate some of the principles of the motor/generator, which have been adapted, in a lesser form, to accommodate building a solid-state device." So even the fe-guru links overunity with Bedini.

Ren, how many SSG have you build?
Correct me if I'm wrong and don't call us ignorant and closed minded... if we were, we wouldn't be on this forum.  8)

edit
For those interested, here is the patent:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=wSkJAAAAEBAJ
« Last Edit: June 10, 2008, 01:35:52 PM by alan »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #53 on: June 10, 2008, 01:07:01 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline willitwork

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #54 on: June 10, 2008, 02:23:28 PM »
Ren,

My pulse motor in various configurations with various coil types has been running for weeks. I have tuned it and seen its many sweet spots. I use a hall effect device which feeds an op amp used as a voltage comparator. The threshold can be adjusted. The op amp (a legacy LM301) fires a 555 which drives a 2N3055. If the principle could be demonstrated to work I would have converted to a MOSFET output with much higher rise time drivers.

My test procedure was as folllows:

Build the basic unit watch the back EMF, reuse as much as possible. Vary the pulse width, hall effect sensor position and threshold and voltage driving the coils to identify the sweetspots. Watch all waveforms on the trusty Tektronix. At one time I used a cap across the coil to turn it into a tuned tank. That produced curious results. I measured the output that the system would use to pulse batteries. It did not take long to determine that any claim to aetheric entergy was pure bunk.

I was able to get the unit to spin at 1500 RPM with 5 volts on the drive circuit and a 4ms pulse drawing about 50ma. Much higher speed with increased drive voltage and higher pulse widths. The precise position of the hall effect device is also critical. The spinning magnets stir up the air and of course incur loss. If I take the magnets out of the circuit and convert the 555 to an astable variable duty cycle oscillator I can get similar output from the coil as when the magnets are spinning. The only difference is that I won't be waisting energy by churning air with a bunch of spinning magnets. That output can be fed to an ususpecting rechargeble via a half wave rectifier. Saves on spining metal.

Now Bedini may have never stated that the device was OU but some people on this thread do.

Here are my questions to you:

How have you built your Bedini? What results have you achieved?


PS: If you paint the magnets and use a strobe you will be entertained by them.

Offline Evil Roy Slade

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2008, 02:58:31 PM »
@WilbyInebriated

I refer you to http://www.keelynet.com/bedmot/bedpress.htm

I assume this press release was authorised by Mr Bedini. There doesn't seem to be a retraction of the claims anywhere, although I haven't searched extensively so may have missed it.

ERS


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2008, 02:58:31 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline canuck22

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #56 on: June 10, 2008, 03:22:31 PM »
not really wanting to move you all away fom your bickering.......

feynman how goes the build?

Offline Evil Roy Slade

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #57 on: June 10, 2008, 03:32:55 PM »
Hi Ren,

My definition of overunity is that more energy can be extracted from a device than is input. The input energy is measured by quantity, not its cost.

So although the input energy may be free in cost terms, e.g. Wind, the energy input is not zero in quantum terms. BTW The efficiency of extracting power from the wind has an upper limit of 59%, the Betts Limit.

I haven't seen every device ever built quite obviously, so my own narrow view of the world is the only thing I am going on. Feel free to point me in the direction of an OU device that has had some independent testing done on it.

My background and what I have built, or not, is of no relevance. I am challenging the claims of Mr Bedini and haven't put forth my own. If and when I do then please challenge me as much as you like. I would expect no less.

You have built 9 of Mr Bedini's devices?. Are you in fact claiming to have an overunity device? Or were the devices underunity battery chargers? Sorry for the confusion on my part.


@Feynman

I apologise for hijacking your thread. It was inconsiderate of me. Let me know if you prefer this
tangential debate be taken elsewhere.

ERS



Offline tinu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #58 on: June 10, 2008, 08:04:22 PM »
...
If you are saying OU has never been proven, EVER, then I ask where all your documentation is from the beginning of time regarding every device/concept ever built?

Can you honestly say you have studied and explored all avenues to the letter, or are you just saying you havent heard/seen it proven?

Now and then I still let a stone drop and watch it.
Nope, I haven?t explored all avenues? Too many stones.
Neither have I kept much documentation about falling stones.
Maybe the next one will levitate or even ?fall upward?. Who really knows?!
In fact, I know for sure it will do so. I?ve heard one saying that one witnessed it. I guess it happened to me too; but it was a long time ago ? I forgot how I did it. Just trust me. Post 25 pictures of your stones with your username on them and maybe, just maybe, I?ll remember how I did it. Don?t ask me to prove it; that?s impertinence!  ;)
(Now: where is that thread about OU falling stones? ??? )

Cheers,
Tinu

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: Feynman makes a Bedini Motor
« Reply #59 on: June 11, 2008, 06:42:22 AM »
My background and what I have built, or not, is of no relevance. I am challenging the claims of Mr Bedini and haven't put forth my own. If and when I do then please challenge me as much as you like. I would expect no less.

so you still maintain the these "claims" are made by john even though by your own words you have no evidence to back up this statement that it's john himself making these claims. in fact, you admit to making an assumption about it all. it's asinine for you to call out john and "challenge" him on a claim he has never made wouldn't you say? on that note, the "press release" you linked says, and i quote "...according to sources..." do you have some evidence that john was one of these sources? you think he should retract a claim that he didn't make? how exactly does one do that? ren was right, this is good for some laughs...

independent testing? yeah... that's called building one yourself. see then you can do the experiment just how you want. your own quality control, your own measurements, etc.

naw don't actually build something you might lose your

 

OneLink