Author Topic: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite (Read 81907 times)

professor · « **Reply #45 on:** October 07, 2008, 03:20:41 AM »

Quote from: hoptoad on September 23, 2008, 01:47:52 AM

The energy gathered from the collapsing magnetic field of the coil is not "free energy", it is merely the energy stored by the magnetic field of the coil.

When you charge up a capacitor, it is storing energy as charge. and when you discharge it, you are only getting back what was stored. The same applies to an inductor. When you initially connect an inductor, the energy used to create the magnetic field is stored in that field. When you disconnect the inductor, the collapse of the magnetic field releases the stored energy.

Yes, you can charge a battery or run some other piece of circuitry with this stored energy, but you will never charge a battery at a greater (or even equal) amount of current than what the supply battery is providing.

The total mechanical torque of the motor plus the electrical energy of the output from the collapsing field, (and any additional separate pick up coils), when added together, is still less than the total electrical energy consumed by the motor.

This becomes very evident over the long term, when using two batteries of identical capacity. Use one for the circuit supply and one for charging. First discharge the battery that you are going to charge, then use the other to charge it. Then reverse the batteries and do the same again. Repeat over and over. Eventually both batteries will go flat.

Bedini, Bearden and Lindemann try to tell the uneducated, that the energy from the collapsing field is "free" energy, when in fact it is only stored energy, which was put into the system in the first place by the supply battery.

I have, over the years, made over a hundred variations of the Bedini and Adam's motors, and whilst it was/is possible to make very efficient motors which recycle the energy stored in the driving coil, none exhibit any genuine O/U.

Cheers from Hoptoad

Hi Hoptoad
I fully agree with all of your Article there is no more energy coming back as you input,unless you add an additional source like passing the EMF through a magnetic field which may add extra Energy derivative
from the Magnet.there are too many unsubstantiated Claims by these inventors like the SELFRUNNING
COLD Electricity Circuit from Stiffler being a total misconception of an RF Circuit.
When you smell the mighty Dollar you loose reality and resort to all kinds of shenanigans.
professor

alan · « **Reply #46 on:** October 08, 2008, 03:37:13 PM »

On the SSG, as fast a the secondary voltage rises, even faster it drops when put a load on it.
In part 6 of EFTV Bedini states: it is a different electricity, a radiant type.
Sounds like bull. Of course the SSG works, but no one seems interested in showing evidence of excess energy.
I must admit I was impressed by the demonstration in eftv6, where he charges a capacitor within a couple of revolutions and shows the big spark after shorting it out.

nitinnun · « **Reply #47 on:** October 30, 2008, 07:54:30 AM »

it is incredibly simple, to test the science that the bedini motor runs on.
just hook a multimeter up to a wire coil, and move a magnet over the wire coil.

you will get voltage AND amperage.
much more than the magnet could possibly be losing.
(if the magnet is losing anything at all.)

the rest of the bedini motor, is to support the above activity.
and to make the above activity efficient enough, to create more electricity than is consumed.

the bedini motor, has little that needs "proving".
the bedini motor is mostly about "improving".

alan · « **Reply #48 on:** October 30, 2008, 02:40:42 PM »

Incredible claims need incredible proof, until then it's based on believe.

WilbyInebriated · « **Reply #49 on:** October 30, 2008, 11:24:24 PM »

Quote from: professor on October 07, 2008, 03:20:41 AM

When you smell the mighty Dollar you loose reality and resort to all kinds of shenanigans.
professor

like the churches?

Quote from: alan on October 30, 2008, 02:40:42 PM

Incredible claims need incredible proof, until then it's based on believe.

have you built one yet alan? until then your opinions are based on your beliefs...

nitinnun · « **Reply #50 on:** October 30, 2008, 11:48:43 PM »

i have found that possibilities have made me FAR happier in life,
and gotten me far further in energy research,
than "physical proof".

i feel sorry for people who cannot see "possibility" in their minds.
for those people who only understand/trust, what they can see, hear, and touch.

those people must have really empty lives !
because the physical world is boring and uncreative !

anyway. everything in the universe is just an opinion.

the only difference,
is who forms their opinion based on boring physical objects,
and who forms their opinion based on possibility !

alan · « **Reply #51 on:** October 31, 2008, 02:32:28 PM »

Quote from: WilbyInebriated on October 30, 2008, 11:24:24 PM

like the churches?
have you built one yet alan? until then your opinions are based on your beliefs...

No, my opinions are not based on my beliefs, because I don't have an opinion about this thing.
I don't dismiss it neither embrace its claims, till I tried it myself or seen some correct measurements and calcs.
Believe me, I do hope this thing works as claimed.

What I tried to say was that people are statisfied and convinced of fe too quickly, without really confirming it systematically, "look it spins, it works see, mythbusters sux" is not enough I think.

WilbyInebriated · « **Reply #52 on:** October 31, 2008, 02:50:59 PM »

Quote from: alan on October 31, 2008, 02:32:28 PM

No, my opinions are not based on my beliefs, because I don't have an opinion about this thing.
I don't dismiss it neither embrace its claims, till I tried it myself or seen some correct measurements and calcs.
Believe me, I do hope this thing works as claimed.

What I tried to say was that people are statisfied and convinced of fe too quickly, without really confirming it systematically, "look it spins, it works see, mythbusters sux" is not enough I think.

no opinion on this thing? really? cause thats not what you said here

Quote from: alan on October 08, 2008, 03:37:13 PM

On the SSG, as fast a the secondary voltage rises, even faster it drops when put a load on it.
In part 6 of EFTV Bedini states: it is a different electricity, a radiant type.
Sounds like bull. Of course the SSG works, but no one seems interested in showing evidence of excess energy.
I must admit I was impressed by the demonstration in eftv6, where he charges a capacitor within a couple of revolutions and shows the big spark after shorting it out.

hrmmm, sure sounds like an opinion...
i agree with what you are saying about people being satisfied and convinced too quickly, i was trying to say that what is even crazier is people talking about it that haven't actually built it.

"sounds like bull, why won't someone build it and test exactly the way i want them to" is not enough i think.

alan · « **Reply #53 on:** October 31, 2008, 04:35:31 PM »

You got me there

but seriously, what bedini said in the video about his version of radiant energy sounded like bullcrap to me, but don't know if it is. Maybe someone could have given a better explanation.

"test exactly the way i want them to", my way is, in my humble view, a correct way of showing correct results.
I try to assist with my knowledge/insights, the building I let others do, who are capable of doing it

.
Until then, nothing is proven for me to make up my mind (not that they have to show proof, their money and hard work, their decision).

Hope to give it a shot in the near future.

gadgetmall · « **Reply #54 on:** January 19, 2009, 07:31:11 AM »

just had to put my 2 cents worth here . I have built not one or two but going on number 9 SG tonight . You need to go Bitch at you wife if you have one not us.I accomplished what i set out to do , make a self runner .. HAHA you didn't !!! Guess what is was by accident and now that i know how i did it i don't care to prove nothing to no one but myself . I want to be free from the government controlled electricity , oil ,gas or money too . I don't care as long as i am happy and my kids are happy . I also Gladly share My information for others to be happy too because most of us here have that common Goal .I bet you never lit 300 or 400 LEDS with a 1 volt battery either did ya .. NOOOOOO ..We DO IT !. your a wimp . Kick him out Steven ! Your a Thief too downloading Copywrite material and admitting it to all us witness you can have your ass sued and probable will by one you seek to Destroy !

powershot · « **Reply #55 on:** January 24, 2009, 03:49:25 AM »

This is to all, not to a specific person:

I've been reading about Bedini for some years.

I've seen many diagrams and electronic/electrical schematics
but there is one thing that I've not seen: Plans.

By plans I mean the same sort of documentation that I would
do in a high school or college class. Specify exactly
everything.

What are the materials used? Where obtained? Exact physical
dimensions? Where is the blueprint?

That is what is needed and I'm not about to put any effort into
replication if I can't replicate without knowing how the
original experiment was constructed.

For example: Bedini's School Girl Motor. He specifies wire
that is not AWG (American Wire Gauge) but appears to be European
ISO. Why? Did he use wire from Europe? What are the dimensions
of the wheel? The coil form? The Inductor? Bunch of nails is
not sufficient. What manufacturer? What size? Purchased when?
Did manufacturer change the alloy, ie, carbon content, trace
metals?

The above is the scientific method. Think Fleischmann and Pons
debacle with the use of platinum electrodes that were used by
others to test F&P's cold fusion and had negative results.

Until then, I won't spend a penny nor a second of time trying
to reproduce phenomena claimed.

But, that's just me.

Still, I'll keep tabs.

gadgetmall · « **Reply #56 on:** February 18, 2009, 01:30:56 AM »

Quote from: powershot on January 24, 2009, 03:49:25 AM

This is to all, not to a specific person:

I've been reading about Bedini for some years.

I've seen many diagrams and electronic/electrical schematics
but there is one thing that I've not seen: Plans.

By plans I mean the same sort of documentation that I would
do in a high school or college class. Specify exactly
everything.

What are the materials used? Where obtained? Exact physical
dimensions? Where is the blueprint?

That is what is needed and I'm not about to put any effort into
replication if I can't replicate without knowing how the
original experiment was constructed.

For example: Bedini's School Girl Motor. He specifies wire
that is not AWG (American Wire Gauge) but appears to be European
ISO. Why? Did he use wire from Europe? What are the dimensions
of the wheel? The coil form? The Inductor? Bunch of nails is
not sufficient. What manufacturer? What size? Purchased when?
Did manufacturer change the alloy, ie, carbon content, trace
metals?

The above is the scientific method. Think Fleischmann and Pons
debacle with the use of platinum electrodes that were used by
others to test F&P's cold fusion and had negative results.

Until then, I won't spend a penny nor a second of time trying
to reproduce phenomena claimed.

But, that's just me.

Still, I'll keep tabs.

Its been replicated as a self runner/ self Charger and its cheap . a few dollars . Do a Search on the site Fusionchip's Bedini Feedback to Source . Verified with measurements / Scope shots etc.. from several others .

hoptoad · « **Reply #57 on:** February 18, 2009, 04:07:42 AM »

Quote from: wattsup on October 04, 2008, 12:02:01 AM

You want some proof of Overunity, look up Universons which is now being accepted by academia as an unknown energy source, which we call ether and which has been shown to be smaller then electrons.

Interesting you should mention "Universons", because the experiments carried out by Claude Poher required enormous amounts of electrical current to achieve his objective of creating a measurable, detectable stream of "universons". This is in direct contrast to Bedini type experiments where currents are usually so miniscule, and voltage spikes so fleetingly short, that the margin for measurement error is very wide.

Cheers

2b · « **Reply #58 on:** February 10, 2010, 09:35:18 PM »

Quote from: chadj2 on September 23, 2008, 04:39:49 AM

Here is the crux of the experiment. We both know that physics says there is just electron and ionic transfers in flooded lead acid batteries. Basically a 1 for 1 exchange during charging. So in theory if you were to charge a 12 volt lead acid battery with 3 amps from a 14 volt source for 15 minutes you should have the same amount of joules in the battery as charging the same 12 volt battery from 120 volts and 3 amps for 15 minutes. For example, I have used 36 volt batteries to charge 12 volt batteries and measured joules out of the 36 volt batteries and then load tested the 12 volt batteries under load. I did this charge discharge process for sometimes full afternoons to make sure it wasnt a false effect. I have no explanation as to why batteries seem to charge from watts rather than just amperage.

Chad

it only appears that way. higher voltage gives the elctrons/current more "punch", and thus, disassociates the chemical bonds in a battery more effectively than a lower voltage with a higher current (with the same wattage). a higher voltage is more effective at reversing the chemical process that takes place in a battery. but at a certain point, it is just wasted power if the high voltage power isn't necessary to reverse the chemical bonds. a lightening bolt behaves similarly. it will do a lot of chemical disassociation with little current. you might be able to get a little better recharging in a battery if it gets a few zaps of high voltage / low current, followed by low voltage / high current of the same power/wattage.

2b · « **Reply #59 on:** February 10, 2010, 09:42:26 PM »

all-in-all, Bedini (with 1st grade grammar and spelling) and Bearden (PhD psycho-babbler w/fraudulent degrees) make me sick. and i wish someone would sue them because they are frauds of the highest order; without attorneys, to keep expenses low. just to shut them the hell up. they've been rambling BS for over a quarter century, and mucking up the waters so that nobody can see clearly. if the reason for loving them is hating govt, better think again. i can't think of a better govt psy-op than those hoaxers.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite (Read 81907 times)

professor

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

alan

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

nitinnun

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

alan

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

WilbyInebriated

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

nitinnun

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

alan

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

WilbyInebriated

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

alan

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

gadgetmall

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

powershot

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

gadgetmall

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

hoptoad

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

2b

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite

2b

Re: RFI: Bedini, bearden, lindemann class action lawsuite