|
Wow!
MileHigh, this is really for you. I will be the first to say that I don't fully agree with certain things that you have said, although not in reference to this situation. This whole thing, however, is just ridiculous. Let's just call a spade a spade, shall we? I understand.
I'll admit, first, that I have NOT been to the forum that your quotes are from. To Many, this means I am biased. So Be It.
Second, I am assuming that you have not mis-quoted the people that have thrown out this "Garbage" system. If you have, then I am sure I will hear about it, but for now this seems a fairly high probability of truth. (Nothing is 100% these days...)
IF there were ANY reality to their claims, then the concept of "Self-Running" is the FIRST thing to be tested. I could give a DA** what it's output is, or what it might save in "Cost". That data IS NOT Relevant to a "Self-Runner" nor, therefore, to this type of device. The only relevant data would be, as you have actually stated, is can it output more than what it takes to run? Simple, no MATH required, and no meters, checks or otherwise. The specific inference is "Power BACK to the Grid", which is not the same as PF correction, etc. I wonder what they were thinking???
If it has any use as claimed, again, by only what I have read here so my "assumptions" could be off, self-running is the "FIRST" and "ONLY" piece of data that needs to be proven. All else is NOT needed as if the concept is provable, THEN we all can tune the things for ANY output we desire. The ONLY reason for NOT doing a simple "Lightbulb" test would be the fact that it would fail. Of all the obvious.... What could those people think, that we are ALL fools? Could the general public be THAT gullible?
I am not one to normally "Rant" like this, but this is SO obvious that I felt "Someone" had to just come out and say it, as most here seem too gentlemanly to make such an observation. I may even be "Censored" or "Banned" for saying this, but it is right there in front of all that have read this. I felt it was worth the risk.
In case there is a question of qualifications, I'm still an EE (Well, maybe a bit more...), use my scope daily (Well, almost...), try to stay in field work as that's where the "Fun" is and I get to see more new concepts (I could NEVER handle a desk...), and HAVE built SEVERAL Bedini type devices. (There ARE certain "Other" things going on there, but that is a different story...) THIS device is supposed to output "Directly Useable Power back to the Grid". That defines standard electricity to me and not "Radiant Energy" or anything unusual, so ALL descriptions of such are, again, not of any value to me. Just more smoke, as it were. This is direct standard electrical power, so no amount of words will make that requirement "Disappear".
(Note to the "Opposition?": Even if I wanted to technically go very deep into the misc conversions, etc., final output to input is ALL that needs viewing for a system. I'll show where the energy comes from, easily, if you show me an OUT>IN and are willing to let me view the design. Of course, if it's real, I might even have to make a couple measurements myself, to prove the theory. Anyone up to that? Any of those people that might be listening (OK, reading...), are you even willing to try? I'd assume the silence will be deafening, though I'd love the work. I Will include the exact specs of where the "Other" energy enters and HOW it was caused to enter, after you make the initial simple proof, using standard electron flow, as THIS device purports to. [It can feed the grid, right?] I'll be listening, on this very thread, on this forum. The gauntlet is down and my sword is drawn. Please don't bother with the "Intellectual Rights" argument. I'll back you all the way and sign off on an NDA, if you prove a self runner. It would not be the first time I have done that....)
SO, for me, MileHigh, it all comes down to your "Simple" and correct Test. Take Whatever batteries you will use, and run any simple load. Get a time, however approximate, and record that. Use ANY method to determine the discharge state. (I suggest small batteries, as that would take a shorter time, but that is completely up to the tester and really makes no difference, just takes longer......) Now, setup the "System" and run the same load. As long as the load is smaller than the max output of the device, it had better run forever or the thing is a obvious scam. For that small load, there would be NO checks needed, as it either works or it doesn't. Depending on how far over the max load you go would be the ONLY way the device should run down, and even then the runtime had better be longer than without the system. If the designer isn't going to, or hasn't run this FIRST and basic test, then ANYTHING else stated has lost all creditability with me and becomes the old "Baffle them with BS" routine. Enough Said.
OK, I'm done. Milehigh, good shot with the hammer. (Hit the nail on the head?) I now must say "Sorry" to all that I have insulted with my crude remarks, with the exception to those that would put forth such a system without any proof or tests that had any value. I certainly appreciate people that open my mind to weird possibilities, and respect them for that. While there are those that "Worship" these certain people, I only value the truth and knowledge. If this was what they truly believed, I could accept that, and define them that way in my own head, but anyone trying to cloud truth for the sake of monetary gain gets on my bad side. That's obvious, in this case. Sorry again for losing my temper.
|
Author
Topic: Bedini 10-Coil Alternative Discussion (Read 72836 times)
