PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-12-20, 11:17:56
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 23
Author Topic: Bedini 10-Coil Alternative Discussion  (Read 72978 times)
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
I'll have to wholeheartedly agree with Milehigh on this one.

We used to build those "negative" circuits found in the old National Op Amp Cookbooks back in the 70's...fun to play with.

There are many things that Bearden, Bedini and Lindemann all have in common. Can anyone guess what they are?


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Then there is the Bedini claim that his devices use "radiant current" which is produced by discharging coils.  Not even Tesla himself could produce "radiant current" this way!

Also, there is not a single reference that Tesla ever charged batteries with a RE device.  

If you research RE yourself, you will find that it is NOT a current.

================================================================================

B, B, and L sell literature.
   
Group: Guest
Well thanks Ion and Grumpy for your voices of support.  Ultimately we are looking for the truth.

This is a quote from the Tom Bearden link that I said that I would read first:

Quote
John's method does the following: (1) It forms a true negative resistor in
    a most unexpected way, inside a common lead acid battery, (2) it uses that
    negative resistor to extract excess energy from the vacuum and furnish it
    both to the ions in charging mode and to the electrons in load powering
    mode, and (3) it adds several other stimuli which increase the
    amplification of the negative resistor and further enhance the effect,
    increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum and collected in the
    charging process and also in the powering process.

Putting the "negative resistor" talk aside, you can see how Bearden's prose is clearly indicating that you can get excess energy with a Bedini motor setup.  I am assuming that John Bedini is fully aware of this content online and I will make the inference that John Bedini has "authorized" this online content about him and his motor.

This puts the ball in John K's court.  Earlier in your postings you clearly indicated that a Bedini motor is not a free energy device.  Yet you give us links that state that a Bedini motor is a free energy device, so which is it?

Also, on that topic.  I am going to make the assumption that you are very familiar with all of the Energy from the Vacuum DVDs.  Someone on the Energetic Forum said that in DVD #2 someone on the DVD (not sure who) states that the 10-coiler is a means to produce free energy.  Is this the case or not?  If the answer is yes, then who made this statement?

If there is no answer forthcoming, can someone pose the question on EF or OU and get an answer?  I know from reading that there are people there that buy those DVDs and watch them over and over.

Thanks,

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@milehigh
Quote
So you were the fist to jump on it!  Congrats!  It's unfortunate that what you are saying is not true.  You don't have to build the thing to know how it works!
Bedini has stated his device is based on the precise switching of of an inductance which relates to transient effects, lets do a google search on --"inductance transient effects". Now I wonder why one would get hundreds of thousands of hits on scientific papers in regards to transient effects in inductors if everything was understood?--- if we had nothing left to learn? From your posts you would seem to be implying that you must know everything these hundreds of thousands of credible scientists do not--- is that what you are saying?, that you know everything without building or testing anything?
Let's google ---"science switch mode converters", that is where you switch an inductance(a coil of wire) on and off to charge something such as a battery not unlike what Mr.Bedini is doing. Oh dear I am getting millions of hits on this one, maybe you could respond to all these engineers and scientists and inform them that you understand all that they are researching and you could also tell them that there is really no need to build or experiment with anything. Of course I am being sarcastic as usual but I hope you can understand my point here, your argument is absurd. I would also like to note that I have made absurd arguments in the past as well, I am not perfect, I do not know everything but I will be the first to admit I may be wrong and I take a great deal of pride in this fact---that I am wrong all of the time.

@John_K
Quote
Sure I can. It's been on the Internet for years. I may have not quoted it exactly correct. Go to this page for more
information:
Ah, Mr.Kron I have a great deal of respect for his work although I would disagree with some of his terminology. A negative resistance? I have built many oscillator circuits based on this supposed effect with NE2's, quenched SG's and 2N2222A transistors and found there is no negative resistance. If a resistance is defined as an opposition to motion then a negative resistance must be beyond superconductivity or an acceleration of some sort. I think the issue here is one of math versus reality, does a sudden lack of resistance constitute a negative resistance? Does an inductive discharge producing a voltage rise proportional to resistance effectively negating all resistance including a polarity reversal constitute a negative resistance? Should we start calling every resistance a negative acceleration? What I do agree on is the fact that we can confuse this simple issue with math,oscilloscope plots,electronic functions and all other kinds of nonsense but the message implied is that there is some sort of energy gain due to an unexpected acceleration between the source to the final destination.

@Grumpy
Quote
Then there is the Bedini claim that his devices use "radiant current" which is produced by discharging coils.  Not even Tesla himself could produce "radiant current" this way!
Have you been talking with Tesla again? Bad Grumpy, you know how the neighbors talk when you do that.

Regards
AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Guest
Well thanks Ion and Grumpy for your voices of support.  Ultimately we are looking for the truth.

This is a quote from the Tom Bearden link that I said that I would read first:

Putting the "negative resistor" talk aside, you can see how Bearden's prose is clearly indicating that you can get excess energy with a Bedini motor setup.  I am assuming that John Bedini is fully aware of this content online and I will make the inference that John Bedini has "authorized" this online content about him and his motor.

This puts the ball in John K's court.  Earlier in your postings you clearly indicated that a Bedini motor is not a free energy device.  Yet you give us links that state that a Bedini motor is a free energy device, so which is it?

Also, on that topic.  I am going to make the assumption that you are very familiar with all of the Energy from the Vacuum DVDs.  Someone on the Energetic Forum said that in DVD #2 someone on the DVD (not sure who) states that the 10-coiler is a means to produce free energy.  Is this the case or not?  If the answer is yes, then who made this statement?

If there is no answer forthcoming, can someone pose the question on EF or OU and get an answer?  I know from reading that there are people there that buy those DVDs and watch them over and over.

Thanks,

MileHigh

MileHigh,

Yes, John Bedini is fully aware and has authorized Bearden's online content as it is reproduced word for word on his pages. However, no where does Tom say it has to be a "Bedini motor" as you put it. If we're talking about terminology, Bedini himself refers to an "Energizer" rather than a "motor". If you had built one you would understand this terminology. Bearden explains how John manufactures a "negative resistor" in the common lead-acid battery, not about the method or device he uses. You cannot "put the talk aside" as it is the foundation of what Bedini's devices do. You have read the text out of context.

If the "ball is in my court", here's an ace... You're not even playing in the same court. I did not give you a link that "states the Bedini motor is a free energy device". I've read those pages over and over and nowhere does it state that the Bedini motor is a free energy device. It states that the "free energy" is in the battery in the process that John has invented and patented. I stand my by original posts that said that the Bedini 10-coiler (of which this thread is named) IS NOT a free energy device, never was, never will be. Please don't put words into my mouth.

Yes, I have watched the EFTV DVDs over and over. Whoever on EF stated that "the 10-coiler is a means to produce free energy" is quite correct. The 10-coiler is a MEANS, not the device which in my book means that it is the process that creates the "free energy", not the actual device itself.

@AC,

Let's not squabble about the terminology. The fact is that according to Gabriel Kron, circuits can be made that converge energy into the circuit, rather than just diverge energy from the circuit as all EE's are taught from the text books. Kron clearly made this discovery which allowed the generator to be disconnected from the circuit and the circuit could power itself and it's loads and losses. Call it what you will, but you can't deny the fact that every watt of electricity produced today is extracted from the active vacuum, not from coal, oil, nuclear or any other fossil burning technology that we have become brain-washed to believe.

@Grumpy,

I have never heard of the term "radiant current" as you put it. When and where did Bedini claim this, please list the reference as I've read everything John has placed in the public domain many times and never come across this term. I haven't spoken to Tesla lately, but he termed the energy "radiant energy", referring to energy extracted from the "Aether" as we would call it today. Tesla also knew it was in the form of a "gas" that floated on the outside of the wire, not within the conductor itself.

@ION,

I believe the thing that Bedini, Bearden and Lindemann all have in common is that they have all produced and witnessed extracting energy from the vacuum, or aether, or environment - whatever you want to call it. They may have also published literature on the topic, but that was to educate people from the lies and suppression that was ordered by Mr. J. P. Morgan and executed by Lorentz.

You guys probably think that I'm some sort of "brain-washed Bedini, Bearden crack-pot", I don't blame you. But I have done the experiments and proved on the bench of what they have claimed in front of my own eyes. I don't expect you to believe an ounce of what I say until you have simply done the same experiments for yourselves. If you choose not to, fine, I don't care if you do or don't. It won't make any difference to me or my research into this technology. I know it works, I know how it works and no one is going to convince me otherwise.

I hope that someday before we have burned up all the fossil fuels and killed the planet and its inhabitants by our greed and ignorance that mankind will wake up to itself and realize that it just doesn't have to be that way.

Back to the bench....

John K.
   
Group: Guest
AC:

I am correct in that I think that I have read several times that you stated that you are an engineer?  If yes, may I ask what kind of engineer?

John:

I am not worried about whether a "Bedini motor" is called a "motor" or "mechanical oscillator" or an "energizer."  It doesn't really matter, you and the readers know what I am talking about.  In the link you provided Tim Bearden is clearly talking about using a Bedini motor setup to pulse current into a battery to charge it.

When Tom Bearden writes "increasing the excess energy extracted from the vacuum and collected in the charging process" he is stating that when you charge batteries with a Bedini motor the ultimate result is that you have excess energy stored in the charging battery.  "Excess energy" is perfectly clear to me, it means free energy.  You charge a battery with a Bedini motor and Tom is stating  that you get free energy, more energy out than the energy you put in in the first place.  i.e.; you power the Bedini motor with X  Joules of electrical energy over a certain amount of time and then you can extract more than X Joules of electrical energy afterward from the charging battery.

Quoting you:

Quote
I've read those pages over and over and nowhere does it state that the Bedini motor is a free energy device. It states that the "free energy" is in the battery in the process that John has invented and patented. I stand my by original posts that said that the Bedini 10-coiler (of which this thread is named) IS NOT a free energy device, never was, never will be. Please don't put words into my mouth.

As I state above, it is 100% clear to me from the link you provided that Tom Bearden is stating that a Bedini motor setup is a free energy device.  Using a Bedini motor allows you to get more energy out of the charging battery that you put in.

So I am afraid that I am going to have to ask you again, is a Bedini motor a free energy device or not?

Quote
Yes, I have watched the EFTV DVDs over and over. Whoever on EF stated that "the 10-coiler is a means to produce free energy" is quite correct. The 10-coiler is a MEANS, not the device which in my book means that it is the process that creates the "free energy", not the actual device itself.

Sorry, I don't accept your comment above.  The device is a "means" to do something but the actual device itself does nothing????   The two are one in the same.  You have to get real here John.  You are talking in a form of marketing-ese, or like a politician.  It's like saying a car is not a transportation device, it's just a means to transport yourself if you push the right pedals and use the steering wheel properly.  It's the process of driving the car that transports you, not the car itself.  That kind of talk makes people roll their eyes.  Please just state the straight goods.

Also, you still didn't answer my question:  Does someone on the EFTV DVD state that the 10-coiler is a free energy device and if yes who says it?  If you can state the quote from memory that would be even better.

Finally, I hope you can talk about you COP > 1 and COP infinity claims that you mentioned.  Your setup, measurement methodology, measurement data, all that would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-18, 20:50:39 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Regardless of whether the 10 coil charger is touted as a free energy or excess energy device or not, it is clear that the main thrust of books, DVD's etc by the holy three are advertised as "free energy" books.

The three support each other and make a nice living selling these books, DVD's pamphlets etc as well as lecturing at "free energy" symposiums. So why would they not support each other?

http://www.cheniere.org/books/FEG/index.html

http://www.free-energy.ws/products.html

http://johnbedini.net/john34/bedinibearden.html

Check out the smirk on John Bedini's face on the cover of the "Free Energy Generation Circuits and Schematics" book.....he's probably saying "we pulled off another one, I can't believe it, thanks Tom".

I've been chasing the "free energy dragon" for nearly 40 years, have more than one lab at least as impressive as JB's, have built some of his "FE claimed" devices.

I'm glad that John K is having fun charging batteries and producing "excess energy" (not free energy) LOL

I'm just stating that he might want to close the loop on the system with a simple boost converter so he doesn't have to swap batteries, then he can see where the excess energy is hiding.

Sorry, not a believer in the "Holy Three"

Quote
They may have also published literature on the topic, but that was to educate people from the lies and suppression that was ordered by Mr. J. P. Morgan and executed by Lorentz.

We should all be shocked (LOL) to learn that Lorentz was in on the suppression.

By the way, my background is in inductive switching and power control circuitry, made my living at it, and was able to retire 15 years early and pursue my own research because of it.



---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
@GrumpyHave you been talking with Tesla again? Bad Grumpy, you know how the neighbors talk when you do that.

Regards
AC

Try it.  RE doesn't come out of a discharging coil - it can't.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr

@Grumpy,

I have never heard of the term "radiant current" as you put it. When and where did Bedini claim this, please list the reference as I've read everything John has placed in the public domain many times and never come across this term. I haven't spoken to Tesla lately, but he termed the energy "radiant energy", referring to energy extracted from the "Aether" as we would call it today. Tesla also knew it was in the form of a "gas" that floated on the outside of the wire, not within the conductor itself.

Back to the bench....

John K.

OK

http://www.icehouse.net/john1/intro.html
Quote
If you kill the dipole you loose the energy. The dipole killer is the electron  current in the circuit. So therefore the term free electricity  only applies to those that have done  away with the current or have figured a way to block it from completing it's path through the circuit. Their are no meters to measure this radiant current, and when you catch it, it has the power of the universe and beyond. Good luck in your research . Their is only energy from the vacuum, known as radiant energy. to find out more about this you need to read Tom Bearden's book. To go to my pages go to the bottom of the page .

Bedini lists his own patents and the capacitive motor of Bearden et al, and then states:
Quote
These patents are the only key to unlocking this radiant energy.
Then he lists Tesla's Radiant Energy Collecting patents, which show collection and a few means of generatinf radiant energy.  If you take these different methods of generation and hit the books, you will find the many other names for radiant energy.  Too many people want to say something is wrong or missing in modern science without first understanding it.

Bedini then states:
Quote
Here in the Tesla patent once again we see the use of radiant energy. As I have said above their is only a radiant current, and this current is passed through the system by the capacitor and only a capacitor. The next step in the system is the amount of time it takes to charge this capacitor, and then the amount of time it takes to discharge the capacitor for they all have their own time, and each one of these things must be in sync in their own time.

It is so funny to sit here now and think that Benjamin Franklin had it all at his finger tips, if he would have used the capacitor the correct way.

It's the most simple thing in nature to do, and the hardest for mankind to understand because of the mind blocks. Their is no math for radiant current, for are instruments do not measure it. It's even sick to see meters all over these machines, because their is no possible way to measure the Aether flow. The people have had it all along and yet a little "meter" has stood in their way from the truth. Meters only measure wasted energy in the system.

Bedini then shows his solid state device - The Real McCoy as he calls it. 

Then he states:
Quote
(all patents are core technology, now using inverted radiant circuits)

AND
Quote
Radiant currents are just like Tesla said a gas in nature the transformation converter is the Capacitor.

Bedini then goes on to answer a question from Dave Thomson (the aether physics dude):
Quote
An answer to David Thomson

David this is great stuff and I admire your work, but the dipole we are talking about are two different things. first of all the math does not apply since their are no equations for it. The math of today's scientist only runs you around in equation after equation, "just like Tesla said". All are electrical equations are only designed to burn energy in current. I understand the The Casimir effect, but this does not have anything to do with the charge of a magnetic moment. this does not take any high voltage since the stress field is always there. Our circuits are designed to split the magnetic moment before it becomes magnetic, this is where the radiant comes from. If we go back to Tesla and what he was doing in the end we find out he was studying through small experiments how this Radiant gas behaved, and what shapes it worked best with. His work with different lattice was very detailed and this is where The Casimir effect comes into play. As for the Radiant work their only three patents by Tesla  which discusses anything, and no math. The only thing we have to use at this time is VQ without the I (current) but it should be Vr =Q ( voltage from the split Radiant = Charge) The only other factor is TIME to get the Vr. If a long time is required to collect charge in this split then C (capacitor) should be very small so that the highest V (voltage) is obtained. If the Vr is very quick in splitting this magnetic moment then C can be very big. Also frequency of this magnetic moment is very important. You must release the Radiant voltage into a radiant current de-void of any electrons. So what is charging the batteries in My system is pure Radiant Current. This means that since their is no electrons to pile up on the Ions of the battery nothing can move, this forces the Ions to change their state and they move on their own, this is nothing more then a impedance shift, if you have a low impedance in the battery you have real power, if you have high impedance in the battery you have nothing. Nature takes time to move at her own rate, so the battery may take a long time to charge but charge it will with a different form of energy. This brings me to a different point, That all that is driving the switching solid state wise is a difference in potential across the battery inverted. This then means that the whole flow theory is out the window, meaning that the semiconductors are working on potential charge de-void of electrons so their is no heat generated in the semiconductor. As for the battery it fill's in it's own electrons. I  must say that Tesla was right.

John

Well, I can't begin to anihilate that paragraph enough.

Then there is the second reply to David:
Quote
Answer Two

David and Darren

First of all with all due respect and admiration for your work, I must still state that My work has nothing to do with "Strong Charge", or Resonance in our circuits. My work is based on real working models, and these real working models are saying something much different than what the equations are saying. My magnetic moment is based on what is occurring in the front end circuit before the normal current builds up, and then to capture the radiant voltage and then split this voltage into a current de-void of electrons to charge the batteries.  So here we differ again I'm not looking for electrons to power anything, in your model you can not get away from the electrons. My models are telling me that the equations must be revised to work properly with My model. I not only have one model that is working I have 30 that do the same thing plus the solid state models. Radiant energy goes away when electrons enter the picture. Read very carefully what Tesla said about the power stations when they were DC powered, I think you will catch it. I have never seen anybody that did science right do the equations before they had a working model on the bench.  Also it's not "Professional" to speak of another fellow scientists working in the field as regurgitated Bearden concepts, when nobody has check the references to find out if he is right. I have worked with Tom Bearden for 30 +years and those theories come from my bench models that are working. Now others are getting to first base and soon they will be on third base, soon you will see these machines powering loads and charging their own batteries, then where will all the math models sit? If my patents were understood it would be found out that the Mono Pole motor is not a Motor, it is a mechanical Radiant oscillator with a one to one transformer inductively triggered. Being a one to one transformer you can not get more out then you put in, unless something else is flowing through it, it does not fit the math models, so this washes the forward converter theory down the drain. I say this, if I take your model and understand it correctly, everybody should have their lights burning right now! What bench model do you have running on this theory?   I say these things to you with all do respect for your hard work.

John Bedini

Quite a mess isn't it?


   
Group: Guest
Ion:

Congratulations on your early retirement!  Nice that you can do your own thing!

Grumpy:

It does seem to be "all over the place."

I think part of the problem is that the term "radiant" meant one or more things in the late 19th century, but the meaning of the word has evolved over time.  So I think there is a lot of confusion here and people are comparing apples with oranges with pomegranates.

Going back to Bearden for a moment and the link that John provided, there is this quote:

Quote
Suppose we "hit" a battery's terminals with an instantaneous leading edge
    rise of a pulse of electrons and potential. Let us assume the "hit" is in
    the "battery-charging" mode. The electrons drive in instantly, trying to
    force the heavy ions to start moving in the charging direction. For a
    moment the lead ions just sit there, and then very slowly (compared to the
    electrons!) start to reluctantly move in the recharging mode. During that
    "ion response lag" time, the electrons continue to furiously rush in and
    pile-up on the plates. The charge density sharply increases on the plates
    in that pile-up where the charges are "squeezing" together (clustering). So
    now we have a much higher potential suddenly rising in the squeezed charge
    cluster, because of the increased charge density arising there.

I don't buy this for a second.  There are no electrons "piling up on the battery plates."  Current flows in "curvilinear cubes" through all of the conducting volume of the battery.  It is impossible to have electrons bunching up on the battery plates.

In my book that's two strikes against Bearden.  The first strike is his fabricating a story about an elusive "negative resistor" that somebody invented but the knowledge was suppressed by the powers that be.  The second strike is to fabricate a story about electrons bunching up on the battery plates suspended in the electrolyte.  People that do not understand physics and electronics will gobble this stuff up and believe it.  This does not cast a positive light on Bedini either since he associates himself so closely with Bearden.

From my perspective the literature and other media clearly indicate that Bedini systems are supposed to produce free energy.   However, if push comes to shove you can always point to somewhere in the literature where Bedini categorically states that a Bedini motor does not produce free energy.

All that being said, results on the bench would really help matters.   I believe that ultimately the battery is supposed to "bring the radiant (or whatever) energy over to the real side" where it can be measured and do useful work in the real world.   Hence the interest in John's or anybody else's real-world bench test data.

With respect to the bench, I have explained what a Bedini motor does.  It is simply a timing device, a.k.a. "mechanical oscillator" that energizes an inductor and then allows that inductor to discharge it's stored energy into a charging battery.  When the inductor does this it is acting like a current source, because that's what inductors do.  If the load that the inductor discharges into has a very high resistance, then you will get high voltage spikes as a result of the unstoppable initial current flow.

The vast majority of people that experiment with Bedini motors, I will guess more than 98%, have no real idea how the device works as described in the paragraph above.  Even John K. was not aware of this based on what he stated in his first few postings.  I doubt that Bedini or Bearden ever mention this fact in their literature or their DVDs.  In contrast, if you take an Electronics 101 course, you will learn this material.

I find it all very sobering and frankly quite strange that people have worked with Bedini motors for years without really understanding how they work.  It is doubly strange that Bedini never mentions this.  Some people see high voltage spikes and are convinced that is the motor producing "radiant energy."

v = L di/dt.   The voltage output from a discharging inductor is proportional to the size of the inductor and the rate of change of current flowing through the inductor with respect to time.  The higher the load resistance you connect across the discharging inductor, the faster the current will decay with respect to time, and this results in very high voltage across the terminals of the inductor.  This is not "radiant energy," it's just a coil discharging its conventional energy.

Anyway, perhaps we can cut to the chase and talk about real-world results on the bench?

MileHigh
   

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 568
Quote
v = L di/dt.   The voltage output from a discharging inductor is proportional to the size of the inductor and the rate of change of current flowing through the inductor with respect to time.  The higher the load resistance you connect across the discharging inductor, the faster the current will decay with respect to time, and this results in very high voltage across the terminals of the inductor.  This is not "radiant energy," it's just a coil discharging its conventional energy.

You are so right, I think BEMF is one of the most misunderstood things in the Free Energy community.  Most experimenters think because they can get a very high voltage back from a lower voltage input that it is free energy.  Most also don't know the difference between CEMF and BEMF or flyback.

I would like to add that opening the inductors output leads is the highest output load you can put on it and consequently the highest voltage is reached.  And this is how most measure it and think they have something.


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Group: Guest
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
FROM BEDINI'S OWN WEB SITE:

http://johnbedini.net/

Quote
20 Bedini-Bearden years Free Energy Generation

MORE HERE: http://potentialtec.com/kits1.html

   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Grumpy
Quote
Try it.  RE doesn't come out of a discharging coil - it can't.

I understand that Mr.Bedini has made many statements which may seem a little strange but all this squabbling over the possible misuse of terminology seems pointless and has no bearing on whether he has something or not. Try reading some of Victor Schauberger's work and you will get a good lesson in having to read between the lines as most everything he say's seems nonsensical, but in this madness there is true genius.
On the issue of an inductive discharge, I have produced radiant events from both the charging and discharging of an inductance at relatively low voltages. I know these are radiant events or radiant energy because every conductive object in the vicinity such as pliers, nuts, bolts, open wires, coils etc.. has a strong surface charge and a volt arc discharge can be drawn from them to ground or to other open or closed path conductors. I should be clear this Radiant--"Consisting of or emitted as radiation:"  Energy--"The capacity of a physical system to do work." can also travel on single conductors a considerable distance and charge objects at a distance. Whatever you want to call this makes no difference to me, the fact remains that energy has radiated from a source to a sink through a space and by definition this is a radiant event.

@milehigh
Quote
I am correct in that I think that I have read several times that you stated that you are an engineer?  If yes, may I ask what kind of engineer?
I come from a long line of fecal engineers, you know it is a shitty job but someone has to do it. I hope you do not think any less of me or that this would somehow hinder my ability to learn or evolve my understanding of science just because I wallow in human excrement on a daily basis.

Regards
AC
« Last Edit: 2010-08-12, 02:02:02 by allcanadian »


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
@Grumpy
I understand that Mr.Bedini has made many statements which may seem a little strange but all this squabbling over the possible misuse of terminology seems pointless and has no bearing on whether he has something or not. Try reading some of Victor Schauberger's work and you will get a good lesson in having to read between the lines as most everything he say's seems nonsensical, but in this madness there is true genius.
On the issue of an inductive discharge, I have produced radiant events from both the charging and discharging of an inductance at relatively low voltages. I know these are radiant events or radiant energy because every conductive object in the vicinity such as pliers, nuts, bolts, open wires, coils etc.. has a strong surface charge and a volt arc discharge can be drawn from them to ground or to other open or closed path conductors. I should be clear this Radiant--"Consisting of or emitted as radiation:"  Energy--"The capacity of a physical system to do work." can also travel on single conductors a considerable distance and charge objects at a distance. Whatever you want to call this makes no difference to me, the fact remains that energy has radiated from a source to a sink through a space and by definition this is a radiant event.

...

Regards
AC

"Radiant Energy" should not be confused with "radiant force" or "electrostatic induction".  Radiant energy is radiation like you say and as Tesla shows in his RE patents.

When Tesla first started researching what he later termed "radiant electricity", he found two articles that mentioned events that he felt were related.  The first involved discharging a capacitor which resulted in iron needles being magnetized two floors below the capacitor.   The second involved arcs as you describe when Elihu Thomson connected the terminals of a Rhumkorff coil to a metal table and a water pipe.  I am reasonably sure these events are a display of displacement current and not the same as what Tesla called "radiant force" or "radiant electricity".  Avramenko (spelling?) reported the same arcs and said it was displacement current.

Radiant force will charge capacitors (not nearly as easy as it sounds), and attracts objects to the coil producing it.  It actually has many names, but all are related forces.  Even the Lorentz Force is related.  Takes at least about 2kv dc, sharp pulses for this. 
   
Group: Guest
Grumpy and company:

I have a theory about the needles becoming magnetized.  Does anyone else?  It's "I hate pop quiz" time!  lol

You have a hollow metal sphere.   There is no electric field at all inside the sphere.  Charge is continuously moving on the surface of the sphere to ensure that's the case.  So there can be very high frequency AC currents on the surface of the metal sphere if there is high frequency EM radiation in the environment.

"I hate pop quiz II:"  How come you see the plasma being created at the tips of needles when you look at those "ionic lifters," or you have a hollow metal sphere at a very high static voltage with one or more metal needles as part of the sphere?   Why do you only see the plasma forming at the tips of the needles?

No Google!  Poynt99 is disqualified!  lol

MileHigh
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Grumpy and company:

I have a theory about the needles becoming magnetized.  Does anyone else?  It's "I hate pop quiz" time!  lol

You have a hollow metal sphere.   There is no electric field at all inside the sphere.  Charge is continuously moving on the surface of the sphere to ensure that's the case.  So there can be very high frequency AC currents on the surface of the metal sphere if there is high frequency EM radiation in the environment.

"I hate pop quiz II:"  How come you see the plasma being created at the tips of needles when you look at those "ionic lifters," or you have a hollow metal sphere at a very high static voltage with one or more metal needles as part of the sphere?   Why do you only see the plasma forming at the tips of the needles?

No Google!  Poynt99 is disqualified!  lol

MileHigh

Before you jump to conclusions, you might want to find the article about Joseph Henry's experience. 

I can't remember exactly, but I think he was discharging the cap through coils with iron needles (like nail or knitting needles, etc.) inside the coils.  He later found that needles two floors below his lab had also become magnetized.  (Stone and wood building, maybe some metal too.)

I know that the sparks you are talking about are because the electric field is concentrated at the sharp edges.  (Diverged if you like.)

The sparks you are talking about are electrostatic - perhaps even corona if the voltage is high enough.  By the way, you can trigger a spark gap very very quickly if you set it up to produce corona and then trigger it - it's like it is preloaded. 

The sparks that AC and I are talking about are electrodynamic, as they appear only when he field is changing rapidly.   With a HV HF transformer - you can draw an arc to an insulated conductor from a single transformer lead.  Spark is longer or shorter depending on rate of change and all that (see displacement current).  A few Russian scientist have interesting patents utilizing displacement current and Avramenko wrote a paper on converting displacement current into conduction current (I have never read this paper, only seen references to it.)

The attractive force that I mentioned is a little different.  It is still electric in nature but proportional to the gradient of the electric field squared (grad E^2).  Also, the attraction is opposite that found in hydrodynamics and is "from low pressure to high pressure".  so, if your coil is producing this force, objects are attracted towards it.  This force has several names (over a dozen).  One of it's known properties is that it can produce a magnetic field.

You really should clear off a workbench and get in the game.  You'd be very good at it.
   
Group: Guest
Grumpy:

My theory about the needles is that it was a big capacitor and assuming he shorted it out, the current got super high for a flash.  That created an unidirectional magnetic field impulse that was strong enough to magnetize the needles two floors down, which had to be properly aligned in the magnetic field.

Very tired so I can't comment on your stuff.  So briefly, the charge on any hollow metal object always arranges itself to give you zero electric field inside the metal object.  So in the presence of any external AC electric field, the charge on the surface of the metal object has to move around to compensate.

When a conductor has a static charge, the electric field lines have to emanate from the conductive surface at right angles to the surface.  So at the tip of a needle, you have a high concentration of electric field lines all bunched together.  The electric field strength is defined as the rate of change of the voltage of the electric field lines with respect to distance.  Another was of stating it is the electric field strength is the gradient of the electric field potential.

The voltage gradient is very high at the tip of the pin, hence the electric field strength is very high at the tip of the pin.  This very strong electric field pushes on the nuclei of the air molecules and pulls on the electron clouds (or vice-versa).  If strong enough, electrons are stripped off of the nuclei and you get a glowing plasma, a bubbling cauldron of positive ions and electrons.  The tip of the pin is the "Genesis point" for the creation of the plasma.  Current is either going into the pin, or out of the pin, to sustain the plasma.  Of course the same process works with high potential AC, and then you can play Bohemian Rhapsody on the throbbing AC plasma (Classic Rock works better with AC plasmas).

MileHigh
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Grumpy:

My theory about the needles is that it was a big capacitor and assuming he shorted it out, the current got super high for a flash.  That created an unidirectional magnetic field impulse that was strong enough to magnetize the needles two floors down, which had to be properly aligned in the magnetic field.

Very tired so I can't comment on your stuff.  So briefly, the charge on any hollow metal object always arranges itself to give you zero electric field inside the metal object.  So in the presence of any external AC electric field, the charge on the surface of the metal object has to move around to compensate.

When a conductor has a static charge, the electric field lines have to emanate from the conductive surface at right angles to the surface.  So at the tip of a needle, you have a high concentration of electric field lines all bunched together.  The electric field strength is defined as the rate of change of the voltage of the electric field lines with respect to distance.  Another was of stating it is the electric field strength is the gradient of the electric field potential.

The voltage gradient is very high at the tip of the pin, hence the electric field strength is very high at the tip of the pin.  This very strong electric field pushes on the nuclei of the air molecules and pulls on the electron clouds (or vice-versa).  If strong enough, electrons are stripped off of the nuclei and you get a glowing plasma, a bubbling cauldron of positive ions and electrons.  The tip of the pin is the "Genesis point" for the creation of the plasma.  Current is either going into the pin, or out of the pin, to sustain the plasma.  Of course the same process works with high potential AC, and then you can play Bohemian Rhapsody on the throbbing AC plasma (Classic Rock works better with AC plasmas).

MileHigh

I forgot to mention that the "force" I spoke of is "non-Columbic".
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@milehigh
Did you buy my fecal engineering bit?, Sorry I could not resist as the term is just so damn funny,lol. I'm a Power Engineer,ie: specialist in energy systems/power generation and conversion systems. In Canada I can cross over and challenge the Mechanical Engineering Degree which cuts out two years of university which was my plan but plans change. It has it's moments, have you ever fired up a gas turbine as big as your house? It can also be stressful, turn one wrong valve or switch and trip the plant which can cost your employer a few million a day and your career is effectively over,lol. I am still working but I have come to the conclusion we are doing it all wrong, the future is a decentralized grid utilizing super efficient devices at the point of use. This should be obvious, if the cost is less and the efficiency higher then centralized power production has no future and I was never one to live in the past.

Quote
My theory about the needles is that it was a big capacitor and assuming he shorted it out, the current got super high for a flash.  That created an unidirectional magnetic field impulse that was strong enough to magnetize the needles two floors down, which had to be properly aligned in the magnetic field.
You are aware of the inverse square law?, I have done experiments with EMP's and it is not all it is cracked up to be as the energy dissipates must faster than one would expect in reality. Inversely, the energy I am speaking of dissipates much more slowly with distance that I would expect, in fact I cannot say that there are any measurable losses in this system which I find very interesting. Consider the fact of how much energy we lose due to I^2R losses, eddy formation ect... and you will start to understand why I find this technology so attractive. Ask yourself what would happen if a conductor could not conduct because even a short length would offer great impedance, what would happen if a conductor can only act as a waveguide for the energy in question?. The only reason I refer to this form of energy as something different is because I have ruled out every effect you have mentioned in all your posts by actual experiment, your theories will only take you so far and at some point your going to have to get your hands dirty.
I think you already know this but reality can be a real bitch, nothing ever works out as planned and nothing about it is easy. This is and always has been what separates the people who do things from the people who think about doing things.
Regards
AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Group: Guest
AC:

That was very strange so I didn't know what to say!  The power stuff sounds interesting.  For sure decentralized power will become more interesting as time goes on.  Of course in other countries it is a fact of life and has been for decades because the power grid is unreliable.  Diesel or gas generators fill in for the gaps in the grid.  Changing the diesel or gas generators for something greener is always desirable.  If solar panels cost one-tenth of what they cost now, then the whole ball game would change.  Then I think the other challenge is to do away with batteries, because they are messy and dirty and very un-green.

I know about the inverse-square law.  But if you hypothetically had a very large ultra-low-inductance capacitor and shorted it out across a thick iron bar or something you just might be able to magnetize the right type of iron needles out to a fairly large radius.  Just a guess.

Quote
The only reason I refer to this form of energy as something different is because I have ruled out every effect you have mentioned in all your posts by actual experiment, your theories will only take you so far and at some point your going to have to get your hands dirty.

Okay in one sentence you are allegedly deconstructing everything I have said in this thread?  Can you pick some points I made and talk about your experimental results that refute them?  That will get my hands a little bit dirty.

Quote
This is and always has been what separates the people who do things from the people who think about doing things.

I know the mantra AC, "Do the Experiments."  The counter-mantra is "Get a reasonable knowledge foundation going before you do the experiments, it will make you more productive and you will learn faster."

The short rebut is I have done the experiments, albeit in a different form, but I have done them.

Anyway, onward and upwards!

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-14, 15:34:33 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
I looked at Rick Friedrich's long description of how a Bedini motor works on Google video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1630339210335190736#

I am about 3/4 of the way through and I should have been "blogging" as I watched it.  Rick mentions lots of points about the motor that are correct using layperson's terminology.

He mentions that the Bedini motor is not "conventional technology" and so conventional analysis and understanding of how the motor works does not apply.  This is one of the great ironies when it comes to Bedini "technology" and Bedini enthusiasts in general.  They think that they have a system that is outside the bounds of conventional electronics understanding.  However, in the vast majority of the cases that I have seen, it is the enthusiasts themselves that don't understand what their motor or "energizer" is actually doing.  They say "textbook doesn't understand" when in fact they don't understand it themselves.  It's all pure textbook, it is all very simple and very easily understandable, if you have the knowledge foundation.  That's what this thread is all about and what it is attempting to do.  Help create that foundation and then see if anyone wants to test to see if what's being said is true or not by running some more and new tests with their setups.

He clearly states several times that you should be able to get more energy out of the charging battery than you put into it.  Personally, I would only believe that if I saw some serious charge and load testing done on the charging battery.  I am willing to just look at this and forget the other factor, how efficiently the source battery can transfer power into the charging battery.

He uses analog current meters and I am not completely comfortable with their ability to average out the pulsing current, for both the source and the charging batteries.  Nonetheless, early in the video he shows about 120 milliamps at about 12 volts being supplied by the source battery and 32 milliamps at about 12 volts going into the charging battery.  He makes no comment here but he should have.  It is showing you that his motor is roughly 25% efficient at transferring power from the source battery into the charging battery.  The other 3/4 of that power is becoming waste heat.

I had to stop at about 1:05 and come here.  Rick makes some "smoking gun" statements that clearly show that he is basically a layperson that knows all of the Bedini motor buzzwords.  He talks about how remarkable it is that the source battery can be at a lower voltage than the charging battery, and still charge it, "without a transformer."  He mentions that even a four-volt source battery can charge a 12-volt charging battery.  He thinks this demonstrates something special about a Bedini motor.  (He also states that the spike is "free."  That's not true.  The energy in the spike came from the charging battery.  You can prove this for yourself by running some tests.)  If you have been reading this thread and have been "getting it" you know that there is absolutely nothing remarkable about this fact.  You know how you hear the high-frequency whine when an electronic flash is recharging the main flash capacitor to a high voltage?  There is another example of a pulsing inductor circuit.  So Rick has qualified himself as a layperson by making that statement.  You would think that he would know how the "motor" works as of 2007, when the movie was made.  I will assume that by 2007 Rick already had had a close association with John Bedini for several years.

If there is anything else worth mentioning I will post more.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-14, 02:00:59 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Another few comments comment about the clip.

Again around 1:05 there is a text overlay:  "The fast turn-on and off of the transistor, The Sharp Gradient DC Disruptive Discharge:  CAUSES THE ENVIRONMENT TO FREELY CHARGE THE BATTERY."  Don't we all wish this was true.  When the transistor switches on, the coil starts to energize.  Mathematically speaking the coil is integrating the voltage applied across it, and the result of the (voltage x time) integration is current flowing through the coil.  The battery is working and supplying the energy to make this happen.  This represents the storing of electrical energy in the coil that is provided by the battery.  The magnetic field around the coil is where the energy is stored.  You can even quantify the magnetic field flux density in Joules (or Ergs) per cubic centimeter if you were so inclined to do that.  In the physical world if you push on a spring the same process is taking place.  You compress the spring in your hand and you can feel the spring pushing back.  The pushing back, that force you feel, is equivalent to the current.  Your hand is acting like the battery in this case and providing energy to the system.  The spike that happens when the transistor switches off, the "disruptive discharge" is the releasing of that stored energy.  Just like when you let the compressed spring fly out of your hand at a high velocity (equivalent to voltage).  Going back to the inductor discharging into the battery, that energy comes from the energy stored in the coil, and that coil energy came from the source battery.  The spike energy does not come from the environment, and the environment does not freely charge the charging battery.  The notion that the spikes are extracting some extra energy from the environment is false.  It is a familiar theme in free energy circles.  Again, this can all be proved experimentally.

Around 1:07 he demonstrates how if you disconnect the charging battery and instead the neons start flashing, you can see how the current consumption from the source battery decreases a bit.  There is a text overlay, "It takes more energy to run the motor with the charging battery removed."  Rick says, "That does not make sense."   Hey says the "speed does not change that much on the wheel" almost as an afterthought, but he does not really check that parameter seriously.

Here is were you separate the "Do the Experiments" men from the boys.  In my opinion Rick actually does not know if it makes sense or not, but to him it "seems sensible" to say that.  He does not investigate this further.  With careful measurements you can explain exactly why this happens.  Here is where I would need to get my hands dirty to tell you exactly why.  We know that when the charging battery is connected the inductor discharges it's stored energy more slowly as compared to when the neons are flashing.  There is a transformer coupling back to the pick-up coil when this happens.  It may be something related to that, but tests would have to be done.  There is an explanation for this, guaranteed.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-08-14, 09:42:31 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
I am doing some Bedini hunting around online for fun.

http://www.panaceauniversity.org/John%20Bedini%20Technology.pdf

The above is a "Panacea University" pdf document all about Bedini technology.

The following quote is in bold text and caught my eye:

Quote
What makes this technology an exception to every other aspect of current technology is that
although it has been tested and made to work in some practical applications, it is yet to be
accepted by the mainstream ethos and is not taught in any textbook that we have today.

I have already covered this topic, everything about a Bedini motor is pure textbook.  So Ash and the boys, come on down!  Read this thread, I think that it is important that you do and you are welcome to come here and discuss.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
Hi guys,

I have a question about spark gaps. I myself have never worked with them since I have always thought it to be a great waste as the radiant energy. But here is a question.

In the spark gap the energy potential is in one direction. But that gap, in my view, is counter productive because it does not permit any flyback return from higher up in the circuit, So what if you put a heavy diode across the spark gap that is pointing back to the source. You would still be able to make the spark gap work and have a return path for any flyback. Does that sound crazy?


---------------------------
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 23
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-12-20, 11:17:56