Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[WilbyInebriated]

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

[Evil Roy Slade]

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.

Let's follow your line of argument that the Bedini Motor is NOT claimed overunity.

What would I end up with if I were to heave myself out of my comfortable recliner and build this motor, as Feynman is doing. It's not an overunity device. Is it a really good battery charger? But I already have a number of chargers....PWM driving some nice juicy mosfets....buck or boost.

I am curious as to what Feynman's aim is in building the Bedini Motor. What say you Feynman?

And what of all the replications faithfully documented in a myriad of youtube videos.
Are they all aware that the result of their efforts is a battery charger?

Perhaps there is another use for this motor that has escaped me. Please enlighten me.

ERS

 



 

[Evil Roy Slade]

BTW, the PHD in that lovely armchair should be on the back of the chair so everyone can see it when I am blissfully resting

ERS

[poynt99]

@ wilby

although it was not Bedini making the claim directly in that press release, see "Energy from the Vacuum - Part 2". In this video there is no doubt that Bedini is claiming overunity from his motor/generator devices

--about the independent testing statement made by ERS, you missed the point

the point is to have a device, for which the builder claims to be overunity, tested by a qualified group (most people are not) to verify the claims

this way it is the actual inventor's/builder's device that he built being tested, and it is being done by an independent and qualified group. the myth busters are obviously not a qualified group to do this sort of test.

[PMM Dave]

@ wilby
the point is to have a device, for which the builder claims to be overunity, tested by a qualified group (most people are not) to verify the claims

This phrase sums up the problems being explored in this thread very succinctly.
1) Does the builder claim overunity, and if not, what DOES he claim?
2) Nobody is more qualified to test the machine than the builder! Once the builder has some interesting test results, THEN it might be worth another group replicating the tests. But otherwise, what is the point?

I personally have not seen any quantitative test results, properly documented, that indicate overunity. Can anybody point me to some?

Also, I like the picture of an armchair that says "PHD" on it. Does this mean that anybody on this forum actually HAS a PhD? Just thought I would ask.

[nul-points]

I personally have not seen any quantitative test results, properly documented, that indicate overunity. Can anybody point me to some?

i don't want to prolong the hijacking of Feynman's thread, so i won't enter into a discussion here - if you want to follow up my results with me we can either do that privately via PM / email or in public via my 'OU/COP>1 switched cap...' thread

results from my recent experiments are posted at:
  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

as you would read on my website, i don't have a PhD 

regards
sandy

[willitwork]

The Bedini and other pulse motors are excellent projects that are worth building. It is possible that some energy is pulled from the environment at or about the time the motor pulses. Once these these units hit their sweet spots they are a beautiful thing to watch. They seem to be efficient and very stable. The holy grail, imho, is not to build a self sustaining unit first up but to determine if we are extracting any energy at all from a source other than the our input power supply.

Personally I would be happy if it could be accurately determined that we are only able to pull milliwatts from the environment. That would be enough to warrant pushing into further and more refined development. If we can get milliwatts we should not discount the possibility that we could get megawatts!

In my own testing I have not been able to measure any gains. That does not mean that there aren't any, it just means that I can't measure them. Good Luck Feynman and let us know if we can assist you. I will watch the thread with interest.

[shadotrak]

hey Feynman - all the best with the Bedini replication - looking forward to hearing what you discover about its operation


I AM NEW BUT HAVE BEEN MONITORING THESE BOARDS FOR A WHILE.
THE OBJECTIVE WILL BE ACHIEVED, NO DOUBT, EVEN TO TRACKING THE PATTERN OF THE ELECTRON AND DIRECTING THE LITTLE SCUTTER.

WILL BE WATCHING, OH! YES I HAVE A FEW THINGS IN THE WORKS, WILL LET YOU KNOW WHEN RESULTS ARE POSITIVE.

SHADOTRAK

[ramset]

FEYNMAN hows things? Chet

[shadotrak]

hey Feynman - all the best with the Bedini replication - looking forward to hearing what you discover about its operation



I HAVE BEEN WATCHING THESE BOARDS FOR A WHILE NOW.
THE OBJECTIVE WILL BE ACHIEVED !

ANYONE CAN SPOUT THE RULES AS CONTAINED IN CURRENT OUTDATED TEXTBOOKS,
BUT WHEN THEY ARE 10-20 YEARS BEHIND, AND WANT TO LIVE IN THE PAST, AND TRY TO GET EVERYONE TO ADHERE TO THEIR WAY OF THINKING, THEY ARE THE ONES WHO WILL BE LEFT BEHIND.

NEW DISCOVERIES ARE NOT COVERED IN TEACHINGS WHICH ARE USED TODAY!

THE ONLY THING TAUGHT ARE THE " CLOSE YOUR MIND TO ANYTHING I SAY YOU CANNOT
BELIEVE"  AND MAKE EVERYONE CONFORM.


THINKING OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSE WILL EXPEDITE THE DISCOVERIES NEEDED TO EASE
THE ENERGY CRUNCH. 

I HAVE PROJECTS IN THE WORKS, WILL LET YOU KNOW WHAT, AS SOON AS THERE ARE POSITIVE RESULTS.
THEN "MYTHBUSTERS" WILL HAVE EGG ON THEIR FACE.

AGAIN GOOD LUCK ON THE REPLICATION.
NOT SHOUTING JUST CAN'T SEE WELL.

SHADOTRAK

[Magnerazz]

This is a paper on a Bedini replication by doctorate level physicists. They found that it worked as claimed. The physics have been worked out to engineering level. It is overunity and it does not violate conservation of energy. http://www.aias.us/documents/uft/a94thpaper.pdf (it is too big to attach)

I have been following Einstein Cartan Evans unified field theory for over a year now. It is being widely accepted in the industrial physics community of working scientists, but the academic community will not accept it because it steps on some pet 20th century theories, I.E. no black holes and no big bang, no need for dark energy or dark matter. It explains all available empirical observations and experimental data for any branch of physics in a 4d general relativity geometrical model, so no need for extra dimensions or string theory ( which has never produced anything useful anyway) . However ECE has been developed and tested with super computers and is rigorously mathematically correct. All of the well proven laws of classical and quantum physics are recovered as special limits of ECE theory.

The kicker is that ECE predicts the ability to extract energy from space time both gravitationally and electromagnetically thru spin resonance connections. The physical laws involved are of the same mathematical structure as the Coulomb, Ampere-Maxwell, Faraday and Gauss laws of classical electrodynamics with added terms to define the spin connections.

The Bedini motor properly configured produces such a spin resonant connection within the target battery itself. The battery self charges from a spacetime connection. The motor simply produces the resonance conditions necessary for this to take place, it does not supply charge current to the battery.

[nul-points]

let's see if i get this straight:-

  Professor Evans et al produce a paper supporting energy drawn from 'coiled' space-time as a perfectly valid process & citing the Bedini motor/battery charger as an example

  The Prof, with the support and assistance of other equally heavy-duty scientists (one or more having worked in association with Einstein's team), has managed to complete Einstein's dream of unifying general relativity and Quantum Electrodynamics and now fully believes that, using appropriate techniques, energy can be drawn from the 'vacuum' without violating anything more than a skeptic's pride


dayyum - the poor old Prof must be kicking himself that Mythbusters have so decisively shown that this is an impossibility - it would mean 'Perpetual Motion', after all 


hi Magnerazz - i think it's pretty mean that you've been sitting on this stuff for year!!!   
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

[utilitarian]

This is a paper on a Bedini replication by doctorate level physicists. They found that it worked as claimed. The physics have been worked out to engineering level. It is overunity and it does not violate conservation of energy. http://www.aias.us/documents/uft/a94thpaper.pdf (it is too big to attach)

I have been following Einstein Cartan Evans unified field theory for over a year now. It is being widely accepted in the industrial physics community of working scientists, but the academic community will not accept it because it steps on some pet 20th century theories, I.E. no black holes and no big bang, no need for dark energy or dark matter. It explains all available empirical observations and experimental data for any branch of physics in a 4d general relativity geometrical model, so no need for extra dimensions or string theory ( which has never produced anything useful anyway) . However ECE has been developed and tested with super computers and is rigorously mathematically correct. All of the well proven laws of classical and quantum physics are recovered as special limits of ECE theory.

The kicker is that ECE predicts the ability to extract energy from space time both gravitationally and electromagnetically thru spin resonance connections. The physical laws involved are of the same mathematical structure as the Coulomb, Ampere-Maxwell, Faraday and Gauss laws of classical electrodynamics with added terms to define the spin connections.

The Bedini motor properly configured produces such a spin resonant connection within the target battery itself. The battery self charges from a spacetime connection. The motor simply produces the resonance conditions necessary for this to take place, it does not supply charge current to the battery.

I am assuming that the good scientists have a perpetually-spinning Bedini motor to accompany their bold conclusions.  What, no?  Hmmmm.

[Magnerazz]

I am assuming that the good scientists have a perpetually-spinning Bedini motor to accompany their bold conclusions.  What, no?  Hmmmm.

Yes they replicated the Bedini patent plans. Understand that this is a greater than 100% COP device, like a heat pump it requires energy input from an isolated source to modulate a larger output from another discrete source. Space time is the relativity theory term for this source of primordial charge density that is an inherent property of the universe. Other theories might call this " Aether" or " Gamma and Beta Atmospheres".  The Bedini motor will not work if connected in a direct loop to its own battery source. However it will charge multiple target batteries which can then be used to power other devices as well as be swapped out to run the motor. But the motor and charge circuits must be isolated and the charger side is not grounded except through the batteries in circuit. There is no earth ground involved.

[utilitarian]

The Bedini motor will not work if connected in a direct loop to its own battery source. However it will charge multiple target batteries which can then be used to power other devices as well as be swapped out to run the motor.

This does not pass logical muster.  If a Bedini motor can charge a target battery, why can't that battery in turn be used to recharge the source batter via another Bedini wheel, thus creating perpetual motion?