Brad,
Thank you for taking the time and allowing for some give and take here. I'm trying to be mindful of these things without violating the rules with claims.
You are factually not correct here on a least one thing. But I'll get to that.
You say there are no known devices which... Are you claiming to be able to know all devices world wide. While I know many systems I could never say I know all of them. So you are making an impossible absolute here. Therefore it is just false to say that. You can only say that so far as I know...
Your absolute claim will just prevent you from considering anything like that. This is why I asked these questions. You effectively will prevent anyone from demonstrating something to you because you will assume something false about it. Like the sulphation claim, which is bogus. I'll come back to that.
While there are certainly setups where additional loads reflect on the input, but there are others that do not. It is like the difference with what Itsu is doing and what I do with the resonance kit.
If that was so then I would not have been able to run my boat for three years by merely swapping batteries around. Now that was done deliberately without any advanced processes for the sole purpose to demonstrate to everyone that you could do such things. If you were around back then you could have looked at that. And that is very easy to show. Hundreds of people were there and every one of them had the opportunity to examine everything and go for a ride as well. Same with the lawnmower and other setups. So maybe you are referring to what you have examined here, but certainly not for the rest of the world. And yes, I have many mistakes in people's systems that you and F6 are irritated by. It is frustrating all the ignorance and lies perpetuated. That is why I say 90-95% of the problem is psychological. Over and under believing. People want to believe they have OU and others want to disbelieve. Both are a problem for everyone.
Can you give me a positive example of where Bedini used a sulfated battery in this way? I wouldn't be surprised if you had a real example. But I did not ever do experiments with sulfated batteries on those systems, and always insisted upon people starting with new batteries. So what you say is completely false. If Bedini did a false presentation that doesn't mean those motors are as you claim. Yes I have more against Bedini than all of you put together, literally. I have exposed his ignorance, mistakes, and lies. But his lies were more along the lines of claiming to be an inventor when he actually copied from other people. Liars do not lie about everything. But I don't blame you for not trusting anything he said or demonstrated. Because I have made that argument myself. The other day AG pointed out a video from one of my students showing a 2015 or 2016 clip of Bedini claiming that the spike on the energizers was determined by the altitude (not even the height above ground, and not with any ground wire going to ground either), and according to the basic math he gave there, that would mean he would have had to have 100kv spikes in Hayden Idaho, which he didn't. So if your example is one of those then I don't blame you. But I don't play those games. I often expose that very thing, which is the same as doing voltage drop loads before you start a video. I know all these games these people play. But I actually had Bedini's batteries in my shop next door for three years. So I know the condition of batteries used.
Brad, I don't need more recognition as the private sector has been more than ample. I am just here to help people learn. I have the same concerns you address and do address them. But I have found a better way. Everyone has been going about this wrong, including this forum. You are all looking for the mysterious circuit while not understanding the principles of free energy. So parts are looked to, and special connections, as the magical system. But I found that it is far more successful to teach on the principles or themes of free energy and then people can make the parts conform to those principles. One such principle is knowing how mainstream theory works and being able to contrast that with what we are doing. That means mainstream is largely linear processes, but it is also nonlinear as well. But the nonlinear is resistive rather than reactive. So you have to be able to contrast these first two with the third. Without doing that engineers will just always assume nonlinear resistive in all there estimations. The cannot understand Tesla for that reason. Many will just not go there. It is out of their box. So unless that contrast is made, if you give people a circuit, they will just do the wrong thing with it. So I have been teaching along those lines of the themes and principles of free energy. I'll be doing a cheat sheet on that.
And there in lies the problem,highlighted in red.
There are no known devices which can do as you say,nor has there ever been any proven to work that way.
Any additional load placed on a system will either reflect on the input,or reduce heat loss,which is an energy conversion process in the device itself. No !free OU! energy has ever been had from any system to date.
On all occasions it comes down to measurement error,or unseen energy already within the system--much like Bedini's trick of using sulfated batteries to show his OU effect's,when in actual fact,the extra energy seen was already within the battery,and just hidden underneath the sulfate layers.
This is why i asked if you could provide us with just 1 of your 15 OU device's,so as we can see the effect you are seeing,and find out where it is coming from. This would only be good for you Rick,as the more people that validate your claim's,the more you stand to gain-->it would be a win win situation for all.
Brad
Author
Topic: Ricks best video's (Read 58670 times)
