PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-06-20, 00:57:00
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Author Topic: Bedini 10-Coil Alternative Discussion  (Read 66446 times)
Group: Guest

There is no rational reason to expect that the charging battery will magically show an increase in energy, none!  The term "radiant energy" used by Bedini in the context of a discharging inductor that's part of a Bedini motor is nonsense.  Any first-year physics or engineering student would tell you that.

MileHigh

MileHigh - I agree that the term 'radiant energy' is somewhat odd.  But the fact is that as many people who report a loss or failure of these motors' efficiencies - as many others report on their success.  I'm inclined to support Lindemann's opinion and expertise.  And I'm sure it would defy any sense at all for him to support this if there were nothing there.  Also - I have first hand experience of the benefits in recharging a battery from counter EMF.  I assume that the same could very well be done with back EMF from a motor.  But I'm open to correction.  I've never tested this.

And a first year student could indeed comment.  But I'd be more interested in his comments after he's graduated.
   
Group: Guest
As Milehigh as so eloquently posted my results as stated to Ozy in the other forum, then decided to pick apart the results and provide a complete (actually incomplete in my book) analysis without even getting out of the arm chair. How can anyone even begin to seek the truth? I ran for 2 days straight and could of run longer. You want 25 days from me, but from Milehigh you accept total analysis withing 20 seconds after he posts, from a guy who has not practice EE in 20 years, admits he never built one and has only watch the videos. Are you Guys, Gals really serious? Don't accept my results, build it, replicated my setup, you'll see.

Bit's

Bit's - I'm not sure how to access the appropriate thread at EF.Com forum.  I'm banned and I can't always get in. If I were inclined to support MH's analysis then I'd not be asking for your own.  And if I didn't generally support this drive to better ways of getting our energy then I would not be wasting my every waking hour at it.  I'm asking - in good faith - for some evidence of these claims.  I am unduly optimistic - and I assure you that there are many others equally so.  They just don't post here.  I assure you that while this thread is devoted to an entire rejection of any Bedini claims - the readers here are not necessarily in synch with that object.  It's just that they're less vocal.

Again,
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
As Milehigh as so eloquently posted my results as stated to Ozy in the other forum, then decided to pick apart the results and provide a complete (actually incomplete in my book) analysis without even getting out of the arm chair. How can anyone even begin to seek the truth? I ran for 2 days straight and could of run longer. You want 25 days from me, but from Milehigh you accept total analysis withing 20 seconds after he posts, from a guy who has not practice EE in 20 years, admits he never built one and has only watch the videos. Are you Guys, Gals really serious? Don't accept my results, build it, replicated my setup, you'll see.

Bit's

Jeff:

Can you describe your show setup?  I mean really describe it, say in three paragraphs.  What size of batteries in ampere-hours?  Your battery swapper was it running?  I read something about the 10-coiler charging a bank of target batteries and you had to have light bulb(s) on the charging bank to prevent the batteries from being overcharged.  What was the light bulb(s) wattage?

I am asking you for a complete description of your setup so that we can comment on it.  Battery energy is a must, and all the critical pieces of information to get a sense of what was going on energy-wise.

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:

Quote
from a guy who has not practice EE in 20 years, admits he never built one and has only watch the videos.

Read this thread and you will take those words back.  It will be abundantly clear to you that I know what I am talking about.  It's time to stop "spinning."
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Can you describe your show setup.  I mean really describe it, say in three paragraphs.  What size of batteries in ampere-hours?  Your battery swapper was it running?  I read something about the 10-coiler charging a bank of target batteries and you had to have light bulb(s) on the charging bank to prevent the batteries from being overcharged.  What was the light bulb(s) wattage?

I am asking you for a complete description of your setup so that we can comment on it.  Battery energy is a must, and all the critical pieces of information to get a sense of what was going on energy-wise.

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:

Read this thread and you will take those words back.  It will be abundantly clear to you that I know what I am talking about.  It's time to stop "spinning."

May I second this.  And MileHigh I don't think anyone doubts your abilities.  What I personally question is your bias.  It tends to make me question your analysis. 
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

When you distill it down to the bare essentials, we are asking ourselves if energizing an inductor and then discharging it into a battery results in more chemical energy stored in the battery than was contained in the current pulse from the inductor.  My "bias" is the common sense laws-of-thermodynamics bias.

There is no "radiant energy" for sure, because we understand exactly how an inductor discharges.  Bedini doesn't want to explain this to people.  Nor can "radiant energy" be measured in any way, you are supposed to accept it is there because Bedini and Bearden say so. Then you have Bedini talking about Bloch walls in inductors and bar magnets.  There are no Bloch walls to be found.  Bedini has hijacked the meaning of "Bloch wall" and redefined it and uses it for his own ends.  I was shocked when I saw Bedini talking about Bloch walls in standard bar magnets, because they don't exist.  I was so shocked I started a separate thread about it.

So the truth is that the burden of proof for the proposition falls on Bedini and his supporter's shoulders.  I don't have to prove anything and in that sense I don't have a bias.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Bits-n-Bytes, I begin to understand some of what is going on.  (Technical data vs. Personal opinion...)

As I have insufficient information, I can make no further comments.  I have seen my basic Tesla switch not work correctly, and HAVE seen a unit made by another actually do things I considered impossible.  I have learned to keep an open mind.  As I mentioned - not enough data.

I am going to keep watching and listening, as I don't expect you to suddenly provide enough information for me to actually make a hard and fast decision.  From the small pictures I saw, and the non-technical information presented with them, it would seem that MileHigh's concerns are valid.  It would also seem that a careful validation of the batteries charge state, after two days, would also be enough "Proof" to state that there WAS a level of energy influx.  Sorry, I have insufficient data for me, the ultimate skeptic, to make a decision either way, although just that fact states a little more than I care to admit, at this time.

ARGGGG.   This now requires me to research further, get information from multiple sources (Facts, not opinions, of course.) so that I may make some kind of determination.  I didn't see any real tech info on the "10 Coil" device, but I'm sure the info is out there.

Be assured, I WILL get more info, and return when I can be more assured of the accuracy of my response.  Unfortunately, I must agree with the three stages part, and do know of certain military devices with certain "Similar" types of properties, but I have seen many more fake devices than real, and have been involved with several manufacturing companies that have gone out of business, chasing a dream that had not been properly vetted before beginning production.  I won't allow myself to repeat certain mistakes.

I still feel that MileHigh has a good point, but, as he just asked for the data needed, you may have already done the exact test requested, just not in the way suggested.  I.E.  Is there a specific gravity charge level reading for each cell in a before run and after run condition?   Little specific things like that make all the difference.  I'd be overjoyed to peruse any detailed data you wish to share.

If this type of information is or has been already posted somewhere, links would be greatly appreciated.  Verification of any data supplied would wait until needed, as I will give the benefit of the doubt to anyone, until final verification time comes.  AT that point, I have to actually see and build it myself, so you can't help me there, other than specs...  Don't think I feel I deserve any special attention but as there seem to be quite a few watching this, this might be a good place to tabulate data, or links to data, if you like.  Not my place to even suggest it, but I guess I have.  (You don't need to make it easy for me.  I'll find the data if it is out there.)

TO All:   These type of questions and comments may seem cruel to some, and, like I felt earlier, not cruel enough to others.  They ARE necessary to truly vindicate people that come up with great things, as there are too many out there that just want to make a buck.  This type of grilling is the best way.  As someone just said:  "If it is true, you can prove it."  I first read that in my 7th grade science class, which is longer ago than I will admit, but remember reading it in the extra books I used to study.   On the other hand, if this turns out to BE just another one of those high efficiency devices, then the word scam WILL be attached to it and all involved.   I would be willing to bet that certain names will have a bad reputation for a lot longer than their lifetime.  (It works both ways.  Tesla had to die before getting 1/10th of his deserved credit.   We certainly don't want a repeat of that.  Then again, I could mention other names that have the opposite fame.  No need to go there, either.)

I know I sound wishy-washy on this one, but I would like to think it's just open-minded thinking on a subject that I truly haven't enough information to decide with certainty whether it fact or fiction.

I guess I should have been more aware of this a long time ago, but the crazy charge field stuff has been keeping me busy.  (Yeah, that's just an excuse, and not even a good one.)   :)


By the way, MileHigh, Do you actually believe that "Radiant Energy" does not exist in any way, or are you stating that it doesn't exist in this specific application?    If you can say, with complete honesty, that you understand "Exactly" how an inductor discharges, then that is another discussion we must have, at another time, in another thread.  (That implies you understand "Exactly" what a magnetic field is, which I was under the impression is still an open topic, for most physicists...)     Just for reference, there are many. well respected people, not related to the OU movement at all, that would have very strong opinions on these subjects.   Does a Magnetic field exist in the vacuum of space, or is it the mass it encounters that pull it back into being from the distortion of 'aether'/'dark matter' or some other descriptive and undefined word?  These are very difficult experiments to preform, but some are worth it, just for the experience.  Then again, many don't have the "I need to see it to believe it!" bug, like I do.
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Can you describe your show setup?  I mean really describe it, say in three paragraphs.  What size of batteries in ampere-hours?  Your battery swapper was it running?  I read something about the 10-coiler charging a bank of target batteries and you had to have light bulb(s) on the charging bank to prevent the batteries from being overcharged.  What was the light bulb(s) wattage?

I am asking you for a complete description of your setup so that we can comment on it.  Battery energy is a must, and all the critical pieces of information to get a sense of what was going on energy-wise.

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:

Read this thread and you will take those words back.  It will be abundantly clear to you that I know what I am talking about.  It's time to stop "spinning."
Milehigh, as you have taken most of my post from the EF forum, you have my entire setup. You also have all of the values that I told Ozy earlier today. Certainly you have provided an inaccurate analysis right here on your very own forum. As for the bulbs, they where both 60W. I had to put them on the 2 bats configured in series because they were over charging. They were at 37 volts at the time I installed them. Come on Milehigh, you really need to build one and test for yourself. This way you'll have all of the values at your figure tips. You must really practice what you preach. There is no spinning, you your self admit that you haven't practice in 20 years, never have built one, and just watch videos. This is "tough talk" by your standards as those are your words. I guess I am just asking you to live by your own standards. When you build one and start the testing , please let me know so that I can help you, but until then, kindly keep your analysis to the facts.

Bit's
   
Group: Guest

If this type of information is or has been already posted somewhere, links would be greatly appreciated.  Verification of any data supplied would wait until needed, as I will give the benefit of the doubt to anyone, until final verification time comes.  AT that point, I have to actually see and build it myself, so you can't help me there, other than specs...  Don't think I feel I deserve any special attention but as there seem to be quite a few watching this, this might be a good place to tabulate data, or links to data, if you like.  Not my place to even suggest it, but I guess I have.  (You don't need to make it easy for me.  I'll find the data if it is out there.)
Your best bet is here: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5374-bedini-10-coil.html
This has a few answers that you seek, please join us over there, if something is unclear just ask Bits!  ;D
We don't have the complete picture yet, but we are certainly getting somewhere!


TO All:   These type of questions and comments may seem cruel to some, and, like I felt earlier, not cruel enough to others.  They ARE necessary to truly vindicate people that come up with great things, as there are too many out there that just want to make a buck.  This type of grilling is the best way.  As someone just said:  "If it is true, you can prove it."  
Bravo, well said!

Ozy



   
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

When you distill it down to the bare essentials, we are asking ourselves if energizing an inductor and then discharging it into a battery results in more chemical energy stored in the battery than was contained in the current pulse from the inductor.  My "bias" is the common sense laws-of-thermodynamics bias.

There is no "radiant energy" for sure, because we understand exactly how an inductor discharges.  Bedini doesn't want to explain this to people.  Nor can "radiant energy" be measured in any way, you are supposed to accept it is there because Bedini and Bearden say so. Then you have Bedini talking about Bloch walls in inductors and bar magnets.  There are no Bloch walls to be found.  Bedini has hijacked the meaning of "Bloch wall" and redefined it and uses it for his own ends.  I was shocked when I saw Bedini talking about Bloch walls in standard bar magnets, because they don't exist.  I was so shocked I started a separate thread about it.

So the truth is that the burden of proof for the proposition falls on Bedini and his supporter's shoulders.  I don't have to prove anything and in that sense I don't have a bias.

MileHigh

MileHigh.  May I say how grateful I am that you answer me at all.  It seems that Bit's and Loner talk through me and past me and around me that I may as well not be here at all. I wonder if it's because I'm a woman or if it's because my comments and requests are irrelevant all on their own - regardless of my gender.  I'd be sorry to learn this.  Either way.  It certainly seems to be enough for Bit's to justify NOT posting those results here.  More's the pity as there are more than just you and me interested in all this.  

But having said all that I'm afraid the truth is that NO-ONE knows how an inductor discharges.  There are a few flawed theories that propose certain things.  But they're none of them correct.  Certainly not that correct that any self-respecting theorist will fall on his pen and die by it.  And certainly NOT correct if you're proposing that they discharge electrons in any way, shape or form.

I often think that the real objection to me on EF.Com was that I had an alternate theory to Bedini et al.  I think they rather prefer it that a MAN promote a theory.  LOL.  Certainly there was NO justification in banning me for saying 'if anyone claims to understand everything about Leedskalnin he would first have to duplicate the miracle of Coral Castle'.  And I suspect that Bedini feels the right to claim his theory in terms of his results.  I personally think that all theory needs to be tested by time and evaluated by prediction.  That sort of takes the speculation out of the exercise.  And frankly - radiant energy has already be 'bagged' - by Newton - then Einstein.  It just means something else as applied by that group of so called 'theorists'.  And I know absolutely nothing about Bloch walls - but will read up on it in due course.  I only have respect for their work and where they're pointing.  That's more or less where it begins and ends.  I just wish they could prove their results with something that's unequivocal.  And it seems that Bit's is going to ignore my/our request.  Makes one think.

Anyway MileHigh.  Notwithstanding your apparent role as dissenter - I have endless respect for you - on many, many levels - outside of your evident reliance on conventional theory.  That definitely needs a refresher course.  

Kindest regards
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

I basically told you what I remember about your setup in reading the posts over the past week and a half.  I don't ever recall the ampere-hours or the number of batteries specified.  I am not going to wade through all the posts again.  I am asking you to do us all a courtesy and give us a definitive description of your setup.

In that vein, do you know what the average power consumption of the 10-coiler was during the workshop?  I don't want to put words in your mouth but I would not be surprised if you didn't know the power consumption.  In that sense, the whole thing is moot, right?  You had some fully-charged source batteries with a certain number of mega-joules in them, that we can determine.  I am assuming that the 10-coiler was running with an unknown power consumption.  If that's true, game over.  You have no clue if the setup was supposed to run two days or not run two days because you are missing critical data to answer that question.

I am assuming that you put two 120 VAC 60-watt light bulbs in series across the 37 volts in the charging battery bank.  Did you put an ammeter in series with the light bulbs when they were lit?  Did you check what the battery voltage stabilized to?  It would be interesting to know how much power the light bulbs were dissipating.

I am assuming that you were talking about a 24-volt bank of batteries that were being over-cooked by the 10-coiler.  So the 37-volts was a "fake" voltage reading due to the pulsing from the 10-coiler and the most likely scenario is that the two bulbs were burning off essentially 100% of the energy coming from the 10-coiler.

But like I said, do you know the average power consumption from the 10-coiler during the conference?  Without that piece of data, the whole exercise is a non-starter.  The only thing that you are left with in anecdotal evidence, "The 10-coiler ran for two days."

By the way, did you run it overnight?

Finally, I have worked in high tech for more than 30 years, and I have never been more than a 30 second walk away from a real engineering development lab.  Please drop the "build it" argument.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
I don't like light bulbs on the charge batteries. Way too many variables come into play!
Also I have seen a scam using that exact method.
Because the lights are running off essentially high energy pulses, they appear bright but are actually using much less power.
So two 60w bulbs quickly can become say 30w of power usage. Batteries account for the rest.
I much prefer the grid tie inverter setup, measurements can be taken with a normal multimeter or watt meter - without the 'error' / 'mystery' because it's standard AC Sine wave.
Of course we have to trust Bits, that his setup runs perpetually in this configuration... but hey... he seems like a nice guy doesn't he?

Ozy
   
Group: Guest
aetherevarising, I was not aware I was talking around and through you.  Maybe I'm missing something.  Don't feel that just because I don't comment on something means I didn't read and digest it.  If the info is good and correct, there is no need for me to comment.  The info stands for itself.

MileHigh, now that you have "Asked", I will Third it (Others have asked, too).  Any information would be appreciated, Bits.

(Links to previous posts welcome.  I refuse to go back to any EF link.  I needn't explain that here.)

   
Group: Guest
I don't like light bulbs on the charge batteries. Way too many variables come into play!
Also I have seen a scam using that exact method.
Because the lights are running off essentially high energy pulses, they appear bright but are actually using much less power.
So two 60w bulbs quickly can become say 30w of power usage. Batteries account for the rest.
I much prefer the grid tie inverter setup, measurements can be taken with a normal multimeter or watt meter - without the 'error' / 'mystery' because it's standard AC Sine wave.
Of course we have to trust Bits, that his setup runs perpetually in this configuration... but hey... he seems like a nice guy doesn't he?

Ozy

Actually aussieaussieaussie - the fact is that if switching a light at high frequencies also results in a lowering of the power without a noticeable change in it's performance - then that's a REALLY valid means of saving energy.  We should be using it.  Everywhere.  Regardless.  I would have thought.  If your average light filament can take that degree of punishment then why are all you clever guys not building those switches?

But I do NOT think that anyone here is a scam artist.  It's just that it would be much preferred to see some data that we can all apply.  

   
Group: Guest
Ozy,

When you put 120 VAC incandescent light bulbs across a more or less DC battery voltage the critical thing to do is measure the current through the lights and voltage across the battery bank.  The resistance of filaments varies and that's why you have to make real measurements.  There was some pulsing in the voltage due to the 10-coiler firing but we will cautiously assume that we can ignore it for this discussion.

I will repeat the most critical point again for emphasis:  I am assuming that they set up two battery banks, fired up the 10-coiler, and within a short time noticed that the charging battery bank was being overcooked so they found some light bulbs.  I can't remember if the battery swapper was being used.  Then they just let the setup run.  Leading up to the workshop, they must have done a dry run to make sure it would last the two days.  That's it.

Without measuring the average power consumption from the 10-coiler, you can't say anything whatsoever about the 10-coiler demo being "over unity" or whatever.  No average power consumption data means you can't say much at all.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
In my experience a standard filament bulb will last anywhere from 3-7 days before blowing running like this, LED will last a lot longer - I found some started to fail at around 30 days.
Thats why I don't like bulbs with Free Energy Devices - unless they are clearly on an inverter!
I want answers too, I think it was best put on another thread here:

"I will never understand people. If I came up with a device that seemed to be OU, The first thing I would do is ask all of you people on here to debunk it, or help find out where the energy is coming from. If you couldn't, then I might start to think, hey maybe I got something here."

Ozy
   
Group: Guest
MileHigh,

Settle down.

Firstly, this 'test' run at the convention, wasn't a test.
It was said in another thread that all the machines at the convention where shut down overnight because of fire concerns.
Until Bits says different I have to assume that this remark is still valid, and therefore it wasn't a test... more of a demonstration.

They only real test published so far is the inverter one at between 60-210watts of output depending on battery level.
This is the ONLY test you could possibly analyze.

Ozy
   
Group: Guest
Loner:

Quote
By the way, MileHigh, Do you actually believe that "Radiant Energy" does not exist in any way, or are you stating that it doesn't exist in this specific application?    If you can say, with complete honesty, that you understand "Exactly" how an inductor discharges, then that is another discussion we must have, at another time, in another thread.  (That implies you understand "Exactly" what a magnetic field is, which I was under the impression is still an open topic, for most physicists...)     Just for reference, there are many. well respected people, not related to the OU movement at all, that would have very strong opinions on these subjects.   Does a Magnetic field exist in the vacuum of space, or is it the mass it encounters that pull it back into being from the distortion of 'aether'/'dark matter' or some other descriptive and undefined word?  These are very difficult experiments to preform, but some are worth it, just for the experience.  Then again, many don't have the "I need to see it to believe it!" bug, like I do.

I believe in the conventional scientific and lay definitions of radiant energy.

As far as how an inductor discharges, I prefer to put aside the "big 'philosophical' questions" that are often asked to challenge you, "Do you really know what voltage is?" or "Exactly what is a magnetic field?"  An inductor is an energy storage device and operates exactly how the differential and integral equations that describe it say it should operate.  If you want to challenge the Enlightenment when calculus was developed and how some smart people quickly realized how differential equations can mathematically model the physical and electrical world we live in you are going to have to have that discussion with somebody else.  Yes a magnetic field exists in the vacuum of space.  Empty space has a known permeability.

Sorry, but that's as far as I am willing to go.  Feel free to start a new thread about this stuff if you want to!

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
MileHigh,

Settle down.

Firstly, this 'test' run at the convention, wasn't a test.
It was said in another thread that all the machines at the convention where shut down overnight because of fire concerns.
Until Bits says different I have to assume that this remark is still valid, and therefore it wasn't a test... more of a demonstration.

They only real test published so far is the inverter one at between 60-210watts of output depending on battery level.
This is the ONLY test you could possibly analyze.

Ozy

Ozy,

Here is a reality/fantasy check for you:

http://pesn.com/2010/11/23/9501730_Bedini_Renaissance_Conference_a_turning_point/

Quote
The conference-long demonstration by Jeff Wilson ('Bits') of the MachineOfTime1  prototype was apparently convincing. It is a Bedini 10 coiler running in a self-sustaining mode with additional power running two bulbs. It's the first 10-coil self-runner built by Friedrich.  The small size and capacity of batteries he had on the system, and the brightness of the bulbs being illuminated (around 60 Watt equivalent), with no diminishing during the entire two days of continuous running, indicated that he was indeed harnessing free energy from the environment via the Tesla switch. Run normally, those batteries might have lasted six to eight hours.

Without knowing the average power consumption of the motor and the amount of energy in the source batteries and the total length of time the setup ran, the above paragraph is just your typical free energy hyperbole that Sterling Allen is so good at writing.  I can clearly see the "was apparently" but what people will remember is the highlighted sentence at the end of the paragraph.

If Jeff wants to chime in he is welcome, but for now as far as I am concerned the demo showed a 10-coiler Bedini motor burning off battery power.  At the end of each day there was less energy remaining in the batteries in the system because some battery energy was turned into heat energy while the system ran.  There was no "self-sustaining" or "self-running" going on at all.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
If an inductor were merely an energy storage device then it would have to disobey inductive laws every time it discharged.  Conventional thinking definitely has a deserved edge until it starts contradicting itself.  Then and under such circumstances and with respect, I think we must all assume there's some error.  And inductive laws state unequivocally that a changing electric field induces a magnetic field and likewise a changing magnetic field induces an electric field.  Every time a magnetic field collapses in an inductive coil it represents a changing magnetic field.  And this, in turn, induces a corresponding electric field in an entirely new regenerated cycle of energy induced in terms of what is WELL known in electromagnetic power generation.  That collapsing cycle induces a second cycle that takes that voltage into a new direction to cycle a second generation of current.   For some reason - probably to contain all that potential and it's inevitable affront to what is barely understood as 'energy conservation', there are few if ANY electrical engineers who address this point.  Thankfully there are those physicists, albeit a few, who concede this point.  

This is NOT vague esoteric science MileHigh.  It's actually STANDARD REQUIRMENTS IN TERMS OF MAINSTREAM THINKING.  It's just that mainstream thinking has left out an entire cycle that they require everywhere else.  
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary:

Feel free to start a thread if you want because I am not going to go there.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
I'll pass MileHigh.  In fact - I'll withdraw from this argument.  You were the one to bring up the subject of 'what every first year student knows'.  Inductive Laws are CERTAINLY first year syllabus.  You were the one to state that conventional understanding - mainstream understanding must carry the argument.  I merely pointed out that mainstream is contradicting itself ALL OVER THE PLACE.  And here's yet another example.  

What I cannot get my mind around is how a motor is able to get the required increase - in any context at all.  But we're actually doing tests on this that I can better understand it.  Frankly - I see excess heat.  I cannot see any other gains.  And a motor is not designed to provide extra heat.  

But I'll withdraw.  It's your argument.  Just do me the courtesy of reading that point I made about conventional understanding on some very basic laws.  It's HOPELESSLY flawed if you assume an inductor cannot become a source of energy re-generation.  It both can and does regenerate an entirely NEW cycle of energy and can be measured to do just this.  

ADDED  - and MORE TO THE POINT - it also returns PRECISELY as much energy as was first applied - regardless of the amount of energy that may have been dissipated as HEAT in that inductor or anywhere at all on that circuit. 
   
Group: Guest
MileHigh,

Do you read my posts before commenting?
I said the numbers mean nothing, it was a demo, not a test.
If you want to rant about tests well leave this demo to the sidelines where it belongs.


Rosemary,
I really do believe your debate is better served in another thread,  if you read above this is the bedini 10 coil thread.
Didn't you have some circuit with a cop>17 , or are you different person???


Ozy
   
Group: Guest
Ozy,

I have no quarrel with you about the the demo and it may be left on the sidelines if Jeff doesn't comment.

However, it's safe to assume that the majority of attendees to the conference and a lot of the people on the free energy forums believe that something special was demonstrated by Jeff with the 10-coiler.  In fact nothing special was demoed unless Jeff wants to try to convince us otherwise.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Ozy - I'm not a different person - but nor am I talking about my circuit.  I'm simply trying to point out that inductive laws require a second cycle of regenerated energy and an inductor simply does this.  But having said that - I am absolutely not qualified to comment on this topic in this thread.  I am just trying to follow the argument.  I agree that with you all that we need some more definitive numbers from Bit's.  But it's unlikely that he'll oblige - thinking as he does that everyone denies that there's any benefit to that 10-Coil number.  Personally I'm very much on the fence.  I just want to see some better numbers.  And watt meters won't cut it unless they're able to register the high frequencies that are being applied.  Nor will ammeters.  What's needed is some detailed voltage analysis across some carefully positioned shunts.  And I simply do not understand why they don't do this.  It's relatively simple.  Otherwise do that extended test.  Either way - we'll have answers.

But don't deny the possibility of a greater than 1 COP based on conventional understanding of power.  It's flawed.  Hopelessly.  An inductor - a coil - must give back as much as has first been applied.  And it's real energy.  And it obeys the required inductive laws.  It's simple.  But I really need to got out of this discussion.  It just gets me hot and bothered.

Regards,
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
Hi Rosemary,

We all would like to see better numbers, but thats the problem, we are all asking for different tests. Poor Bits!

Your attack on using a watt meter after the inverter is totally totally flawed, and shows that your understanding of basic electronics is flawed.
An inverter converts your 'magical' energy to normal AC and that my dear is very measurable with a multimeter! :)

I suggest you do your research before mouthing off...

But my biggest piece of advice would be, shouldn't you be working on your own device? BP certified it as COP>17 shouldn't you be rich and not mouthing off about off topic stuff in this thread... :)

Ozy
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-06-20, 00:57:00