PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-06-20, 01:35:22
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

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 66450 times)
Group: Guest
Ozy,

Quote
He states that he could of run the machine longer, but didn't.
Why the test was stopped is still unknown.
If any voltage drop was recorded in the batteries after the test is also unknown.
The size and quantity of the batteries used is still unknown.

I know that you are interested in getting to the bottom of this also and that's good.  I am just letting you know that your comment about measuring any voltage drop in the battery bank is flawed.  It's all about the energy in the batteries.  Measuring a minor voltage drop means almost nothing.  Measuring the battery output impedance would be much more interesting but almost nobody knows how to do that.

If you have been following the forums for a while, you have read thousands of postings about measuring before/after battery voltages.  This is especially prevalent for Bedini run tests.  Unfortunately, measuring battery voltages at best just gives you only a very rough idea about what might be going on with the battery.  This is the absolute truth.  You might want to read up on batteries.

MileHigh
   
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
aussieaussieaussie or Ozy - whoever you are - it seems that you're rather anxious to remind us all that you're from down under.  In your case I'm not sure exactly what it is that you're under unless it some generalised delusions about everything and anything at all.  Yet we know nothing else about you.  Except that I've now got the dubious pleasure of learning that you're also crass and impolite and somewhat deluded.  Notwithstanding your best efforts to convince me or anyone else, that watt meter that you CROW is the answer - is actually NEVER GOING TO CUT IT.  Perhaps you should learn that art of muzzling yourself before you throw all that advice around as freely as manure.  And my personal assets or their general well being has absolutely NOTHING to do with you or with this subject.  And my rights to express an opinion are inviolate - until such time as I'm banned from this forum.  And until then I'll thank you to exercise a little courtesy.

What a cheek.

   
Group: Guest
Haha,

Ok firstly, its a username, as in it's a name I use - nothing more.

There is nothing wrong with my test, if I built a machine like Bits, it would be the first test I would do. Followed of course by many many other further tests!
You see Bits is already convinced about it been self runner, but he seemed a bit shaky on the output figures and that was what I was putting to rest.
Bits proving to you that its a self running is a whole different story, and one that I am not asking for at this time.

"In your case I'm not sure exactly what it is that you're under unless it some generalised delusions about everything and anything at all."
This is priceless - my answer is that I am under the USA. Think about it! hahaha

Look, I appreciate your input with regards to any further evidence Bits shows us, but I am going to side with bits here and say....
Go build an SSG, try revive an old battery - at least you can say you have tried.  ;)

Ozy
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary,

You told me my test was wrong, so I explained how your reasons were absurd and false.
No problems making a measurement with cheap standard equipment if it is after the inverter.
This is self evident to MileHigh and anyone who has ever had an inverter and a pulse circuit.

God, I am glad I never waisted anytime replicating your circuit. You obviously have no idea at all.

Attack me my dear and you better have a sound logical reason or I will put you in your place!

Ozy
   
Group: Guest
MH - apologies.  It's getting way off topic.  I'm out of this.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary
   
Group: Guest
Oh and Mile High you are Correct, Battery voltage really does mean nothing, too many variables once again.
Proof is in the work!
   
Group: Guest
I think the message to Jeff has been well and truly made and its really not worth labouring the point about measurements. He will learn as I have over the last few years that it is very easy to be misled by observation into believing there is a system gain when using Bedini energiser's and cap pulsers etc. This is especially the case when using series connected batteries. I have tracked apparent gains over extended periods running into many hours and only after two or three days of continuous running, have I realised that the batteries are practically dead. Batteries when placed under certain pulsed loading conditions and being 'back-popped' will rise in terminal voltage and look deep into their capacity to maintain terminal voltage for long periods of time.

If you study a series connected battery set running a Bedini energiser, you may observe that one battery will be rising in voltage at a quicker rate than the others are falling or very often just sitting at a static voltage for long periods of time. This gives the impression that the battery set as a whole is gaining energy. It is very convincing but don't be deceived because when run for long enough. the whole battery set will eventually run down - fact! I could have convinced a lot of people with my setups running them for many hours with apparent gain. Adding stages of processing to the system just makes it harder to see exactly whet is going on. I've spent hundreds of hours building all sorts of energiser's and load testing them but have never seen overunity. When Jeff preoccupies himself load testing continuously for months on end as I have, the penny will drop. Until then just let him enjoy the moment.

Hoppy
   
Group: Guest
Hi Hoppy,

I know I am guilty of sometimes over-labouring the point.  Right now I am operating on the assumption that the 10-coiler demo at the Renaissance November workshop convention just ran on battery power and there was nothing special going on.  This is based on the presumption that Jeff never measured the average power consumption of the 10-coiler so he has no idea how long it was supposed be able to run.  Therefore the press and the "buzz" about this demo is false.  I am also operating on the assumption that for Jeff's main project, the 10-coiler and battery swapper and grid-tie inverter, he has never done a serious load test like I described to prove that the system is over unity.  One more time, there is a false "buzz" about this project.

If Jeff was an amateur experimenter that would be one thing.  But in reality he's not.  He is directly tied in with Rick Friedrich and by extension John Bedini and the products that they sell through their various web sites.  You have a group there that between them might represent 50+ man-years in this business and they should know what their products can do and can't do.  It's inexcusable to not understand your product when you are operating at this level and it's inexcusable to not be able to generate specifications, even preliminary specifications, for some of the integrated systems that you want to build and sell.

You are probably talking $15K USD for all of the pieces to make a full-blown 20-coiler with battery swapper and cap pulser and grid-tie inverter and two large banks of batteries and the consulting fees for integrating the system together.  Then you look at the web site and you notice nowhere does it state that the 10 or 20-coiler can be the basis for a free energy machine, even though at the Renaissance November workshop convention they showed a computer-graphic video clip of a system like this powering a house.  And ironically the original "buzz" about the 10-coiler was that it could indeed power a house and that has since been scaled back to between 60 and 210 watts.

Then there is the simple thermodynamic reality about the 10-coiler.  If you start off with a fully charged source battery and a depleted charging battery and use the 10-coiler to charge the charging battery at the end of the day you will end up with a net loss in total battery energy.  Right now the preliminary estimate based on the performance of other Bedini motors is that up to 70% of the source battery energy is lost as heat during the charging process and only 30% of the source battery energy makes it into the charging battery.  That's why running the long load test with a 100-watt light bulb on Jeff's main setup is so important.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
MH,

You raise some valid points about commercial responsibility.

Jeff tells us that his battery banks do run down but his 10 coiler can restore the charge removed in less time than it depleted. I suggest that what he fails to understand is that although it may appear that his depleted batteries are recharging in less time, he probably has no real idea of the state of charge and therefore how much capacity has been gained in a given period of time. Terminal voltage is clearly not a valid indicator. When battery swapping, it can take a very long time to see an overall reduction in the overall battery bank voltage. With the big 200A/hr batteries Jeff is using, the proof of self running is simple, start with a fully charged set of batteries and simply let the system run for a full week continuously. I guarantee that the accumulative end capacity of the whole battery set will be very much lower than when the run started. Jeff could use a decent hydrometer to easily prove this.

Hoppy
   
Group: Guest
Hoppy:

Great comments like usual.  I'm not a hard-core battery guy and I keep forgetting about using a hydrometer to check the energy state of the batteries.  So Jeff could get definitive data on his system in pretty short order if he wanted.

MileHigh
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Excellent discussion guys. I think you're right on.

Jeff mentioned he was going to try using capacitors, did he not?

I think Jeff will get that reality check pretty darn quick if he has the integrity to follow through with the capacitor test.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
Group: Guest
Excellent discussion guys. I think you're right on.

.99

What testing methodologies to determine "Excellent discussion guys. I think you're right on." I still fail to see any posted test of your data to counter. Your threads are riddled with "I Think" "Maybe" "Perhaps" Etc. Etc. I must repeat myself, I have demonstrated, produce, design, build and post data points. Just answer me on question and 1 question only, "How much draw at 24VDC does YOUR 10 Coiler draw". Mine draws anywhere from 2 - 3.5amps when adjusted to the sweet spot. Don't give me any lip service, this is not a hard question and don't try and follow up with "you should" "maybe". I am providing you a data point. Just stick to this one question only and test your setup. The only question on the TABLE is "How much does YOUR machine draws at 24V when adjusted to the sweet spot. Don't post anymore spew until you can.

@ Rosemary, I was not disregarding your input, but I wanted to stay focused on illustrating to MH that unless you get off the porch, the only thing you can do is bark like a puppy!

Bit's

   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
What testing methodologies to determine "Excellent discussion guys. I think you're right on." I still fail to see any posted test of your data to counter. Your threads are riddled with "I Think" "Maybe" "Perhaps" Etc. Etc. I must repeat myself, I have demonstrated, produce, design, build and post data points. Just answer me on question and 1 question only, "How much draw at 24VDC does YOUR 10 Coiler draw". Mine draws anywhere from 2 - 3.5amps when adjusted to the sweet spot. Don't give me any lip service, this is not a hard question and don't try and follow up with "you should" "maybe". I am providing you a data point. Just stick to this one question only and test your setup. The only question on the TABLE is "How much does YOUR machine draws at 24V when adjusted to the sweet spot. Don't post anymore spew until you can.

@ Rosemary, I was not disregarding your input, but I wanted to stay focused on illustrating to MH that unless you get off the porch, the only thing you can do is bark like a puppy!

Bit's



OK Bit's, my lips are sealed and the stage is all yours!  :P

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Look, the vast majority of us will never own a 10-coiler.  And if I go to the trouble of building a bicycle-wheel Bedini motor and make a clip and post it, then what?  You will answer questions about your 10-coiler?

You mentioned the sweet spot.  If you read the Bedini measurement thread you will learn how to measure the power input from the source battery bank and the power output to the charging battery bank in real time.  Then I suppose you could say that the sweet spot is when you get the highest (power output/power input) ratio.  It's probably the most important parameter for your motor.  My guess is with the right tweaking you could get it as high as 0.35.  We are talking about "advanced" Bedini motor analysis techniques, compliments of yours truly.  There is a ton of other good solid information along those lines in the Bedini threads.  I describe a triggering method based on pure EMF from a pick-up coil so you can get rid of the inefficiencies associated with using a trigger coil to turn on so many transistors.  You don't need the top peak of the waveform from the pick-up coil to push extra and unnecessary current through the transistor base inputs.  It's not a big deal for a single-transistor SSG but it is a big deal for an 80-transistor 10-coiler.  It might be an interesting project.  That would save power, give you are better sweet spot ratio and also reduce unnecessary drag on the rotor.  If you want to ask me any questions I will be pleased to try and help you.

Another thing just came to mind.  If you reduce unnecessary drag on the rotor, then you don't have to energize the coils as long to keep the rotor turning.  By definition, the shorter your coil energizing time, the more efficient your motor will get, and the higher your sweet spot ratio will get.  The ratio increase could be significant.  You could control the firing time in software with a $20 microcontroller board, all that you need is a TDC trigger from a small pick-up coil.  That also gives you a real-time RPM display.  That's something to think about when you look at that big ugly 10-watt resistor used to regulate your base current.  However, it's all a moot point if your setup fails the "reality check" test.

We are hoping that real data from you will be forthcoming as previously requested.  The offer to help you is sincere.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-11-26, 04:00:04 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Look, the vast majority of us will never own a 10-coiler.  MileHigh

Then why do you guy's keep bashing me and others if your intent is to never own a 10 coiler. I am not trying to sell you one. All I am doing is showing my work. Challenge is great, but please let's agree that if you are going to compare, comment, disput, etc. That you do obtain one. I will also have other devices here shortly to show, and respectfully, I ask at that time, that you also obtain the same so we can cuss and discuss data points.

Thanks for your time.
Bit's
   
Group: Guest
I'm a bit behind, so bear with my last post on this thread, please.

Nice that the Hydrometer was mentioned, again.  (That's kinda what I meant by specific gravity.  Add a load test and that is very close to a "True" charge level on a battery.  I have also done a little with the "Pulse Charge" stuff, and this test IS required.  SG should be enough, but SG and Load is best.  Voltage test on most rechargable batteries is a waste, for the most part.  Gel cells and Sealed cells are even more of a pain, but that is not a discussion for this thread.)

All these "Complex" electrical tests are completely part of the "Smoke".  Stop falling into the "Trap".  No over-thinking allowed.

Remember the "KISS" rule, as if it is not followed, the word "Scam" applies.  (Even if they are only scamming themselves.)  I would not doubt that some that are involved with this actually are convinced they have what they say they have.

Last Time!  Start with ANY setup, measure the "True" charge on the batteries.  Run with "ANY" amount of load for some unmeasured amount of time, by itself.  Measure the "True" charge on the batteries.  THIS is the only useful OU test.  Any more than this assumes this test passes already and is pure smoke and mirrors.  If OU, the charge increases by some amount.  Decrease means junk.  End Of Test.

Of course, IF this passes, then the power, flows, etc. become VERY important, but they are ALL After the OU fact.  I can put this simply, for those who are just reading this, without commenting.  We want to know if the engine RUNS, NOT HOW WELL IT RUNS.  This eliminates sweet spots and all "Mystery".  Who Cares!  The tester can tweak any way they like to get it to RUN OU.  If they cannot do that SIMPLE thing, then "Baffle them with BS" is the only recourse.  I notice that the OU researchers avoid even discussing this little aspect.  Does this make it clear?

I'll drop out now and leave this to those who have the willpower.  The other references I found, as I got no useful links here, all have the same deceptive (or questionable?) tone, as the basic first test is avoided.  Why?  The answer should be obvious.  Any OU researcher with a few hours of actual bench time with batteries is fully aware of this stuff.  Bits, are you saying your group is not?.......(No Answer Required nor Desired!  I'm not saying "I Think".  I won't type the words I would like to use.  I am sorry for even that remark, but your comments speak for themselves.  Is there a device that can increase the standard charge, operating by itself?  Of the dozen or so Bedini - style devices I have personally replicated, I haven't seen one pass the basic test.  They WILL do certain other things, but that is a different story.  I WILL NOT get into the charge recovery of sulfated cells with pulse charging, as that provides false data, as you should already know.  I also discount pure RE charged cells, for reasons you should understand, assuming you have preformed the basic, initial, proof of concept test.  All I mean to say is, no pulsed or inductive "loads" are acceptable for charge quantity testing, for obvious reasons.  AFTER the OU Test, anything is acceptable, but NOT BEFORE.  A simple true test would be NO batteries, except for starting, but I have not even seen a design for that concept.  My apologies for coming on so strong.  I promise to stay away, from now on.  If you ever show either the simple test or the Cap test that I can replicate then I'll shout to the world how wrong I am, but till then.....)  

MileHigh, Thanks for the answers to the questions I put to you.  You are correct in that such a discussion should be in another thread, although I think I mentioned that too.  As that gets too long, and too crazy, I doubt such a thread will prove fruitful for quite a while and I certainly won't be the one to start it.  I do appreciate the response as it gives me insight into your positions on many concepts.  Nice, solid, reality based.  I would make only one suggestion for thought.  Remember Einstien's quote, which I always take to heart:  "Imagination is more important than knowledge."   You seem to easily have enough of the knowledge part, and with a little imagination, I think you could go very far in this area of study.  (I'm not being a kiss-a**.  Just my opinion.)

I must now avoid this topic, as certain battles are outside my abilities to handle.  It is certainly not worth me spending my time on something I'm not proficient at and I'm never going to convince those that "Worship" at the "Ministry", anyway.   Those that are willing to continue this fight are better than I, but that is just not where my skills are.  I prefer the Actual bench work to the "Social" work.

Thank-you for allowing me to post, even though my attitude is not acceptable.  Certain things just get to me.  Sorry, again.

Good luck to all.
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Okay, your point is made.  I won't be getting a 10-coiler or anything else you develop and I will continue to comment.  And it's important to state that the commenting is not "bashing," it's just me attempting to give you a realistic and truthful appraisal of what I see.  I don't accept your argument that I have to buy your stuff to discuss it.

Your demo at the conference was not a self-runner.  Your main setup with the battery swapper and grid-tie inverter cannot produce any free energy.  You have made these claims but you haven't produced any convincing data to back them up.  That's an issue for you to ponder.

Logic says your claims can't be true and my 30+ years working in technology says the same thing.

We will see what happens as the story unfolds.

MileHigh
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Another approach:

Just take two small fully charged lead acid batteries and two Bedini 10 coilers and run them back to back i.e. the "charging battery" is driving the second 10 coiler and recharging the primary battery.

No battery swapping required.

If the system is OU it will run for a very, very long time or the system will run uphill and overcharge both batteries eventually killing them.

Or it will die it's fated death in short order. I'm betting on the latter.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
I am going to respond to Aaron's posting:

Quote
What too many people simply refuse to get is that John B has always stated
you will NOT see any extra "electricity" or in the machine.

The extra, when people see excess, will show up in the BATTERY - the
chemistry is required for the process.


And IF people measure the mechanical work of a calculated wheel
wheel on the shaft, leather strap, spring loaded scales to accurately
calculate it as Peter L shows in his original Electric Motor Secrets video,
you can see how much is there - then you add that much work to what
you get from the batteries.

Depending on the setup, if 0.8 cop was accurately calculated, then
there is actually about 0.9~0.95 since there is easily 10~15% work
in the mechanical part.

0.8 is not very good. 0.90 cop can be done with a little better build
and 15% on the wheel can be had for about 1.05 cop. It isn't magic
and it doesn't violate non-equilibrium thermodynamics since it is a
non-equilibrium machine meaning closed system conventional
thermodynamics doesn't even apply.

This is an indisputable fact and every natural system is a non-equilibrium
system and conventional thermodynamics NEVER applied to any natural
system.

These machines are analogies of natural system.

"The extra, when people see excess, will show up in the BATTERY - the
chemistry is required for the process."


Aaron seems to be implying that if you pump one joule of energy into the battery that you might be able to get one joule plus some extra energy out of the battery.  This is not true at all.  There is no rational reason that can be put forward to make a case for this proposition.  Depending on where you look Bedini or Bearden will sometimes state that it's the coil that is getting extra "zero point" energy that comes in via the non-existent Bloch wall, or it's the battery itself that is somehow "resonating" or it has something to do with the "momentum of the ions."  It's all nonsense.  The battery is not magically increasing in energy with a dose of some extra energy added when a coil discharges into it.  There is nothing special at all about a discharging inductor.  A discharging inductor is not "radiant energy" it's just a discharging inductor.

A closely related issue is that most people can understand how a capacitor works and how it discharges, but they find it very difficult to understand how an inductor works and how it discharges it's energy.  The voltage spikes you can get from a discharging inductor are perfectly normal behaviour, and this is NOT "radiant energy coming from the vacuum."  The challenge for every free energy experimenter is to try and actually understand how an inductor works.  If you can do this all of the wild talk about "disruptive discharges" and voltage spikes and "radiant energy" will fall by the wayside.  You will realize that an inductor is just as boring as a capacitor and it obeys the laws of conservation of energy.

You must be made aware that John Bedini is leveraging the fact that the majority of experimenters don't understand how an inductor works and is using this to his advantage by calling it "radiant energy."  The main players in the Bedini motor world themselves do not understand how an inductor works.  No doubt it's not easy to understand, but once you do then you get a new perspective on how the motor works.

Ask yourselves this:  You know that with no charging battery in place you get high voltage spikes and that's why you use a neon to protect the transistor.  You also know that with the charging battery in place, the high voltage spikes go away and become relatively low voltage spikes.  But, do you know WHY?  If you can't answer that then you don't understand how an inductor works.  If you don't understand how an inductor works then you don't understand how a Bedini motor works.

Okay, some healthy ranting there, so I will continue responding to Aaron in a second posting.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Here is some more data points;

"Lockridge Type" or Principal Device – Tesla Self Run Motor Generator

Maybe you should discuss the reasons why this WON'T work, in your analysis of course!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nigarian Girls build Free Energy Device

2 students invent fueless power generator
Business Nov 20, 2010

By Akoma Chinweoke

Two students of Doregos Private Academy, Lagos, Olajumoke Adebayo and Eniola Adewale has invented a fueless power generator. The invention was showcased at the Pan-African Women Inventors & Innovators Network Symposium, Expo & Awards at the ECOWAS Commission in Abuja.

Eniola Adewale (left) and Olajumoke Adebayo with the fueless power generator they invented

The event titled Innovative Women with Innovative Solutions for Africa was witnessed by the minister of Information and Communication, Prof. Dora Akunyili, and Mrs Josephine Anenih., minister for Women Affairs, It was indeed a commemdation galore for the students as other youths were advised to emulate them.

The students both in SS3 and members of the Junior Engineers, Technicians & Scientists (JETS Club) said the idea was born out of a need to minimize the cost spent of the usage of fuel generators as an average amount of N10, 000 is spent on fuel weekly adding that their invention does not emit any toxic and poses no threat to human health.

According to them, the idea was conceived through the JETS club to which they belonged as coordinators. “We used magnetic flux to generate electricity which the conventional magnet cannot. It consists of a shaf fixed with eight neodymium magnets which rotates when an initial current is passed through the field coils. The electricity is then passed from the copper coil to a step-up transformer which steps up the power voltage from 32 volts to 200 volts to power the output of the generator”. They said.

The young stars noted that JETS club afforded them a vantage avenue to think, analyze and work on scientific research before embarking on the project based on their scientific knowledge that a generator can still exist without using fuel. They stated that it is possible to produce cheaper and more dependable source of electricity for both domestic and industrial use.
The invention the students admitted was not an easy scale through as they had to make several presentations and seminars on the project to the audience comprising their teachers and the school authority before they were finally selected to defend the significance of their project.

Both students hinted that they intend pursuing a career in Engineering in the near future, to develop a bigger generator that can power the whole school.” This is just a prototype to showcase our endowments and potentials.”

The materials used for the invention according to them are a locally fabricated step up transformer, capacitors with total capacity 400,000 uf, neodymium magnets, copper wires transistors battery, oscillators, bulbs and several other materials.

The coordinator Junior Engineers, Technicians & Scientists (JETS Club), of the academy, Mr Lawal Olaide noted that the problem of high cost usage of fuel generators and unemployment in the country coupled with the burning desires of the students to make something unusual was responsible for the feat. according to him, “the main objective of this project is to produce a generator that can produce cheap and sustainable electric power to solve the problem of power supply permanently in the country, adding that it is also of great importance as it does not emit any waste (toxic) products as with conventional generators”.

The Principal of the academy, Mr Jide Adebayo said the school is committed to its mission of creating a learning environment which maximizes individuals’ potentials to meet the challenges of education and life.

allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Two Girls' Innovative Generators

Mr. Lawal Olaide, the school's JETS coordinator, said the challenges of high cost of fuelling generators, unemployment resulting from poor electricity supply and the ambition of the students accounted for the feat.

"The main objective of this project is to produce a generator that can produce cheap and sustainable electric power to solve the problem of power supply permanently in the country, adding that it is also of great importance as it does not emit any waste (toxic) products as with conventional generators," he said.

Minister of Information and Communication, Professor Dora Akunyili, and Mrs. Josephine Anenih, Minister for Women Affairs, commended the students and asked other young people to emulate them.

Our main concern is that this invention will not get the type of attention that we think a project of this significance should get from governments, research institutions, and commercial organisations.

For those who attended the event, it was another activity, which ended with the photo opportunities. This sort of attitude signposts governments' disinterest in providing electricity for Nigerians though everyone admits that improved electricity will enhance industrial, commercial and social activities and improve the quality of life of Nigerians.

Governments' seriousness in solving the challenges electricity poses will be gleaned from how it treats the efforts of these young girls. The generator lobby will not like this type of invention, will government side with it?

Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, and its numerous agencies, has for years failed to harness the research results of brilliant Nigerians, who believe they can make a difference in a country that is stuck with in the past.

No youth will emulate them if their invention ends up on the shelf or sealed in one file in the shelf of one irrelevant government agency.

It is government's turn to emulate the duo by using the invention. Nigerians need it, even if governments can do without it. A paradox of the Nigerian situation is that things that are important to Nigerians are unimportant to our governments because they surround themselves with enough comfort to live above the people and their circumstances.

Bit's

   
Group: Guest
Okay, continuing on...

Quote
What too many people simply refuse to get is that John B has always stated
you will NOT see any extra "electricity" or in the machine.

The extra, when people see excess, will show up in the BATTERY - the
chemistry is required for the process.

And IF people measure the mechanical work of a calculated wheel
wheel on the shaft, leather strap, spring loaded scales to accurately
calculate it as Peter L shows in his original Electric Motor Secrets video,
you can see how much is there - then you add that much work to what
you get from the batteries.


Depending on the setup, if 0.8 cop was accurately calculated, then
there is actually about 0.9~0.95 since there is easily 10~15% work
in the mechanical part.

0.8 is not very good. 0.90 cop can be done with a little better build
and 15% on the wheel can be had for about 1.05 cop. It isn't magic
and it doesn't violate non-equilibrium thermodynamics since it is a
non-equilibrium machine meaning closed system conventional
thermodynamics doesn't even apply.


This is an indisputable fact and every natural system is a non-equilibrium
system and conventional thermodynamics NEVER applied to any natural
system.


These machines are analogies of natural system.

"And IF people measure the mechanical work of a calculated wheel
wheel on the shaft, leather strap, spring loaded scales to accurately
calculate it as Peter L shows in his original Electric Motor Secrets video,
you can see how much is there - then you add that much work to what
you get from the batteries."


This is a completely false argument.  The mechanical output of a Bedini motor that is not actually driving an external mechanical load is zero.  I find Aaron's sentence very cryptic, but I know what he is trying to say.  He is trying to say that it takes power to make the rotor spin, and you should count that.  He is dead wrong.  All of the "power" required to keep the rotor spinning is the overhead associated with running the motor.  By definition the overhead doesn't count, it is part and parcel of the inefficiencies associated with the motor.  The power required to keep the wheel running becomes waste heat power in the bearings and the air friction.  There is a very simple way to account for this also:  About 30% of the source battery's power gets transferred into the charging battery via the Bedini motor.  The other 70% becomes waste heat and is lost.  In that 70% of lost battery power, some of it goes into spinning the rotor.

"0.8 is not very good. 0.90 cop can be done with a little better build
and 15% on the wheel can be had for about 1.05 cop. It isn't magic
and it doesn't violate non-equilibrium thermodynamics since it is a
non-equilibrium machine meaning closed system conventional
thermodynamics doesn't even apply."


The COP is more like 0.3 as explained above.  Out of the 70% of lost power that becomes heat, for the sake of argument, I will agree with Aaron on the percentage for the rotor spinning and say there is a 15% slice in there for that purpose.  The power pie always adds up to 1.0, it's impossible to reach 1.05.  Aaron is just trying to do some "fancy footwork" with numbers here to hoodwink you into believing over unity is possible with a Bedini motor.  The 15% to keep the rotor spinning is power lost as heat and it is fully accounted for.

When Aaron says it is a "non-equilibrium machine" and "closed system conventional thermodynamics doesn't even apply" he is talking nonsense.  Don't let those catch phrases just slide by without giving them a critical examination.  It is an "equilibrium machine" because every component of the power from the source battery can be accounted for.  The simplest split is into 30/70 as explained above.  You can keep on splitting the 70% of lost heat power into the bearing friction, air friction, heat lost in the interconnect wires, heat lost in the transistor, heat lost in the coils, etc, etc.

Don't be phased by the "open" vs. "closed" system thermodynamics statement either.  That's just another catch phrase that you should not let slide by without giving it a critical examination.  People use the term "open system" to hoodwink you into believing that "extra energy" finds its way into the system because it is "open."  They say, "It doesn't violate conservation of energy, it's just getting energy from somewhere else."  It's pure nonsense.  When you look at a Bedini motor what are you really looking at?  You are looking at a device that takes source battery energy, and only source battery energy, and turns it into heat and energy that was put into the charging battery.  That's all it does.  Forget about "open vs. closed," that's just nonsense to confuse you.

"This is an indisputable fact and every natural system is a non-equilibrium
system and conventional thermodynamics NEVER applied to any natural
system."


If you have been following me so far and you get it, then you realize that the above line from Aaron is more nonsense.  Every natural system is an "equilibrium system" in the sense that the conservation of energy applies.  All of Nature is a giant system demonstrating how the conservation of energy works.  Even Aaron's famous heat pump example is an example of the conservation of energy when you look at the whole system.  Conventional thermodynamics ALWAYS apply to any natural system and everything is in equilibrium.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Jeff:

Quote
Here is some more data points;

"Lockridge Type" or Principal Device – Tesla Self Run Motor Generator

Maybe you should discuss the reasons why this WON'T work, in your analysis of course!

You have got to be kidding!  How many experiments on the forums have you seen start with a big burst of enthusiasm only to peter out and die because the experimenter misunderstood his or her measurements or did not understand what they were doing?

You posted a light human interest article about something technical written by a non-technical reporter.  They are a dime a dozen.

You seem to be forgetting where the burden of proof lies.  How can you possibly forget that?  I don't have to prove anything.  You are the person that has to prove your free energy proposition WILL work, with your analysis and data, of course!

The reason it is different for you is that you are part of a group that is willing to sell these systems for profit.  You have a military background and you know that there are drawings and specifications for the most complicated avionics systems right down to the simplest sheet metal screw.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
I am going to comment again on what Aaron posted:

Quote
In any case, these chargers are absolutely a new breakthrough
technology as they are potential chargers and not current
chargers. This is of course completely different than pulse
chargers or other variations that simply chop current into smaller
punches, etc... they're not even in the same category.

Here Aaron is making the classic mistake that most people make when it comes to the "radiant chargers" that you can purchase from EnergenX and it also applies to any Bedini motor.  The sales pitch is that they "charge your battery with potential only, and there is barely any current."  They are pitched as "breakthrough" technology.

Life can be topsy-turvy sometimes.  When Aaron says "potential chargers" he is thinking about the good old voltage spike that a discharging inductor can produce.  That's what's inside an EnergenX "radiant charger." But the truth, the REAL TRUTH, is that "radiant chargers" and Bedini motors output PULSES OF CURRENT.  That's how discharging inductors work.  So when Aaron says "potential chargers" he really means a current-based charging system.  When Aaron says "not current chargers" he is referring to conventional battery chargers that output a voltage that results in current flowing into the battery.  So when Aaron says "not current chargers" what he is really trying to say is "not voltage-based chargers."  Life can indeed be topsy-turvy sometimes.

The notion that making use of a discharging inductor to charge batteries is unique and revolutionary is simply silly.  There are other companies that sell battery chargers based on the same technique.

Quote
You also have to consider that what the meter shows is not
what the machine is running on. The meter shows what is
being lost while the circuit is actually running on magnetic
current and the "amperage" is an incidental loss from the
line resistances, etc...

I have no clue what Aaron is saying here.  The wisest course of action here would be to ignore these statements because they don't really make any sense.

Quote
I'm confident that the electron current model of electricity is
completely false and I recognize this as an irrefutable fact when
looking at the scientific evidence and it is up to you and everyone
else to search the references and not just evidence but proof that
the model is flawed. So what you see on the meter is not what
you think it is. The current measured is an effect and is NOT the
cause.

Many people challenge the notion of electric current and the existence of electrons.  Think about the fact that up until just a few short years ago we watched TVs and computer monitors that were based on accelerating a beam of electrons onto a phosphor-coated vacuum tube.  I am not going to get into the current/electron debate on this thread.

Quote
It is thought that only "hot" electron current can charge the battery.
This is not so. Those lead ions can move in charging mode by simply
hitting it with impulses of potential (like the inductive spike of high
potential and little to theoretically no current
) and the short width
is evidence of no work there for practical purposes as all the TIME
is locked up inside of that voltage potential spike.

You supply that TIME POTENTIAL to something like a lead acid battery
and you wind up getting the time out of it in the form of work. Potential
in and work out.

"Hot current" and "cold current" is a false concept that only exists in the realm of free energy devotees.

"like the inductive spike of high potential and little to theoretically no current"

This is where Aaron doesn't get it, like many others.  That "inductive spike of high potential" is actually a CURRENT spike.  The mechanism behind a discharging inductor is CURRENT, and not potential.  That's why the "high potential spike" is reduced to a spike of less than one volt when you connect it to a big battery.  It's because the inductor is pumping CURRENT into the battery, not potential.

The biggest irony here is that Aaron is saying "theoretically no current" when in fact the whole thing is based on current first, and the voltage observed is a result of the current flow.

The "time potential" stuff is likely related to when Aaron talks about a discharging inductor as "compressed time potential."  It's a non-starter.  The right thing to do would be to get a complete understanding of how an inductor works.

Quote
In any case, an elephant that gets walking will keep walking when you
spike it's butt with a small impulse from a bullwhip. Not a perfect analogy
but a little bit can get a bit thing moving. Once the merry go round is
spinning, you can just hit it with your pinky to keep it going in that
direction. Anyway, this is a potential charge and why these spikes can
directly charge a battery without running current through them and they
will boil without all the heat that is normally associated with an equivalent
charging rate from a conventional hot current charger.
It desulfates and
rebuilds the plates in a way that no other chargers ever have.

The highlighted test above is wrong.  Every pulse of current from a discharging inductor going into a battery contains a finite measurable amount of energy.  A certain proportion of that energy will be lost as heat, and the rest will get converted into chemical energy in the battery.  It's just plain nuts and bolts.

Quote
I have charged the batteries with these machines, disconnected them
from the machine and the batteries continue to charge for an hour. REAL
CHARGE. Those lead ions are so heavy they have serious momentum and
that momentum will continue for a while giving the battery a real charge
when there is no circuit attached to provide any current. I doubt you
can get this same benefit with a hot charger as any hot charger I've ever
used and disconnected from a battery follows with an instant drop
on the voltage and not a continuous charge up.

I don't but any of the post-disconnect charging business.  Aaron would have to show some data to back up his claims.  I don't buy the "ion momentum" business.  You can open up a chemistry book, or in this day and age go online, and you can read the formulas for the chemical reactions that show what happens when a battery charges.  You need energy in the form of electric CURRENT to make the chemical reactions take place.

Quote
I admit I have only done this when I capture the spikes in a cap and
discharged the cap in impulses with a mechanical switch. That was the
first time I calculated about 1.5 cop almost 10 years ago. The second
time with these circuits was with an inverted solid state cap discharger
about 5 years ago.

There is no way that Aaron calculated 1.5 COP.  The opportunity is long gone, but if I could have seen his setup and his measurements and his data, I would most likely be able to find the error.

Quote
It should be easy enough for anyone to put a current sensing resistor like
0.25 ohms on the negative rail of the input battery. Put a scope across it
and use a data recording scope to log the dc mean and calculate the
joules drawn over x amount of time. I don't have the tektronix 3054c at
my disposal anymore but it can do 10,000 samples per screen shot. Those
can be dumped to a spreadsheet and sorted and can be analyzed on a
per waveform basis or calculated out over time to see exactly how many
joules of energy were expended from the input.

You don't need fancy DSOs to make very accurate measurements for your Bedini motor setup.  All that you need is a multimeter, some resistors, and a big capacitor.  Read the Bedini measurement thread on this web site for more information.

Quote
Then turn off the machine and disconnect the secondary battery and
draw a load at the right rate (c20 is probably what most people will
scream about) and also with a current sensing resistor and do the same
data capture until that battery is down to the voltage where it was
before it received a charge.
Use a resistive load on this battery instead
of an inductive load.

The highlighted text above shows a huge fail on Aaron's part.  Aaron thinks that you can drain a battery down to the same voltage you were at when you started the charging process and then compare energy in to energy out to calculate your COP.  His statement is actually totally ridiculous and assuming that he has been using this technique over the years, then all of his COP calculations based on this technique are pure junk.  My words are strong but they are true.  If anybody doubts me it can be taken up in a separate thread.  I am a little bit shocked.

Also, what's strange is that Aaron recently said this about relying on voltage measurements:

Quote
That is a tired and worn out argument. Those that know what
they're doing do not simply use voltage that shows up on a meter
to see how much energy there is. Work is drawn from the battery.

This has been repeated countless times and insinuating that this
is the method used to determine "overunity" is misleading and is
manipulation. Some people starting out will think voltage readings
means more than it does, I did in the beginning because I didn't
know better but this does NOT apply to those that have been
working on these projects for a while.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-11-27, 02:28:32 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Guest

Many people challenge the notion of electric current and the existence of electrons.  Think about the fact that up until just a few short years ago we watched TVs and computer monitors that were based on accelerating a beam of electrons onto a phosphor-coated vacuum tube.  I am not going to get into the current/electron debate on this thread.

If anybody doubts me it can be taken up in a separate thread.  I am a little bit shocked
.

MileHigh

MileHigh?  Is this thread about the Bedini 10-Coiler?  Or is it a rant against free energy terminologies?  Or is it simply an attack on Aaron?  As I see it you've got every right to call for better measurments.  The more so as there's money involved in this claim.  But there's absolutely no point in refuting a claim based on what you 'believe' any more than the free energy enthusiasts can claim something on belief.  So. While you call for more measurements - that's a good thing.  But if you're going to parade your 'opinion' and will brook no argument - then?  What the hell?  Shouldn't you also just open a blog?

This endless debate about voltage vs current and hot and cold electricity - is entirely irrelevant.  Voltage is a fact.  It's measurable.  And when voltage is measured on a closed circuit it produces current - as day follows night.  Hot electricy and cold electricity seem to be some distinction that's required - God knows why.  But since there's no official definition anywhere at all - then one can ignore it - I would have thought.  Together with the lack of definition applied to what they propose is 'radiant energy' - also used in some kind of way that makes it distinct from its general context.

I keep reading here to get some idea about how the 'opposition' think - relating to this general 'free energy' movement.  Frankly I see as much if not more bias and bigotry here than I see in that movement.  The difference is this.  Your own stance DEMANDS support or say nothing.  Actually.  Having said that, maybe it's not that different.

Regards,
Rosemary

And may I add.  The fact that electrons can be used in any context at all has never been debated.  Apply enough energy and you can do just about anything with them - in the same way that you move light in any direction and at just about any intensity.  The question has only been what makes up current flow.  And that CANNOT be argued to be electrons.  Anymore than anyone can still argue that the Earth is flat.  But it is - unquestionably - correctly referenced as the movement of charge.  Your reference to this point to advance your argument is spurious.  And better leave out reference if you don't want it challenged.  You're definitely hitting below the belt. 
   
Group: Guest
Rosemary,

The issues were brought up by Aaron in the other 10-coiler thread so I am responding here.  Current also produces voltage.  They certainly go hand in hand.  Sometimes voltage produces current.

I make some strong statements and if someone wants to argue the points that's fine.

I am not going to get into the whole electron debate like I said.  Your stance on that DEMANDS support or say nothing.  I don't care.

MileHigh
   
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, 01:35:22