Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[rickfriedrich]

The first video is old news. I have exposed the first part years ago. The second part the guy has no idea what he is talking about. It is a perfect example of a guy who misunderstands the whole thing. Some of these guys are intentionally lying.
The second video is my friend's video and now after watching it to try and determine why you may be mentioning it I see that this is another clear example of Bedini telling more disinformation. I will do a careful review of it later as claiming altitude makes the kind of difference he claims is bogus. This is a very bad claim and is enough of a reason then to distrust anything he would say otherwise. This factually not true. It is true that day and night makes a very slight difference and altitude could make similar differences, but this is a fundamental misunderstanding of this kind of motor/energizer.

Anyway, good point even though you didn't say what point. If I get a chance I may go over the other one in detail if people need me to. Let's just say that if it was so clear what he was proving would anyone really dislike it? Although what he did by putting the fake magnet motor first was dishonest because that wasn't a Bedini fan. If you want to make a magnet motor you have to change the circle magnet loop like Howard Johnson did. I had his train for years in that shop and it did do that sort of thing. It is easy to make a magnet motor that does no extra work.

You guys might be interested in this John Badini video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4tO0kBOzqk&t=116s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4

[AlienGrey]

Haha  I'm not worried about you guys. I know this is also a places to have some fun and not get too serious. My British friend may not agree in relation to that. For me, I call everyone out on things, including myself. I don't worry when people attack or make major mistakes because we can all learn from such things. FYI, I have never talked to a hard skeptic that I talked to for any length of time without them shaking my hand once they got to know me. I always win the debates because winning not concurring but actually making sure we all benefit and improve in the process. And of course I don't debate about things I haven't thoroughly investigated and felt compelled to press. All other things I have everything to learn, even things I have mastered I always have more to learn. And we learn also about human nature. Haha, so even if people hate me they at least find me interesting. 

As for AG, I think he may be a little ambiguous with his words because I am not sure at times the exact meaning. So I don't take the words seriously then.   So what about this then What do you make of these kind words then ? and i quote
Offline a.king21  Stop being such an insulting *@*(*(@@   Why not show us YOUR OU device.      Now it just seems like he's sitting back having a beer and laughing maybe. That could be possible and I leave room for that. Maybe he'll wake up and realize that didn't make sense what I said yesterday. But my last response to him showed that he didn't know Tesla or John at all, or how all this works. And I really didn't expect that from him. Not even sure of what he was exactly saying to me in his last response. Was the questioning about my picture one of sarcasm, or was he asking if I was the same guy? Or was he trying to make a point that because I was beside Bedini that therefore that was a bad thing? I really don't know. People need to be a little more clear because they end up being misunderstood. When people are ambiguous I just ignore what they say because what can I do about? Judge their intentions but what I guess? No. So maybe he is just really sloppy with his words. Certain by insulting A that was not good. What was the point of that?

As for sticking to the tech side, well that really isn't what all this is about. 90-95% of this is psychological, games, fun, diversions, fallacies, assumptions, unverifiable facts, etc.  There is no purely factual context in cyberland. That is why I have burst this bubble of deception. There is no way to prove or disprove OU on the internet. Come to grips with it people. Wow, there should be a big load off people's backs now. All this is just information gathering, and otherwise fun and games. While this can have very serious implications it doesn't have to be boring either. It should be civil but it never has been when there is no moderation. So you make do within that.

Again, I don't worry what people say because I really am not trying to prove anything. No I can point to some things that can prove a point, but they are only in the real world.
Strange that profile you invented of me considering I asked you about the difference between positive energy and negative energy is it just the impulses or do the impulses have to be negative with respect to earth on a scope ?
You also referred to a sentence of mine concerning 'A.', later Mr king started trolling my self I assume he made an unintentional connection I was referring to with my self and kids when we installed and buried our ground rod the word paranoia or bipolar ..springs to mind. Re your pic nothing intended I assure you I just don;t have time for double remote meanings, sorry to disappoint but there is no malice a forethought as far as I am concerned,
I point to historical facts that you can verify for yourself. I pointed out DVD7 when I could have kept that to myself. This was a big revelation both in regards to the teaching and the fact that Aaron never mentioned it (especially in the Advanced book advertised on every screen in this forum) and that John is quoted as absolutely contradicting what he published on the front of the book several years later about his big 1971 lie claim. So no one else pointed such significant things out online. And everyone would have been deceived unless I showed this very good and very bad thing from this DVD. So that is now two significant things I have proven by means of the internet, but which merely drew attention to the real world facts that you can all verify for yourselves. So I am proving things to you that are very relevant. I don't do this to gain trust but people trust me for such reasons. And as you say that I do take the time to try and help. I am not emotionally reactionary either. In person you would all give me a hug if you knew me.  But online I can be unsparing. You can interpret my words according to the tone you want to hear. But I say many things in jest as you can see and I don't take things as personally as people would think. Even Aaron, I can laugh about his picture of me, and I can still point out some good things he has done. I am not reactional to people. I react to illogic and fallacy. As for motives, who really knows why people say and do what they do? There is no  reason to trust people over the internet. I have probably only met a few of you guys on this thread but I still don't know you. I don't think you even know each other. But you foolishly believe each other so easily, and disbelieve just as much. And I just shake my head 

Anyway, there is nothing more to say. You guys have everything now. If you start with what I wrote yesterday then you can proceed with caution. But if you continue to ignore that and play the chasing after circuits in hope of finding gold game then you are just running around in mainstream circuit loops that you will always pay for. Yes it is addicting to just spend your time making efficiency improvement circuits. It is a hobby that none of you can really justify to your wives. Is it really worth it to hang out for years on forums and have nothing to show for it? I don't have time for that. I've taken time to share all this in hope that it will do someone good. But I must go back to the real world and help real people where I can. So I can't help you guys if you are not willing to read and apply that foundational starting point. It may be too much to expect people to change their foundations and actually do some work rather than just copy what someone else has made in a circuit. I will never do that because I want you guys to really learn how to make all the free energy systems. Just build your house upon the rock and not the sand (which is what you guys are doing, and every year the water washes everything away).

[rickfriedrich]

AG,
Ok looking back at that comment I can see this is another case in point that I read it the opposite way than you intended. I thought you were saying JB was saying no grounding. Anyway, the case in point is that you are not taking the time to write clearly. Even in the rest of the statement you made I didn't really understand what you were meaning. We can't be and don't want to be inside your head man!  The reason I thought you were speaking against grounding was because of your previous attack against A.King when he just made a small point about grounding. Then you attacked in with a bunch of statements that made no sense. I think you either need to take more time to type a little longer or get some help if you can't see this problem. To say A.king is trolling you also makes no sense. What was that about? You were the one that attacked him for no reason. I just don't get what is going on here.

As for the question, what do you mean by "in respect to the earth on a scope?" Not following here what the question is. Difference between positive and negative energy is it just the impulses? The impulse creates a negative experience prior to the current flow at switch turn on and after switch turn off (which is like another switch on as the inductor becomes a source charge itself). The negative is not the spike but the spike is the result after the event(s). Oh, I thought you were referring to the negative probe and connection to the earth/ground. So maybe you were asking about the scope wave going negative?

Strange that profile you invented of me considering I asked you about the difference between positive energy and negative energy is it just the impulses or do the impulses have to be negative with respect to earth on a scope ?
You also referred to a sentence of mine concerning 'A.', later Mr king started trolling my self I assume he made an unintentional connection I was referring to with my self and kids when we installed and buried our ground rod the word paranoia or bipolar ..springs to mind. Re your pic nothing intended I assure you I just don;t have time for double remote meanings, sorry to disappoint but there is no malice a forethought as far as I am concerned,

[rickfriedrich]

AG,
I decided to transcribe part of this video you mentioned. This is a flat out lie John told in 2015 or 2016. Starting at Minute 7:25:

"Your voltage goes, 300 volts, exactly the height of the atmosphere that the coil's at." "So if the coil is at a higher elevation you'll get a" "You'll get a higher voltage. The gradient's different." "I moved it 2300 feet to find out. From sea level." "What is the number of the gradient 150V per meter?" "Yeah, something like that. It's close."

[Problem is that he had just said that he moved it to 2300 feet and it was 300V. If the voltage is 150V per meter for the spike above sea level then 2300 feet (700 meters) would be around 100,000V spike. The sea level would be when he would go twice a year to see his sister in Seattle, and the 2300 feet would be Hayden Idaho where he lived and the shop was. John never went anywhere else and didn't fly after two crashes. The problem with this is that the spike has nothing to do with the altitude as anyone can see. John got 300V spikes in the shop with those machines at 12V input. The spike has to do with the rate of change in the switching as well as the intensity (or amperage) of the impulse. I have made way more of these machines than John has and have run them all over the country and found the spike to be the same at sea level in Hollywood Florida, in Hayden Idaho where he was, in California, Texas, North Carolina, Michigan, Indiana, Chicago, in most US States actually, Canada, Germany, Denmark, England, etc. They all show the same spike that is according to the rate of change. What John is confusing here is coils with antennas above ground. The potential difference between ground and meters above ground can make such difference in voltage. But merely holding a coil above ground and running the circuit above ground is not making a potential difference unless you had an actual connection to the ground to have such a difference. This would almost seem to be an example of John being drunk. But his speech does not indicate this. I cannot explain why he would lie like this. His next reference to Peter continues on this bar talk story telling.]

"And what area had a lot to do with it." "If you go grab Peter Lindemann, and Peter will tell you, we built identical machines. Mine worked, he went up north, his didn't work. He brought his machine back to my place and it worked."

You guys might be interested in this John Badini video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtGz4QHJ0e4

[rickfriedrich]

Mario,
A series resonant tank circuit is where the capacitor and inductor are in series in the circuit. This is the usual way we run the transmitter because of the gate driver. This is A. B is a parallel resonant tank circuit because the capacitor and inductor are parallel to each other in the circuit. The coil and capacitor are not in series with each other in a parallel tank, they are parallel. These people are confused. It appears also that mainstream understanding of what is happening between these two is mistaken, especially about the dielectric. See Stienmetz on the subject. The misunderstanding results from the inability to account for the actual gain in these tanks.

Hi Rick,


I did read your reply after I said it clicked, I haven't replied yet because I first wanted to be able able apply it on my circuit to see if I've actually reached the moron level .
In an earlier post (quote below) you explained how to power the primary of your wireless kit. Sorry for this stupid question, but some people say series tank when they actually mean a parallel tank, because the coil and capacitor are actually in series closed upon themselves. But just to be sure, did you mean A or B of the attached schematic?


thanks,
Mario