Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[a.king21]

AG

When I said 10MW I meant 100 MEGAWATTS.  That is what 100 MW means and that is the size of the transformers we were intending Kapanadze to work with. I don't care if you don't believe me.  I brought you the Aquarium 2 to study so lets leave it at that.

[rickfriedrich]

Hoppy,
I think if you guys listen a little bit more to what I have actually shared that you would be surprised how much we may agree in things. This is why I am talking so much about assumptions. You can call it sermons or whatever, but mostly assumptions stand in the way of progress.
Now I have been making at distinction between the words mainstream and conventional. While these words are often interchangeable, I'm wanting to make an important difference between mainstream theory which assumes various limitations of focus and possibilities with technology and energy. But Conventional usage and products actually contain here and there all the processes that mainstream low level popular opinion denies. People do not realize this because the same things are just repeated over and over again so people just assume mainstream theories are absolute and exhaustive.
So mainstream people are not experts at all. Any expert promoting the limits of mainstream theories are either lying or are not expert at all. They are merely ignorant of existing technology that is over 100 years old. They are merely college level, and probably having limited experience with real world technology. Yes, many people specialize and never see but a sample of what is out there.
Again, I am not saying that conventional processes and understanding is false. I am saying that many of the limiting claims of people are just not true. Any study of the history of science shows how wrong each generation it in this respect. It is laughable. Like Kirchhoff is not false, but merely a special circumstance which just happens to be what most people limit themselves to. Do you see what I mean?
As for Bedini, he never really properly understood battery charging because he never took the time to do proper controlled testing over any length of time. He demonstrated himself to be the worst scientist I have ever seen. Mostly 5 minute tests. It was always people like me that did thousands of tests over long periods of time. Then he would write about it as if he had done the work. As far as I have found in my extensive research on him, that around 2011 he became committed changing his story and giving out all sorts of false information to people as I have mentioned. You cannot rely one what he has shared unfortunately. I'm not saying you have done that, as I speak to everyone in general. Be careful. That is why no one is to be considered an authority. Even Tesla was way off in several things. This is why I say we have to "test all things and hold fast to the truth." But what John said about batteries and charging was vastly conflicting, and many times you didn't understand the context of his statement unless you were in the shop with us the hour he made that comment, as it was about some context he didn't properly share. This was really bad.
If I understand you in your using the word "vagaries" that you are thinking that there is just a very unexpected and inexplicable thing happening in the battery and maybe not even predictable or repeatable. Well, I have been at this 15 years full time and this is very real science that is just more than mainstream practice. I have long demystified all this stuff and Bedini's wild bar talk storytelling.  But batteries are only the basic first stage experience in this tech. It does not depend on using a battery to experience these processes. I'm personally burned out with batteries and motors but that is all that is permissible for the public.

Rick,
Interesting post. You have expended much time and words attempting to show the mainstream experts the error of their ways by applying conventional electrical thought and measurement processes to their experiemnts. Some time back, I mentioned Peukerts Law in respect of battery capacity. I'm sure that you like me have run Bedini wheel energisers for years on end using the same source and charge LA batteries in rotation, (as taught by John), whilst doing work charging batteries and doing mechanical work. By studying Peukerts Law, it can readily be appreciated why this is possible and on the surface appears surprising and exciting to the unitiated. So, in this respect, I understand why you are excited, as I was to experience what could be done using this type of tech. Also, like you, I have applied this to practical uses running modified motors with more powerful mechanical and solid state setups. The only difference between us is that I understand that conventional principles still apply and what we are really doing is exploiting the vagaries of batteries by carefully tuning loads to the device and as John correctly told us, use decent batteries that are well desulfated by conditioning. We are on a similar page Rick but I choose not to conduct a sermon on the issue. 

[rickfriedrich]

A.king,
The transformer looks a lot smaller than a 100MW transformer. What was the specs on that one?

Re coil measurement:  I was asking Kapanadze if special components were required.  My team needed a 100 MW set up. Maybe in builds of 10 MW.  Kapanadze said the only requirement was the cable or wire required which would have to be accurately measured. Then he seemed to think that ordinary off the shelf components were ok.
(In Rick's case he states that just one cm out and you can lose the effect.)
I enclose a photo of some of the transformers we were going to use  to input into the grid .

[AlienGrey]

AG

When I said 10MW I meant 100 MEGAWATTS.  That is what 100 MW means and that is the size of the transformers we were intending Kapanadze to work with. I don't care if you don't believe me.  I brought you the Aquarium 2 to study so lets leave it at that.

thanks for the reply, but no it wasn't that I didn't believe you i just thought you were or might be comparing the difference between grid hardware and TK's efficient capabilities.

Concerning TKs device I think I have a good idea how it works, but that doesn't mean i know exactly.
regards AG

[rickfriedrich]

G,
Wow, I appreciate the effort.

Well I think this comment from me was not the most catching of what I have claimed here. Nevertheless I see why you say this.

Haha, I did prove it already. I proved it to myself in the real world. How could I prove it to anyone else? At the meeting this was one of the least impressive demonstrations and wasn't a big priority. But the guys did put all the caps on the coils and arrange the coils. They were satisfied with the demonstrations, but most of them already had these kits and understood that they could do that already from their own testing. They are on their own private forums doing such things. The meeting wasn't about trying to prove OU to skeptics, but to better understand the principles of OU which I am striving to better teach on each day.

Now you still are not expecting me to try and prove this was 8W for 3/4W input through video, pictures or word (well I did say so in word)? How could I possibly do that? Put meters on all the LEDs and somehow try and show all of them at once, while showing each connection? And how could a video or pictures prove anything when someone could easily enough just have some unseen additional transmitter broadcasting? And people could do the same thing to make a disproof claim. People can fake videos or be mistaken. I will never encourage people to merely believe what I say I have experienced. And putting a bunch of meters around such a setup would definitely affect the broadcast.

So I don't refrain from proving this, but I refrain from trying to fool myself or others in claiming to try and prove something that would be impossible to prove over this medium.

Anyway, everyone at the meeting was plenty convinced that there was more than 3/4W output on some 90 coils, with the potential to have 500 coils do the same thing. Again, let's say we divide the 0.75W into all these coils. Was there more than 0.04W per large 3W bulb (0.6W total) and 0.002W for each smaller LED (0.15W total). That would be like the 3W bulbs only running at 12V@ 0.0033A (3.3ma) and 3V@ 0.0007A (0.7ma or 700ua). Of course the meters show these A numbers a few decimals to the left, but anyone there could see that these bigger bulbs do not blind you with the low numbers if we are assuming nothing more than input power dispersed in these 90 so bulbs. The little red ones are also much brighter than those numbers would allow. We run them at various brightness, and under 1ma gives very little response.

But again, while the goal for many people is to prove OU, that is not the goal of many people who have long experienced OU. You guys are new at this and for whatever reasons have not understood how OU works or stumble yourselves by this confusion of looking for someone to prove OU over the internet. I also don't believe and know for a fact that many people are only pretending to disbelieve OU.
Most people who have OU and are using it are not going to be online talking about it. They are either off making money with it in various ways, or are private people not wanting to draw attention to themselves. Many people who have trying to show something have just be ignored or rejected, so why invite that trouble? The most important YouTube videos on the subject get very low views, and a good number of them are right here on this OU forum. All the good stuff just gets buried in disinfo diversion from it. And many other mistaken or fake OU claims get the attention.

Anyway, G, I did not come here to try and prove OU. I came here because someone else tried to do that against my advice. I came here to teach all of you the principles of OU so that you could do that in countless ways. And that was done. Hopefully I'll get all this more organized over the next few days to finalize that teaching in basic form. But I did give you the same level of claim that Itsu has. And I did this to show all of you your mistakes in your double standard assumptions. According to your expectations on this thread I fulfilled the conditions because a god number of those 18 people, and others from other meetings (California, Lansing, and Canada) are reading this thread over the last few weeks (and some of them have "Confirmation of OU devices and claims" of what I showed them and what they have personally experienced). Others have just my kit. Yet you believe one person's claims that is not in the real world in front of you. If Itsu had been to my meetings and then replicated the same, then what would you say to that? Probably that it was not proof, because it really wouldn't be proof. My point is that all this is on the same level and it doesn't matter how many people speak for or against a claim, or show pictures or videos. If I show you my boat running while charging another battery at the same rate, or a fan, or whatever, can that prove anything when done with video? I showed the black box running for an hour with video. The input stayed the same for an hour. Can you run a 6W load for an hour and the 12AH battery stay the same while such loads were also being powered from that? No. So what kind of proof are you expecting here? And why the double standard?

Hi Rick,
I knew you would jump on it, that is mainly why I worded it like that.   
Here is one of the most catching comments I have read on this forum.
"There were 15 total as I had 4 smaller coils with larger bulbs as well (one under the table and 4 at the top at one point--10 big coils, 4 smaller, and 1 on a ferrite rod). There were 75 small coils with LEDs totaling over 2W. So we have at least 8W of measured power with 0.75W or less input."
It is a pity if you refrain from proving it and it remains a claim. 
Gyula