Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[rickfriedrich]

Dave, I would be interested to know your last name. I know many Daves.

I wouldn't have been reluctant at all with that question. Maybe you mixed the question with something else. I did not say that as I have not had to top off the primary battery. Maybe I said that some people have occasionally done that. There are various ways of making the fan system and some of them would require that to fully sustain rotation. No, I said in the earliest years, already by early 2005 I had already solved my energy needs. I even showed some of the old systems I had run continuously at that very meeting. I do still sell the DVDs of that meeting where I shared that. So you must of missed that and misunderstood whatever was said. The one example was an old multicolor ceiling fan that I had run all summer back and forth on two batteries. I just had a knifeswitch on them to rotate the batteries every 12 hours. It even had a light on it for the trigger resistance if I wanted that on during the evening. I also did a side by side comparison of an exactly the same fan with the blades at the same pitch and same speed with the AC input on the one. And my monopole fan was 3 times less energy input while I could always rotate the batteries around. This was similar to John's fan.

No, topping up a battery is not self-looped or self-running. Now long before that I had done different kinds of shuffling of energy with capacitors. I did thousands of things over the years. But I found that you really don't want to push current into batteries that way because it is not good for the batteries and is usually not very efficient. It was always better to rotate batteries around. But that is old for me, as I have talked about with the third stage process where the input battery can remain charged. I was talking about that on my forums from time to time but only a few people understood that, like my one student in the video I posted the other week. So really we were doing that back in 2005, and after that I just went bigger to the lawnmower and cars and boats. Even though I could do advanced things, I always had some basic setups that I continuously demonstrated to the public so that they could really see the basic system could do a lot. When I did the lawnmower people could not believe it. The monopole motor version didn't have a lot of power obviously, but it was a portable generator that I did go up a fair size hill where I lived when the batteries had sat all winter and were fully discharged. Mind you I had to rotate them several times in that parade I went through. But that was impressive. But the window motor on that lawnmower had real power, and that later went into the boat. The boat was run for three years with just rotating the batteries around. All these and many more were so the public could see this and it would be easy to replicate. Nothing hidden, no advanced circuits.

So as I said, to have a one battery back popper was more involved and not as good for the batteries. It required fine tuning and a third winding in most cases. Apparently I don't have OU unless I have that. So running a boat for three years is not OU to some people here. Charging a massive bank of batteries with a small system where you are seeing 200+ times the output over time is not OU unless you are looping around. Well, I haven't got a clear response for anyone here if rotating batteries is acceptable as OU.

Hello Rick,
In an attempt to clear up some confusion, I would like some clarification on your idea of 'self-looping'.  I was at the 2011 Renaissance Charge Conference in Coeur D' Alene, Idaho.  I spoke to you at one point asking you about your Bedini inspired devices.  The topic was the batteries.  I asked you if you ever had to recharge your primary batteries or if you could keep them fully charged with rotation.  You were very reluctant to tell me, but did say that you needed to top the source charge off on your batteries with an external charger on occasion.  This was only 8 years ago.  You say you've been self looping for 15 years.  My understanding of self looping would be a self sustaining system, no more input from you, the operator.  Can you define self looping in the context previously stated by you?  Does your definition of self looping involve adding external energy to the system on occasion?
Thanks for the clarification,
Dave

[rickfriedrich]

Nick,
Those were nicer words than usual for you. I don't know your videos because how would I? I don't even know your name or where to look. But I do have a lot of experience on forums since the beginning of the internet as we now know it. I was owner of many groups and moderator. And I have a very wide network of friends all over the world who read these forums. I have a good idea of the tricks people play and agendas. Some of you guys are more obvious than others. Yeah some people just have personality issues, I get it. But I see the subtle things happening. I see that these forums are all hacked. They are useless because no matter what people do your type of guys will always be filling up pages with things that go nowhere. Why not build upon what you know about OU and just pass on what you know. I have always done that since 2004. So you guys here and on OUR can't get one replication finalized? That is ridiculous. I really doubt that after all this time you don't have OU. Because it isn't that hard considering the knowledge you have form this forum alone. So it is obvious that you are just data mining in wanting people to work for you for free. That's fine, but then you turn around and attack them after they gift you such information. You act like you don't believe something but you actually do know it is true. Obviously there are a lot of crazies and mistaken people as well. But not everyone. But your type just ruins something that could be so much better. The forums that have policy of requiring people to be polite are far better. I really can't understand why rudeness is tolerated.

Now I don't spend all this time writing for you at all Nick. It is for other people who are reading this. And I am organizing all of this for a reason so people can understand these games and how people respond. I wouldn't do a single video for you Nick. All you will do is twist anything. You go back and forth from saying a nice or ok thing to vicious attack and mocking. I know exactly what it is. It is trolling. I exposed it here and you guys flipped out.  The fact that you have so many posts makes everyone wonder what you have been doing all this time then. That is consistent with a Troll who is here for the longterm to ensure that OU never goes anywhere. If someone says something good, you will just drown it out with diversions, rudeness, or whatever it takes to get ride of them.

I don't do videos for forums. I do videos for customers and for people who not only ask for them but benefit from them. You insult and say nothing good about my videos. Why would I do another. Everything you ask for is in my videos. Give me another week to finish up my organizing of my videos on the new page and you will be able to see the more important ones. Even the video I posted here was not for you guys but for the first meeting I had in NC, as I only showed the second group it running and I wanted to show the first group what it was like running.

The point is Nick, no matter what I do, you will still say some diverting thing. You don't care about real world demonstrations. Everyone knows that I have done many real world demonstrations. You don't care about them, but what cyberworld demonstrations. I have given many of those as well. And I gave you just enough to test you out. Yes I did the video for others, but I did the bulbs just bright enough to get these exact reactions out of you. And it shows everyone your double standard. You can talk all day long about LEDs being useless for indicating anything, but that would be the case for the tiny ones. These big ones are not able to be bright at all when you divide them by the input. I was forcing you guys to misjudge me in doing that. Anyone who works with those LEDs know that if you believed a video was not faked then that video would prove OU in the right sense of the terms. Yes I could have put a meter there, but I wanted to show you that you don't always have to have a meter to see OU. I really don't care what you think of me for doing that. But I know what many more people watching this thread are telling me about all this. Everyone can see who won these debates here. It is the one calling for realism, that is proof in the real world, rather than unverifiable measurements in fantasy land.

Like I said, if people were genuinely polite and earnest in their search for OU I would share more to help them personally. And many times I deal with them privately. I talk on the phone many hours a day with these people. But you guys are hear to mock and disprove and twist and gas  I posted that important book from Barrett last night. I spent a long time doing that for all of you. That is fundamental. It is exactly what I am talking about. I answered G there finally. You all thought that I was just avoiding that subject. But I had to get the time to do that as it took some hours. That is the foundation for OU. The historical foundation for why it has been suppressed. The mathematically reason why it is suppressed. And the evidence amount to proof for OU. You won't look at that. You won't want to admit what it proves. You don't want to see that THAT was the reason why I made the kit as I did with the small leds. You just want OU you say to us. But you don't want to learn what is the reason for it. I have been showing these things Barrett and Kron wrote about all those years ago. The things Tesla was doing way before that. I have done the very large OU demonstrations. But now is the time to learn the subtle details, because when it comes to RF you can't afford to not know these subtle details. Do you really think I could be fine with people getting hurt?

I still have to process a 3+ hour video before I do any more, and that one doesn't have meters on it. I have a lot of work to do on the new website, so I will not be able to do another video for a few weeks. I have no interest in trying to prove something with meters. If I show meters it is for explaining something specifically, but not to prove OU. If I did a meter shot in a way that you would assume OU then I would be encouraging the idea that people should believe videos. So now I see you are finally getting it: "The idea is not to prove or disprove anything, but just to observe the results." Very good.

Actually, I have only every let my customers share their observations. That is how my battery chargers and kits sell. I don't advertise. So I let people tell others what they have discovered. I don't do anything in this work but what good people ask for. They don't ask me ever to try and prove OU on the video. Just, can you sell this? Can you talk about this? I show scope shots all the time, and usually have the amp meter and volt meters on.

Anyway, the new website should be of value.

    Rick: Ok, well, I like the tone of your last comments and post. They are easier to deal with, than previously. 
     You know that I don't know all about you, what you've done, or shown, or said. But, I wonder if you know anything about me, other than being a "troll", that is. Have you looked at my videos, at all?  No? So, we are both lost in space, as far as that goes. Or what itsu has done, or TK, or Hoppy, and other replicators of these supposed free energy contraptions. What guys like me have done through the years here, also. Hoppy and I have over 8000 posts between us here, and at what we call the asylum. TK has almost twice as many posts, or even more than that, including other sites. Maybe that is not important to you, but, you must recognize that WE are not trolls, not believing in free energy, and doing what we can to disrupt it, when possible. Just the opposite.
     I have recommended that you make a video, for us. Not for your customers, clients, or those that you've deal with before, this time.   Will you do that, for us?  Please... 
   And yes, showing updated improved scope close-ups, and output readings, as mentioned by the other guys, here. So, that we can see the scope readings, with all the bulbs facing the camera this time.  I'm sure that would please everyone following you on this venture. As that video would be for us. And anyone else interested.
   You see, I have watched your videos. But you haven't watched mine, or I'd know it. 
   The idea is not to prove or disprove anything, but just to observe the results. That's all. That is what I try to do on my videos.  And TK does with his, "is this OU".  No claims, just showing what is happening. No need to get personal, or judgemental. 
   I am not blind, or dumb, and can see that you MAY have something there, worth pursuing.   
   Pura Vida,           
                   NickZ   

[rickfriedrich]

Most of my customers are those who only have the battery chargers and not the motor kits. Why would you assume that? Actually for several years Renaissance was only the chargers so those old videos were at that time. 

Maybe you can explain why people who have OverUnity systems running in their homes still need battery chargers. I thought you just swapped them back and forth while running the load and they "self sustain".

One of those videos shows the amazing charging of a "non rechargeable" 6 volt battery. But I have an even more amazing video for you, where I use a bedini-like motor system running on a single AAA battery to charge up a C battery.  Is that OU?

[NickZ]

  Rick:   
  Can we just dispence with personal issues and focus on this project? For once.   I can see that you know nothing about me, nor the rest of us that you are still considering as trolls. Ok, no problem. I am done pleading. You won the debate, I forfit.   I can see when I am waisting my time.    I have provided my full name to you as can be found on youtube. Some of the other guys on this forum, can be found there as well But, you won't look, to see what we've done or anything about us.And considering that you won't "do videos for forums, I think that pretty much sums it up.   No further questions. Thanks for your kind reply. I will not trouble you again, as I can see that you are just much too busy to cooperate with "guys like me". I understand now.     NickZ

[rickfriedrich]

T,
Like I said, you just showed up with a video link and a question. It was purposely a trick question. I don't play such games. If it had been one of the other guys who had spent a lot of time discussing things that would have been different. But you just expected way too much and then were so offended and even attacked me for that. You still are overstating this drama that you created. You then even try to trap me in a riddle. You still are trying to make too much out of videos. You then say later that I needed to watch other videos to see more details. That's just the point, you really never know what people are doing fully, because we are not there. Measurements are limited in videos. Yeah you can show a few things, but asking whether it was OU missed the whole ongoing debate. I had just settled the point that you can't prove OU over the internet, then you mysteriously show up asking if a video proves OU. Looks like purposeful timing. Again, your insistence that I watch your videos and how important you are, did not encourage me to take you seriously. Maybe you once had something important to show, but since you dropped by I haven't seen anything but illegitimate pride or ego and constant attack. Since you were not even here most of the time it was really out of place. Nick and others I could tolerate, but you are something else 

As for my OU, not sure what you even refer to. Did I try and prove OU with a video? Did you not read the title? Just because I don't try and prove OU in videos or through a Forum, doesn't mean that I can't teach and help people experience OU through information sharing. That way there can be "Confirmation of OU devices and claims, but that personally in the real world. Hey Joe, I did this and that. OK Bill, I may try that sometime. Do you have to make forums more than that? Why so serious? Why so assuming? Why so demanding? Why not just share ideas and be thankful for others sharing in this research? We all make claims, why get so bent out of shape about it? Just take a downer and chill 

If you read Barretts book I posted you will learn more about advanced processes that relate to what I am doing. I am teaching people to become aware of such things with very subtle changes in special relationships. You are talking about primary level ideas as if that is the whole picture of reality. You don't yet understand what is necessary for OU to even happen. If you do then you don't act like it.

So if you are the man and wisdom with die with you, then explain to us all how Barrett is wrong and all his referenced evidence is wrong? If you can't then tell my why my coil relationships would not actually demonstrate exactly what he pointed out, which was what conventional theory was deliberately ignoring (which was illustrated in the kinds of things you and G were focused on)? If you were really serious then you would do some real homework and consider all those facts. I'm sure G is at least reading that and pondering it. It may take a month before he comments about it, or maybe he won't. But I really don't expect you to take such things seriously. He is only a leading electrodynamicist.

I hope you noticed that that string of 20 NE-2 neons in series with 16 of them lit up (90 volts each) was just being held by my fingers at one end, and not connected to anything at the other end. Like I said, a powerful e-field emitter that can and will wreak havoc with instrumentation. And it could be made even stronger quite easily but then I wouldn't want to run it in the house.
Is that OU?
Back to my three videos and the questions for RF. The first video shows a great gain in VARs over input power in Watts. The phase shift measurement that _indicated_ in phase was an error introduced by the current measuring method I demonstrated which introduced a phase shift of its own. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was Overunity in VARs, and whether or not 1) he had measurements he could show of his own, and 2) whether he would point out the phase shift error as Itsu did.
The second video shows overunity measurements in the Partzman bft, and _fully accounts_ for the phase shift problem with its careful layout and use of non-inductive precision load and current sense resistors. The phase shift is evident and correctly displayed on the scopes that I and others have used, both low and high end equipment. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was Overunity measured in power dissipated by a noninductive resistor in a situation of high, known phase shift incorporating a resonating coil as demonstrated there. Unfortunately RF has been too busy (typing and talking?) to view that very significant demonstration that most of the rest of you have seen.
The third video shows overunity in TinMan's bifilar LED driver circuit by having the load and the internal LEDs, 4 in all, shining brilliantly with ZERO current shown on two inline ammeters, even in the most sensitive 2000 microamp range. I used cheap meters but this effect has been reproduced with all kinds of meters cheap and expensive. My Fluke 87-III acts the same way and is even more sensitive. I wanted to know if RF's Overunity was this kind of Overunity, where meters indicate zero current supplied to a resonating loop but the load is still running along happily.

Three possible types of Overunity indications. But RF's is somehow different? And his measurements somehow more valid? OK, I'm willing to consider that... with evidence. Unfortunately, walls of gobbletext and anecdotes about other people's work done in the misty past do not count as evidence for me.