A very simple circuit that lights a CFL and also charges a battery:
Looks like it works :)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=EPoJ9gCk2Rk
A replication that works too ..
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Hri3emvN2Jk&watch_response
The discussion and details are here :
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2255-imhoteps-radiant-oscillator-video.html
Lets have some replications (without "improvements" please).
I would like to see someone design a circuit like this that could be attached to the power meter on a home. So that when power is being drawn, the collapsing field is then fed back to the meter. This should help drop the energy usage by about at least 80%.
This should also work for power supply's from solar, windmill or any other power source.
We would just need to build larger coils and larger relays or use a setup this size and have one built into every power outlet with return leads going back to the main source.
Get used to it...This is an overunity motorless Bendi CF cold fusion cycle circuit. Inductive
collapse pulses are sent back into a battery to recharge it. The relay with a shorting contact
across it is the way an automobile electromechanical horn works. The ignition transformer steps
12V up to 14KVac. I'm somewhat surprised the fluorescent bulb unit survives - I think there may
be MIB attack point there though.
It would be very desireable to replace the relay capacitor and contact combo with an NE555 oscillator
and either a Bipolar 2n3055 transistor with a base resistor or an IR511 Power FET. Someone should
then try substituting a 120volt-to12volt stepdown transformer reversed for the ignition transformer then
operate the bulb on a std. 110V sixty hertz square wave. :D
What is needed is two 12Volt latching relays to swap batteries and a microcontroller and program to
show prove permanent "on" operations via the Bedini CF cycle. BTW there is no such thing as radiant
energy...but there is CF.
Guys wake up.
This is nothing more than a power converter.
No radiant energy, no cold fusion.
Besides, the lamp will last very short period of time like this as will the relay.
You end up with a ride to town to replace them.
All at the cost of energy.
If the 'inventors' really believe that this has something to do with over unity or free energy, let them show some measurements.
Quote from: robbie47 on August 03, 2008, 02:00:24 PM
Guys wake up.
This is nothing more than a power converter.
No radiant energy, no cold fusion.
Besides, the lamp will last very short period of time like this as will the relay.
You end up with a ride to town to replace them.
All at the cost of energy.
If the 'inventors' really believe that this has something to do with over unity or free energy, let them show some measurements.
hrmm a power converter that provides me with usable light and charges a battery (all at a fraction of the power consumed by a "normal" CFL lamp)... how come all my lights don't work this way?
so you say the lamp and the relay will only last a short period of time? if you really believe this then i'm sure you have some measurements to show? ::)
@mscoffman
"Someone should then try substituting..."
is that somebody going to be you?
Why worry about blowing up a lowly CFL when you can change physics ?
He tell you that the lamp won't last, so much HV there, its obvious. In the other replication in the link above, he uses a rheostat to dim it down.
When you have free energy, blowing up a lamp with it only means one thing - SUCCESS. :)
Why should I come with measurements first? I think the claimers (and all of their supporters) should first.
Don't reverse the claim for evidence.
I could claim that I can make a living creature out of a solid piece of rock and then ask you to prove I can't?
it's refreshing to see some clear instructions on replication and something of practical use.. A lot of the 'inventions' on here are hard to replicate because the 'inventors' make it too complicated, hold back info for the glory.. or you have to read a thousand pages to understand what they are doing.
I think this is simple, usable and a great base to experiment with.
Quote from: robbie47 on August 04, 2008, 05:48:29 AM
Why should I come with measurements first? I think the claimers should. Don't reverse the claim for evidence.
I could claim that I can make a living creature out of a solid piece of rock and then ask you to prove I can't?
look talking asshat, i will make it simple for you. why is it that you think that you should not be held to the same conditions that you have set forth for ANYONE making a claim?
let me simplify that. you CLAIM there has been a claim made and demand measurements. you ALSO claim the lamp will last a short period of time...
i am asking you to BACKUP your CLAIM with evidence as you demand the same from anyone else.
OR retract your claim.
sure you could claim making a living something out of rock.... but that argument only holds if i claim that your rock was the wrong type or won't last, which i haven't...
i know you will take option C which is to continue to talk out your ass.
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on August 04, 2008, 05:54:30 AM
look talking asshat, i will make it simple for you. why is it that you think that you should not be held to the same conditions that you have set forth for ANYONE making a claim?
let me simplify that. you CLAIM there has been a claim made and demand measurements. you ALSO claim the lamp will last a short period of time...
i am asking you to BACKUP your CLAIM with evidence as you demand the same from anyone else.
OR retract your claim.
sure you could claim making a living something out of rock.... but that argument only holds if i claim that your rock was the wrong type or won't last, which i haven't...
i know you will take option C which is to continue to talk out your ass.
Keep some decency first and then we talk further.
Quote from: robbie47 on August 04, 2008, 06:02:25 AM
Keep some decency first and then we talk further.
i see you took option C, i hope this means you are going to shut up...
nice twist away from the meat of the argument.
Robbie47,
Wilbylnebriate claims to be an experienced builder. He likes to challenge people with genuine questions to prove their objections. He is terrified of any attempt to measure the output of a Bedini or similar device and will respond to anyone suggesting it with name calling and insults.
If you press him, he will claim that he has built an SG. He will also state that he has used it to charge many batteries. But he will never ever provide any measurements of his own work. He will acuse people with obvious engineering backgrounds of being unscientific - as he did you! He will also attempt to get his critics to replicate to prove a negative!!
It seems from reading his comments that he:
Has never built anything more than an SG - perhaps has not even done that.
Has no working knowledge of ohm's law.
Has no working knowledge of resonance in a Bedini circuit
Has no understanding of the battery/tank circuit relationship in a Bedini device
You can follow his rantings from here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4515.0.html
In answer to this question:
"Which of the Bedini circuits did you use?
Can you flatten the target battery and recharge it?
Reading a higher voltage on a battery under charge proves nothing"
He said:
"SG circuit yes, and run a load off of it. most any battery type."
Of course if he was truthful he would be the only Bedini builder ever to get OU and would qualify for the price. He did say that the OU prize did not interest him. Perhaps he could show the rest of us his secrets.
In the above interchange he intimated that he is charging and loading many batteries with his Bedini. Of course he is not saying how often he charges his source battery or what kind of load he is using to test the charged ones.
Wilbylnebriate, no one believes you. Put up your schematic, show us your times and your numbers.
Quote from: willitwork on August 04, 2008, 07:05:03 AM
Robbie47,
Wilbylnebriate claims to be an experienced builder. He likes to challenge people with genuine questions to prove their objections. He is terrified of any attempt to measure the output of a Bedini or similar device and will respond to anyone suggesting it with name calling and insults.
If you press him, he will claim that he has built an SG. He will also state that he has used it to charge many batteries. But he will never ever provide any measurements of his own work. He will acuse people with obvious engineering backgrounds of being unscientific - as he did you! He will also attempt to get his critics to replicate to prove a negative!!
It seems from reading his comments that he:
Has never built anything more than an SG - perhaps has not even done that.
Has no working knowledge of ohm's law.
Has no working knowledge of resonance in a Bedini circuit
Has no understanding of the battery/tank circuit relationship in a Bedini device
You can follow his rantings from here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4515.0.html
In answer to this question:
"Which of the Bedini circuits did you use?
Can you flatten the target battery and recharge it?
Reading a higher voltage on a battery under charge proves nothing"
He said:
"SG circuit yes, and run a load off of it. most any battery type."
Of course if he was truthful he would be the only Bedini builder ever to get OU and would qualify for the price. He did say that the OU prize did not interest him. Perhaps he could show the rest of us his secrets.
In the above interchange he intimated that he is charging and loading many batteries with his Bedini. Of course he is not saying how often he charges his source battery or what kind of load he is using to test the charged ones.
Wilbylnebriate, no one believes you. Put up your schematic, show us your times and your numbers.
actually i won't respond to just "anyone" with name calling, just those talking asshats that like to spout on about science and refuse to do the experiment...
i didn't ask him to "prove" any objections, nor did i ask you that in feynmans thread. what i did however ask from both of you was evidence or measurements of your claims. notice that feynmans thread IS NOT titled "wilby's bedini replication and data". i repeatedly told you to do your own tests in that thread and you repeatedly refused. i have made no claims, i HAVE however answered your incessant questions, which you then twist into "my claims"... neat trick.
as far no working knowledge of blah blah you should look to your own... like your statement that the neon in an SG is wasteful. perhaps you could go back to feynmans thread and explain EXACTLY how it is wasteful. i'm guessing you think it is on all the time and this is the "waste" ::)
as i told you before willit, DO YOUR OWN WORK.
PS still waiting on that $10 dollar pulse charger that is powered by the battery that it is charging...
"i am asking you to BACKUP your CLAIM with evidence as you demand the same from anyone else."
"i didn't ask him to "prove" any objections,"
Your Medication Is Wearing Off
Quote from: willitwork on August 04, 2008, 07:24:36 AM
"i am asking you to BACKUP your CLAIM with evidence as you demand the same from anyone else."
"i didn't ask him to "prove" any objections,"
Your Medication Is Wearing Off
"Besides, the lamp will last very short period of time like this as will the relay. "
are you suggesting that he did not make an unsolicited claim here? unsolicited means he was not answering someone's direct question...
"Robbie47, Wilbylnebriate claims to be an experienced builder."
you have some proof of where i claimed this? or are you just making stuff up?
i see you are still engaging in this type of behavior:
Adopting a prejudiced stance against a theory or an observed phenomena without first investigating the details, then using this as justification for refusing to investigate the details.
"Your ideas are obviously garbage. What, try to replicate your
evidence? I wouldn't soil my hands. And besides, it would be
a terrible waste of time and money, since there's no question about
the outcome."
or "I didn't need to because I know a pulse charge when I see one."
see http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt
PS still waiting on that $10 dollar pulse charger that is powered by the battery that it is charging...
Just for the fun of it, I made an estimation of the relay lifetime:
On average they have a mechanical life expectancy of 10 000 000 switch cycles.
Assuming the self resonance of the circuit is at 50 Hz.
For a 24/7 operation this means it will not last for 3 days.
Such a relay costs about 1.5 ?.
Now, for the optimists, what does the energy saving achieved here, bring me in 3 days?
Quote from: robbie47 on August 04, 2008, 08:10:40 AM
Just for the fun of it, I made an estimation of the relay lifetime:
On average they have a mechanical life expectancy of 10 000 000 switch cycles.
Assuming the self resonance of the circuit is at 50 Hz.
For a 24/7 operation this means it will not last for 3 days.
Such a relay costs about 1.5 â,¬.
Now, for the optimists, what does the energy saving achieved here bring me in 3 days?
strange that mine has been running since the 1st... not 24/7 but at least 48 hours cumulative.
my relay was free, actually i have 4 of them i got for free out a sony stereo someone tossed out.
it says nothing, other than that you made an estimation, which amounts to... let me do some quick math here... absolutely jack shit in the real world.
do a replication, or shut up.
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on August 04, 2008, 08:14:03 AM
strange that mine has been running since the 1st... not 24/7 but at least 48 hours cumulative.
my relay was free, actually i have 4 of them i got for free out a sony stereo someone tossed out.
it says nothing, other than that you made an estimation, which amounts to... let me do some quick math here... absolutely jack shit in the real world.
do a replication, or shut up.
You are absolutely right......if producing relays doesn't cost any energy at all.
cost of production doesn't affect me when i got it for free... DUH
still waiting for you to back up your claim with evidence and measurements, NOT estimations.
Wilby-something is just a "wannabe"... Sorry to say this, but he(it) has proved himself with his intelligent remarks for the last few months of his "activity" here..
Bless you....
Now, go back to your stamps or whatever you've been collecting in the past.....
... dudes, don't let Willby's crap get you down. It's his hobby.
Just let him spew his gall and ignore him, and you can still discuss
the thing. ;)
Wow this thread got trashed quick. Am I the only one that thinks Wilby has done nothing wrong here?
Howdy Y'all,
I think Imhotep's generators are awesome, and inspiring. He is harvesting the back EMF off the primary side of the ignition coil and running a lamp at the same time on the secondary side. This is free energy from the ethers just like Tesla said. Let the doubters doubt, it's what they do. People are skeptical until they understand, the they say "Whoa, Cool!" Imhotep understands the flyback principle and is exploiting it with the rectifier diode connecting the negative side of the primary on the ignition coil to the positive side of the battery to be charged. This rectifies the back EMF from the ignition coil and stores it in the second battery. Anyone who doubts that this works simply hasn't invested the time into fully understanding inductors and the way that they interact with the Etheric Plane of Existence. When you generate an electromagnetic field it is analogous to using air pressure to inflate a balloon. If you release the pressure on the balloon the atmosphere pushes the pressurized air out of the balloon. When you energize a coil you are creating a localized disturbance in the ether. As long a you maintain the current in the coil it will maintain the magnetic field. When you release the current the ethers will collapse the magnetic field in the coil and the coil converts the magnetic field into electric current. This current can be utilized, or recycled. This is back EMF, and Imhotep is storing it in the second battery. Free energy...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Anyone have a good schematic + parts list? I'm having a hard time pulling out of the video. Thanks.
test,just wanted a link back to here.
Howdy Y'all,
Here's the parts list.
Blessed Be Brothers...
Howdy Y'all,
Here is the schematic...
Blessed Be Brothers...
And with 3 seconds of thoughts one can make this circuit even use less power.....
double post
Quote from: z.monkey on August 04, 2008, 11:48:50 AM
Howdy Y'all,
I think Imhotep's generators are awesome, and inspiring. He is harvesting the back EMF off the primary side of the ignition coil and running a lamp at the same time on the secondary side. This is free energy from the ethers just like Tesla said. Let the doubters doubt, it's what they do. People are skeptical until they understand, the they say "Whoa, Cool!" Imhotep understands the flyback principle and is exploiting it with the rectifier diode connecting the negative side of the primary on the ignition coil to the positive side of the battery to be charged. This rectifies the back EMF from the ignition coil and stores it in the second battery. Anyone who doubts that this works simply hasn't invested the time into fully understanding inductors and the way that they interact with the Etheric Plane of Existence. When you generate an electromagnetic field it is analogous to using air pressure to inflate a balloon. If you release the pressure on the balloon the atmosphere pushes the pressurized air out of the balloon. When you energize a coil you are creating a localized disturbance in the ether. As long a you maintain the current in the coil it will maintain the magnetic field. When you release the current the ethers will collapse the magnetic field in the coil and the coil converts the magnetic field into electric current. This current can be utilized, or recycled. This is back EMF, and Imhotep is storing it in the second battery. Free energy...
Blessed Be Brothers...
thank you very much, me and Dr Peter Lindemann worked hard on this project and if you have been in the fe community very long you know Peters reputation he is a genius . i tried very hard to make something that could easily be built to study tesla as well as bedini and get some efficient EMERGENCY light. if you want dont take a chance on a 1.50 cent bulb then use it for a ultra efficient ssg i have tested my setup for months for 1 hour intervals and it still works great .the first test ran for 72 hours straight and did not run down the source battery and charged a second battery to boot you got to love the simplicity. if you need more detailed schematics they will be on my new website www.imhotepslab.com soon i will be investigating ,with experts all fe devices and releasing to the public all findings i am here to serve you all for free. get it free energy (my energy) i will be releasing power factor correcting for the standard cfl's as well as a 2 part simple charger soon keep watching and i hope you all like it. **~imhotep~** ;D
Quote from: spinner on August 04, 2008, 09:04:41 AM
Wilby-something is just a "wannabe"... Sorry to say this, but he(it) has proved himself with his intelligent remarks for the last few months of his "activity" here..
Bless you....
Now, go back to your stamps or whatever you've been collecting in the past.....
Quote from: Koen1 on August 04, 2008, 09:09:21 AM
... dudes, don't let Willby's crap get you down. It's his hobby.
Just let him spew his gall and ignore him, and you can still discuss
the thing. ;)
more talking from the talking head peanut gallery... you have nothing specific to refute that i have said? just more mindless chatter about your hallowed opinions? well i guess i should not be surprised, it IS what talking heads do, and i am sure you will continue to talk instead of replicate and then use some pathological excuse as to why you didn't replicate, or post some asinine comment that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
koen1 hows that bedini replication of yours going? you got anything other than third party hearsay to add to the conversation yet?
@imhotep, nice circuit, can't wait to do your next one.
the new movie is being uploaded now PLEASE WATCH!!!
Quote from: WilbyInebriated on August 05, 2008, 03:42:08 AM
blaa blaa
koen1 hows that bedini replication of yours going?
Goes to show how much you actually think before you type;
I never said I was going to build one. And I've still not seen you back up any of your big talk
with anything yet, so don't try to be cool by dissing me or anyone else for that matter.
Quoteyou got anything other than third party hearsay to add to the conversation yet?
Says the guy who never puts his money where his mouth is? Haha!
Why don't you just shut up and go harass people on some other forum?
Or at least, if you want to act like you know something, show us something of your work eh?
You've got a working Bedini motor that produces OU? Show it.
You've got a working Imhotep setup? Show it.
Nobody wants to hear your negative talk.
Quote from: Koen1 on August 05, 2008, 06:01:26 AM
Goes to show how much you actually think before you type;
I never said I was going to build one. And I've still not seen you back up any of your big talk
with anything yet, so don't try to be cool by dissing me or anyone else for that matter.Says the guy who never puts his money where his mouth is? Haha!
Why don't you just shut up and go harass people on some other forum?
Or at least, if you want to act like you know something, show us something of your work eh?
You've got a working Bedini motor that produces OU? Show it.
You've got a working Imhotep setup? Show it.
Nobody wants to hear your negative talk.
goes to show how much you actually do the experiment before you type...
yes i know you never said you were gonna build one, that was the point of my comment... you the guy who has stated he won't do the simple experiment (in fact, if i recall you said it was too complex, a bedini SG circuit too complex... LOL) insisting on telling others how it should be done.
dissing you? i'm not dissing you. i am asking you to do the experiment before you start your mouth blabbering. you still have nothing more to add the the discussion than third party hearsay.
big talk? please be a little more specific instead of your usual vagueness.
it is easy to get me to shut up, do the experiment before spouting off about it.
asking someone to actually do the experiment before spouting off at the mouth is harassing now is it?
show it? I OWE YOU NOTHING. you want something from me? send me a digital camera, all the measurement equipment that you deem necessary and $125/hour for my time. i don't work for you for free.
let me simplify that for you... DO THE EXPERIMENT YOURSELF.
asking someone to do the experiment before blabbering is negative now is it?
get back to your "science" of doing nothing while telling those who are doing something how it should be done...
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 05, 2008, 03:43:35 AM
the new movie is being uploaded now PLEASE WATCH!!!
I think you should really check whether you are charged for Volt-Amperes.
In my country I pay for the real Watts. The price for that matches this.
If you really pay for Volt-Amperes, which may be the case in e.g. the US, the price may be adjusted to this.
Simply check with your energy supplier before shouting out over the internet that you pay too much .
Mind the legal consequences for your act.
Howdy Imhotep,
I noticed that you are using a relay and not power transistors. Do you have an electrical reason for this? I have had problems with power transistors myself.
Blessed Be Brothers...
Quote from: z.monkey on August 05, 2008, 07:22:28 AM
Howdy Imhotep,
I noticed that you are using a relay and not power transistors. Do you have an electrical reason for this? I have had problems with power transistors myself.
Blessed Be Brothers...
The reason can be found in the theory of the phenomena applied here:
U
coil= L * dI/dt , where L is the coil value in Henries.
The faster you switch off the current in a coil the smaller dt and thus the higher dI/dt and thus the higher the voltage peak over the coil directly after switching of current.
In general relays switch off faster than power transistors.
An other reason could be the simplicity of this setup.
In this case the relay can be wired very simple to achieve self oscillation.
When power transistors would be used, there is also the need to drive that power transistor.
This complicates the circuit.
However, as I pointed out earlier, relays wear out quite fast in this application.
Let's see how this discussion thread develops....
deleted
Howdy robbie47,
That makes sense. That is where the FE is, in the release of the current in the coil. When that voltage falls off slow there is less FE produced. Thanks Man!
Blessed Be Brothers...
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 05, 2008, 03:43:35 AM
the new movie is being uploaded now PLEASE WATCH!!!
Hello,
Sorry where the movie can be found ?
Quote from: renaud67 on August 05, 2008, 08:40:43 AM
Hello,
Sorry where the movie can be found ?
HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIyfYjoKc2k)
Quote from: renaud67 on August 05, 2008, 08:40:43 AM
Hello,
Sorry where the movie can be found ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIyfYjoKc2k enjoy! a corrective cap fix will be released soon.
Quote from: z.monkey on August 05, 2008, 07:22:28 AM
Howdy Imhotep,
I noticed that you are using a relay and not power transistors. Do you have an electrical reason for this? I have had problems with power transistors myself.
Blessed Be Brothers...
i was replicating ev gray pwr supply and decided to use a modern eq of the malllory vibator it works for the circuit and is easy to replicate and draws low amps ev gray used vibrators for his own reasons .but they work..
Any one who has ever designed flyback switching converters for a living knows that you can capture the flyback pulse and use it to:
a) charge a capacitor
b) damp the secondary oscillations due to leakage inductance (called a snubber network)
c) recycle the energy into the power supply
d) reset the core for the next cycle
e) charge a battery.
You do not get something for nothing in this circuit. You have to make up your mind. If you quench or snub the flyback energy or use it to charge a battery you will have less energy going into your lamp because you will dampen the secondary oscillations.
So what do you want to do?
a) charge a battery
b) light a lamp
c) do both of the above.
There is only so much energy stored in the magnetic field per cycle. How do you want to squeeze the balloon?
Now the word "radiant" is the new buzzword.
Howdy Y'all,
After watching the video I remembered something from long ago. There used to be these little disk capacitors that you would put in your light bulb sockets which limited the current to the light bulb. I think they were called Bulb Savers, but I haven't been able to find them on the interwebz. Inrush current used to be a problem for incandescent light bulbs. The inrush current would blow up the filament in the light bulb the instant you switched the power on. Basically the Bulb Saver was a high voltage ceramic disk capacitor with plates on the ends instead of leads. When the Bulb Saver was placed into the light bulb socket it would connect to the circuit as a series capacitor limiting the amount of alternating current that could get to the bulb. Since I cannot find them we can do the same thing with a regular ceramic disk capacitor soldered in line with the light bulb socket. You want to pick a capacitor with twice the voltage rating of the circuit. The value of the capacitor would depend on how much current you want. The bigger the cap the more current that will flow in the circuit. I'll see if I can find a formula for that...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Howdy Vortex1,
I agree. You put X amount of current into the coil, and you get X minus efficiency factor out of the coil as Back EMF. But there is another factor there that none of us completely understand yet. This is the Free Energy Factor. Transformers can be designed in a way that exploits this Free Energy Factor. There are examples like Tesla's Radiant Energy Receiver, Henry Moray's Radiant Energy Generator, and the Hubbard Coil. Their designs exploit the Free Energy Factor and use it to draw Radiant Energy into their Coils. This results in a Power Gain, thus Free Energy. I have been working hard to understand these concepts, and I believe that I am close to an understanding. I'll keep working, and let you know as I make advancements. We are so very close...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Z monkey
They were not disc capacitors. They were NTC (negative temperature coefficient) disc THERMISTORS.
i.e. they had initially high resistance and as the bulb base heats up it would drop the resistance down to or below one ohm, thus limiting surges.
You cannot get a disc capacitor that small that would have sufficient ratings, besides a capacitor would act as a differentiator and allow surges through.
QuoteBut there is another factor there that none of us completely understand yet. This is the Free Energy Factor. Transformers can be designed in a way that exploits this Free Energy Factor. There are examples like Tesla's Radiant Energy Receiver, Henry Moray's Radiant Energy Generator, and the Hubbard Coil. Their designs exploit the Free Energy Factor and use it to draw Radiant Energy into their Coils. This results in a Power Gain, thus Free Energy. I have been working hard to understand these concepts, and I believe that I am close to an understanding. I'll keep working, and let you know as I make advancements. We are so very close..
.
Everyone has been so very close now for so very long a time. I have diligently studied the devices you mention over a lifetime. Built many of them. No luck. Let me know how you fare.
imhotep:
I played with Mallory vibrators as a kid nearly 55 years ago. Back then they were my favorite device for driving any inductor, transformer, even small tesla coils. Similar ideas are used in the "Violet Ray" machines. Even the original Ford Motor Cars used a vibrator type interrupter integrated with the coil.
Then I worked in industry for thirty years as a research engineer designing power supplies, switching converters etc. all the while chasing the tail (tale) of the free energy dragon. I have not caught him yet!
Hats off to you if you think you have, but beware of bold claims "Pride Goeth Before A Fall"
....v
Howdy Vortex1,
I agree that chasing the free energy dragon is an arduous task, especially when using conventional coils and transformers. Did you every step outside of the box? Make your own coils? Take a look at this...
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,5144.0/topicseen.html
Blessed Be Brothers...
Nice work Z monkey
I have been following your work. You have really good construction technique. I'm a strong believer in a well thought out nicely executed design. Yes I have built many of my own coils, have a large stock of all kinds of wire, pure iron, nickel-copper, nichrome etc.
The Hubbard design is one of about five devices that I have any faith may be made to work.
Great good luck to you
Kind regards.....V
p.s. my whole lifestyle is "outside the box", not just my builds
Vortex Z All what do you think of the Thane Heins [Crankypants] COP over 10-? device ?
Howdy Vortex1,
Thanks. Good to hear you live outside the box. I shudder at the thought of a "normal" life. I think if we can get enough people to mentally resonate on this Free Energy ideal that we can create a synergistic effect and turn Free Energy into reality by force of will. Having people actually working on projects helps a lot. But even those who can only lend mental energy can help too. It is about what we want as a People, as a World. Can the Free Energy Technology guys will overpower the Centralized Power Line Distribution guys will, or the Dominant Oil Based Technology guys will. We shall see. The Free Energy Technology is gaining momentum and inertia, hopefully we can bring it into reality...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Howdy Ramset,
I have only briefly looked at that device. That is the one with the double toroid, right? I'll have to spend some time looking at it more carefully. To me it looks like Infinity if you have the flux going the same direction where the toroids and joined. I like Infinity, you know that...
Edit, sorry I was thinking of the wrong device. The Perpetuia was the motor driven device with a wheel and magnets. Need to look at that one too...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Z I believe both devices you mentioned are in the Thane Hiens threads one does have just toriods and coils no moving parts [reminds me of your infinity ]COP over amazing Chet
Another replication done today :)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rOEKCHQ98b0
Imhotep,
I feel its not important to show how much watts a CFL actually consumes when some other value is written over it. Its nothing to do with science or energy saving, its only a marketing trick. Have you not seen each and every restaurant saying that their food tastes best in the town and is the cheapest ? They are only selling their product with exaggerated claims. Lets not go there.
It is important to show here that most of the energy can be renewed and can be stored in a battery, while lighting a bulb. This extra energy must be coming from somewhere. If there is no USEFUL charge in the battery, there is no OU.
Doesn't matter how bright the bulb glows, its the amount of charge the empty battery is charged to, that matters.
The point is, to show a lamp glowing indefinitely with just two batteries that charge each other :). Possible ?
Obviously, the next step is to replace the batteries with big caps and switch them alternatively into the setup. Best of Luck !
Quote from: Omega_0 on August 05, 2008, 03:13:19 PM
The point is, to show a lamp glowing indefinitely with just two batteries that charge each other :). Possible ?
Hi all, sorry to butt in but I've been watching this design with interest.
That is exactly what I would like to know Omega...
If you can light a bulb and charge a battery from a battery, how long will the charging battery last and how long will the one being charged last once the first one is depleted ?
I'm also wondering what can be put in place of the bulb... If I'm understanding what I'm watching and reading this is pretty damn interesting stuff, couldn't you replace the bulb with something that generated additional power ?
( PS: I'm a nubbin in the field of OU so no flames, be gentle! )
Ramset:
QuoteVortex Z All what do you think of the Thane Heins [Crankypants] COP over 10-? device ?
Speaking only for myself, I'm a bit skeptical of the measurement techniques used, though I will reserve opinions untill more test data is released. I hope he is on to something.
Precise measurement using thermal true rms measuring devices would satisfy me. Power factor can be a tricky snake.
But this is off topic, we'll save it for his thread.
Mr M,
This stuff is interesting. But this is not OU, sorry to disappoint. Even the inventor knows this and so do the other replicators.
Check the thread over at energetic forums. There are few more replications.
So the answer is, if you go on switching batteries long enough, both of them will discharge to 0.
This circuit, however, increases the efficiency, and lets you store some of the energy which is normally lost.
Even then, we must encourage such efforts, who knows if there is some unexplained stuff hidden there ...... :)
2 CFL's on 3 watt power and charging 2 6 volt batteries at the same time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WWgFEETjXI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WWgFEETjXI)
Quote from: Omega_0 on August 08, 2008, 11:30:49 AM
Mr M,
This stuff is interesting. But this is not OU, sorry to disappoint. Even the inventor knows this and so do the other replicators.
Check the thread over at energetic forums. There are few more replications.
So the answer is, if you go on switching batteries long enough, both of them will discharge to 0.
This circuit, however, increases the efficiency, and lets you store some of the energy which is normally lost.
Even then, we must encourage such efforts, who knows if there is some unexplained stuff hidden there ...... :)
Nobody has made the claim that this ever was "Overunity".
Omega_0
I agree with your observations except for two points you mention:
QuoteThis circuit, however, increases the efficiency, and lets you store some of the energy which is normally lost.
Point one;
Actually this is an extremely inefficient way to light a fluorescent lamp. If you want to explore the efficient way, check out the Royer oscillators used in many laptop computers. The designers of these are extremely energy conscious. No huge ignition coil, no sparking relay contacts which besides EMI radiation losses, heat up thermally and waste lots of energy.
Point two:
In actuality, the energy of the flyback pulse is not lost if uncaptured, but allows the ringing to occur for a longer time and with higher amplitude, therefore the overall energy appears in the secondary, as I pointed out in an earlier post.
To restate, any attempt to capture or utilize the flyback pulse reduces both the amplitude and duration of secondary oscillations by dampening them. So less energy appears in the secondary.
This dual battery scheme with one charging the other is just
sleight of hand. With a little skill, the circuit could be arranged with a single primary battery such that the flyback pulse charges the primary battery. The circuit will still run down the primary battery.
Do extremely careful measurements of the energy budget in this type of circuit to cut through the BS.
To get a quick look at how the energy moves around the circuit, use large electrolytic capacitors instead of batteries as pointed out by others many times earlier.
Bedini will not do this (the single battery), thats why he is able to keep his snake oil show on the road.
Sooner or later, the truth of this type of intellectual scam will be revealed. Sorry Bedini believers, I bought his book, built his devices, and followed his claims from the very beginning (80's) and my tests show no OU.
But Bedini slips and slides around a lot, and when confronted on the OU issue, he backtracks to "just a better way to charge batteries". Pulse battery charging has been around a long, long time.
If any disagree, go ahead with it, you will certainly learn a few eye opening facts along the way, but only if you take careful energy measurements.
Just tryin to save y'all some time.
Quote from: Vortex1 on August 08, 2008, 01:29:24 PM
Contrar my friend, the energy of the flyback pulse is not lost if uncaptured, but allows the ringing to occur for a longer time and with higher amplitude, therefore the overall energy appears in the secondary, as I pointed out in an earlier post.
To restate, any attempt to capture or utilize the flyback pulse reduces both the amplitude and duration of secondary oscillations by dampening them. So less energy appears in the secondary.
This dual battery scheme with one charging the other is just sleight of hand. With a little skill, the circuit could be arranged with a single primary battery such that the flyback pulse charges the primary battery. The circuit will still run down the primary battery.
Do extremely careful measurements of the energy budget in this type of circuit to cut through the BS.
To get a quick look at how the energy moves around the circuit, use large electrolytic capacitors instead of batteries as pointed out by others many times earlier.
Bedini will not do this (the single battery), thats why he is able to keep his snake oil show on the road.
Sooner or later, the truth of this type of intellectual scam will be revealed. Sorry Bedini believers, I bought his book, built his devices, and followed his claims from the very beginning (80's) and my tests show no OU.
But Bedini slips and slides around a lot, and when confronted on the OU issue, he backtracks to "just a better way to charge batteries". Pulse battery charging has been around a long, long time.
If you disagree, go ahead with it, you will certainly learn a few eye opening facts along the way, but only if you take careful energy measurements.
Just tryin to save y'all some time.
But I'm lighting my house for less than i'm paying the electric company... Is that not worth the time until we continue to wait for an energy solution?
QuoteBut I'm lighting my house for less than i'm paying the electric company... Is that not worth the time until we continue to wait for an energy solution?
Say what?
Try entry again, does not compute.
Quote from: Vortex1 on August 08, 2008, 02:05:15 PM
Say what?
Try entry again, does not compute.
If I plugged the same bulbs into the grid I would be drawing 36 watts... with this system i'm drawing 3 watts and charging batteries..
compute..
Wha, ha, this thread becomes one big comic strip ;D
Quote from: robbie47 on August 08, 2008, 02:13:03 PM
Wha, ha, this thread becomes one big comic strip ;D
yeh it's a shame, overunity.com generally has some decent people (from my short time here..) I think i'll just become a reader of the forum from now on..
feeding trolls and all that
Quotef I plugged the same bulbs into the grid I would be drawing 36 watts... with this system i'm drawing 3 watts and charging batteries..
At that rate, sounds like your all ready to set up your own utility company with all those charged batteries How cheap will you sell the electricity? I'll be your first customer. Looks like the energy crisis is over, I can take a nap now.
Quote from: waterhouse24 on August 08, 2008, 02:17:35 PM
I think i'll just become a reader of the forum from now on..
Yes, please do.
Let me meanwhile explain why use of a small magnet changes the power consumption of a setting you show in your video with a completely misleading title.
A relay as used has a preferred switch position due to a mechanical spring. It costs a little bit of current and thus power to change this default switch position.
When a magnet is used, the tension of that spring is influenced. In the called 'sweet spot' the spring is just doing it job but almost no power is needed to bring it out of its default position.
This is why the power consumption is changing.
Quote from: Vortex1 on August 08, 2008, 02:18:18 PM
At that rate, sounds like your all ready to set up your own utility company with all those charged batteries How cheap will you sell the electricity? I'll be your first customer. Looks like the energy crisis is over, I can take a nap now.
please take a permanent nap fucktard...
i notice you didn't address the efficiency issue raised by waterhouse. just some typical 'asshat trying to be clever' response. not surprised you would be the first customer, it's people like you that run to someone else when they need/want something instead of doing it themselves.
jus' trying to save y'all some time...
Quote from: robbie47 on August 08, 2008, 02:31:22 PM
Yes, please do.
Let me meanwhile explain why use of a small magnet changes the power consumption.
A relay as used has a preferred switch position due to a mechanical spring. It costs a little bit of current and thus power to change this default switch position.
When a magnet is used, the tension of that spring is influenced. In the called 'sweet spot' the spring is just doing it job but almost no power is needed to bring it out of its default position.
This is why the power consumption is changing.
Dont' worry this will be my last post..
I understand what is happening with the relay..^^ That wasn't the point of the video.. It was to show the other people replicating, that it doesn't have to draw 1.5 amps as it was doing in the video prior to the magnet.. There is another replication here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PpMOrPSXkc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PpMOrPSXkc)) where he uses a 555 timer and gets the current draw down to 250ma with 4 energy saving bulbs.. The point is, this is a practical device that can be used around the home instead of just the usual bedini motor just turning and doing nothing useful... This can actually be used and uses less energy than if we plugged the same bulbs into the grid...
even though it is not OU and probably doesn't charge batteries.. the fact that it's only consuming 250ma at 12 volts is enough to say this is worth taking the time experimenting with..
I will leave it at that and continue experimenting to help bring a better future for my children.
Quote from: waterhouse24 on August 08, 2008, 02:47:14 PM
Dont' worry this will be my last post..
I understand what is happening with the relay..^^ That wasn't the point of the video.. It was to show the other people replicating, that it doesn't have to draw 1.5 amps as it was doing in the video prior to the magnet.. There is another replication here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PpMOrPSXkc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PpMOrPSXkc)) where he uses a 555 timer and gets the current draw down to 250ma with 4 energy saving bulbs.. The point is, this is a practical device that can be used around the home instead of just the usual bedini motor just turning and doing nothing useful... This can actually be used and uses less energy than if we plugged the same bulbs into the grid...
even though it is not OU and probably doesn't charge batteries.. the fact that it's only consuming 250ma at 12 volts is enough to say this is worth taking the time experimenting with..
I will leave it at that and continue experimenting to help bring a better future for my children.
Waterhous
I hope you change your mind about this being your last post .
I think you just need to figure out who to ignore .
There are some people on this board that just arn't worth the time it takes to read their posts .
I hope you don't let them get you down .
Thanks for the link to that video ........I was wondering if the circuit would drive more than one bulb .
I agree that this circuit is worth looking into .
Near the start of this thread someone said that the bulbes would not last long .
I don't agree .
It seems to me that they are being used in a different mode .
Higher voltage .....lower current .
There is a murcury vapor in the bulb to lower the resistance ........the higher voltage probably won't affect this vapor .
I think that in effect we are making a high voltage arc light .
As I understand it .....there is a filament at each end of the tube ........ when used in a conventional manner when these fillaments burn out the bulb no longer works . ......
We are not using those fillaments in the same way ........
If anyone doing a replication has a burnt out bulb it would be interesting to see if it still works with this circuit .
gary
Quote from: resonanceman on August 08, 2008, 05:14:44 PM
Waterhous
I hope you change your mind about this being your last post .
I think you just need to figure out who to ignore .
There are some people on this board that just arn't worth the time it takes to read their posts .
I hope you don't let them get you down .
Thanks for the link to that video ........I was wondering if the circuit would drive more than one bulb .
I agree that this circuit is worth looking into .
Near the start of this thread someone said that the bulbes would not last long .
I don't agree .
It seems to me that they are being used in a different mode .
Higher voltage .....lower current .
There is a murcury vapor in the bulb to lower the resistance ........the higher voltage probably won't affect this vapor .
I think that in effect we are making a high voltage arc light .
As I understand it .....there is a filament at each end of the tube ........ when used in a conventional manner when these fillaments burn out the bulb no longer works . ......
We are not using those fillaments in the same way ........
If anyone doing a replication has a burnt out bulb it would be interesting to see if it worked with this circuit
gary
Gary,
When i was first going through the testing purposes, as to not burn out any new bulbs the bulb i originally tested was a burned out bulb that did not work anymore. For some reason i kept it, (which i am glad i did)
Peter Lindemann has said he believes this is a Tesla Shockwave. Because after all traditional car ignition coils are a form of a small telsa coil. Not exactly, but a form of one none the less. All the other bulbs I have tested have the filaments twisted together on each stem. So no you are not feeding through the filament. I have tried feeding through the filament and it works as well that way, I put a capacitor in between two of the wires of the adjacent tube stems and only used one wire down to the socket on each stem. It worked also. I hope this helps you.
**~Imhotep~**
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 08, 2008, 05:25:10 PM
Gary,
When i was first going through the testing purposes, as to not burn out any new bulbs the bulb i originally tested was a burned out bulb that did not work anymore. For some reason i kept it, (which i am glad i did)
I am glad you saved it too
:)
I almost didn't say anything because I thought it was unlikely that anyone would have a burnt out bulg on hand .
Assuming I am right ........and the burnt out bulb will last a long time with this circuit ..... we then have a another big posative .
Quote
Peter Lindemann has said he believes this is a Tesla Shockwave. Because after all traditional car ignition coils are a form of a small telsa coil. Not exactly, but a form of one none the less. All the other bulbs I have tested have the filaments twisted together on each stem. So no you are not feeding through the filament. I have tried feeding through the filament and it works as well that way, I put a capacitor in between two of the wires of the adjacent tube stems and only used one wire down to the socket on each stem. It worked also. I hope this helps you.
**~Imhotep~**
I agree that an ignition coil is similar to a Tesla coil .
To me the primary difference is a Tesla coil is resonant
You got me thinking ....... what if we converted the ignition coil to be more like a Tesla coil ?
Choose a frequency ....... pick a cap to resonate with the ignition coils primary .
Maybe a small HV cap connected to the secondary .
It seems to me that the primary could be driven by a PWM . ........probably at very low power .
My next project is building a PWM ...... or 2 or 3
It seems that every time I turn around I find a new project that a PWM could be used for .
Once I get my PWM going I think I have most of the stuff to test this .
gary
yes the car coils are not tuned. In the energetics forum ren has proposed a 555 timer with a fet which might fit the bill. other people have also used a 555 timer with a 3055 bi-polar transistor, with success and low current draw. I dont know if the FET circuit has been tested yet. But that is something to think about..tuning the circuit. Another inventor just replicated the circuit and has it only being powered by a 2watt solar power. So the power consumption is still dropping, 80 ma total. Its quite amazing, he used a little neomagnet to help tune the relay.
Howdy Imhotep,
I have to disagree. Ignition coils are tuned to the dynamics of a spark plug, an air capacitor. When the dielectric (air and fuel mixture under pressure) fails the cycle is done. In your circuit the fluorescent tube (long tube filled with mercury vapor and an inert gas, probably argon) is close enough to the capacitance of a spark plug to work good. About the proposed driver circuit, sure use a 555 for the timing, and a 2N3055 to amplify it, but keep the relay in the circuit. Your gonna need some sparks to solicit the free energy. Use the 2n3055 to drive the relay and then use the relay contacts to drive the coil. This free energy stuff is really hard to comprehend. I know for sure that you are not going to get it without making some sparks...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Anybody make any light intensity measurements (lumens) for comparison to a standard lamp of the same type?
It would help to get a handle on this.
Quote from: ORION on August 08, 2008, 10:58:52 PM
Anybody make any light intensity measurements (lumens) for comparison to a standard lamp of the same type?
It would help to get a handle on this.
ORION, where you been hiding? Haven't seen you in over a year.
If Imhotep lights that bulb with the leads of the bulb both connected to the same wire - parallel to it that is - say a couple of inches apart - like a bulb with a shunt across it - then we can get a handle on it.
Quote from: Grumpy on August 09, 2008, 12:57:46 AM
ORION, where you been hiding? Haven't seen you in over a year.
If Imhotep lights that bulb with the leads of the bulb both connected to the same wire - parallel to it that is - say a couple of inches apart - like a bulb with a shunt across it - then we can get a handle on it.
they are being twisted together and joined as one on each end of the tube. I have a video that explains on to alter the bulbs. I did that so it would strictly go through the gas and not the filaments.
And waterhouse has obtained the brightest output so far. Even i am totally impressed!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWcPnwAEVvs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWcPnwAEVvs)
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 09, 2008, 11:43:32 PM
they are being twisted together and joined as one on each end of the tube. I have a video that explains on to alter the bulbs. I did that so it would strictly go through the gas and not the filaments.
And waterhouse has obtained the brightest output so far. Even i am totally impressed!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWcPnwAEVvs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWcPnwAEVvs)
but is it electrostatic or radiant?
Move your hand towards the bulb - do you feel pressure?
Has anyone tried this with a standard FL tube? Think a two foot one would be great and not cost too much compared to the CFL. Dont like them as you are buying the electronics each time. More waste. Bigger bulb, less price, better deal
thaelin
Quote from: Thaelin on August 11, 2008, 10:39:15 AM
Has anyone tried this with a standard FL tube? Think a two foot one would be great and not cost too much compared to the CFL. Dont like them as you are buying the electronics each time. More waste. Bigger bulb, less price, better deal
thaelin
here is the new vid with one pin on each side running the 48 inch full size eco lux ge bulbs .this is getting fun !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user)
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 12, 2008, 09:37:10 AM
here is the new vid with one pin on each side running the 48 inch full size eco lux ge bulbs .this is getting fun !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user)
If you connect each lead to a sheet of aluminum foil - each placed vertically a few inches apart - with the bulb between and not connected to anything - does it still light?
Quote from: Grumpy on August 12, 2008, 10:43:37 AM
If you connect each lead to a sheet of aluminum foil - each placed vertically a few inches apart - with the bulb between and not connected to anything - does it still light?
i will give it a go and report any results ;D
In the late 1950s, my buddy and I were looking for something interesting to do for Halloween.
We were fairly advanced electro-nuts for being in our very early teens. We decided we would carry around a couple of lit up 48" cool white fluorescent lamps.
I think he used a buzzer or vibrator driving a transformer, I was just getting into transistors and built a blocking oscillator.
Battery packs and circuits were inside our jackets, wires ran down our sleeves to the bulb ends......very dangerous now that I think of it.
Waving those things around on a dark night was pretty freaky. We beat Star Wars to it by 10 years.
Needless to say we terrorized the neighborhood, got a little candy and got thrown out of a few houses for being just too weird.
Those were the days.
Quote from: ORION on August 12, 2008, 07:11:01 PM
In the late 1950s, my buddy and I were looking for something interesting to do for Halloween.
We were fairly advanced electro-nuts for being in our very early teens. We decided we would carry around a couple of lit up 48" cool white fluorescent lamps.
I think he used a buzzer or vibrator driving a transformer, I was just getting into transistors and built a blocking oscillator.
Battery packs and circuits were inside our jackets, wires ran down our sleeves to the bulb ends......very dangerous now that I think of it.
Waving those things around on a dark night was pretty freaky. We beat Star Wars to it by 10 years.
Needless to say we terrorized the neighborhood, got a little candy and got thrown out of a few houses for being just too weird.
Those were the days.
one thing that i observed on this circuit when testing was if you used a spark plug instead of tube and used traditional spark plug wire you have shocking inductance on the skin of the wire that will shock you and light a neon as you drag it on the surface of the wire. but if you use the tube and small clip lead wire instead of spark plug wire the shocking effect is gone you can touch the insulated portion of the clip lead wire and not get shocked ,that is probably why you could perform this cool effect when you were younger. ;D
An article on CFL's and the lack of Power Factor Correction in U.S. consumer appliances, mentioning **~Imhotep~**'s great Radiant Oscillator Charger modification, published today at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Are-CFL-s-Designed-to-Make-by-Steve-Windisch-ji-080814-42.html
Many thx to **~Imhotep~** and the team at Energetic Forums for bringing this interesting info out. And congrats to him and Shiva for producing another great project! This really does have tremendous potential for Third World countries.
Imhotep+Shiva NOW I know why my elec company was giving those bulbs away for free THANK YOU !! From a dopey [not any more]consumer Chet
Jibbguy Thanks for the article
Turning out to be another chapter in how to screw the consumer story. Seems this should have a class
action suit brought out against the makers and anyone who bought one or more get paid back for the
short changeing on savings stated. Plain out consumer fraud! No other words for it.
thaelin
Thaelin It is a Crime [stealing] and it is not just the lightbulbs, elec motors in all the appliances also Chet
Arm a consumer rights group with a KILL-A-WATT meter and send them out to test what is good and not.
That item that does not comply goes on the list and to the DA. When he gets the list, tell me he wont get
in touch with them and tell them to get it right. No fix, take em to court and be highly visible about it too.
Lots of press is bad for business in that respect. I sicked my bud on WallMart about their bulbs about two
weeks ago. He bought like a whole case of them for his new house. Sure would have liked to be there on
that one. ;D
thaelin
Really does seem like headline news Im going to send that article by "Jib guy" to The NY times My cous has been a top writer there forever Chet
PS I also think we should work on a remediation for this with the appliances
Thx guys for the comments.
When designing a solution for consumer appliances, remember that it should probably be active and not passive, meaning that the PFC circuit was only in place when the motor was running; otherwise you'll get some capacitive current-leading phase shift when the motor is off. So the simplest and most direct method imo would be simply putting the proper size AC cap across the terminals of the motor (... I suspect this is why the Peswiki project on testing an invention that was attached to the circuit breaker box of a home failed to make any significant difference on the power bill).
BTW: I also have a 500-worder version of the article for "Letters to the Editor" to your local newspaper; peeps can p/m me if interested,
And let me repeat that this revelation was not mine. I just ran with it as an Open Source project ;)
@jibbguy
One thing that one should not do is add capacitance in your house directly
across the utility line trying to correct some average inductive situation.
If your neighbor has an excess inductive load an apparent current will flow
out of his house through his meter then through your meter into your house
to find the capacitor. You and he will be billed twice for the the apparent current
that he created in the first place and the utility company will have to supply
nothing for that part. The apparent current is a real current it just that the
generator doesn't have to directly supply it. It still flows in lines, breakers
and transformers. One reason that computer equipment is supposed
to be corrected to a PF=1.0 is that they didn't want apparent current to
compromise the current carrying capacity of lines where there are several
pieces of equipment were using a large portion of the real current capacity
of the line at the same time.
:S:MarkSCoffman
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2255-imhoteps-radiant-oscillator-video-12.html#post26746
In the linked post, the replicators claims that
"As far as charging on the secondary battery i have witnessed an increase from 11.50 to 11.89 volts in relatively short period (about twice as much as i've spent on the primary battery)."
Does that mean he has gained more volts then he spent and all this while lighting two lamps ?
Quote from: Omega_0 on August 20, 2008, 01:25:54 PM
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2255-imhoteps-radiant-oscillator-video-12.html#post26746
In the linked post, the replicators claims that
"As far as charging on the secondary battery i have witnessed an increase from 11.50 to 11.89 volts in relatively short period (about twice as much as i've spent on the primary battery)."
Does that mean he has gained more volts then he spent and all this while lighting two lamps ?
Yes Omega_0 the answer to your question is; yes.
Generally "volts" is not a technically acceptable measurement for the state of battery charge.
But it does give you the idea. The "charge" battery is being charged while the unit has
produced light. How? The b-emf pulses cause CF cold fusion in the (acid/lead) battery being charged
which causes it to charge faster than power in the recharge signal would allow. Also HV high
voltage static-like electricity from the ignition coil (14KV) is causing COP>1 gain from electrostatic
generators. So this unit gets it's overunity gain from two sources and therefore is relatively powerful.
What we need is something to continuously swap "source" and "charge" batteries based
on their voltage and keep track of this voltage state of charge. This device would be
able to declare that the system was or was not operating overunity based on what
it was seeing with the load turned on or not...If the unit runs forever (or a long time) it would
be a proof of overunity. And I expect that it would show overunity! I am defining this device
right now, and will slowly be implementing it. If someone wants to beat me to it - be my guest.
A general purpose; Bedini Charge Battery Swap Controller.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on August 20, 2008, 07:42:58 PM
Yes Omega_0 the answer to your question is; yes.
Thanks ! I just wanted to know if I'm reading it wrong. So this clears it up, he is getting more volts, although as you have said, its volts, not joules. So more tests (like a full discharge of both batteries in a known load) are needed to confirm OU.
I feel, its of no use to speculate about how the extra energy is generated, if it works, it works......
More important is, whether it is replicable.
Will wait for your setup :)
Quote from: ramset on August 19, 2008, 09:19:53 AM
Really does seem like headline news Im going to send that article by "Jib guy" to The NY times My cous has been a top writer there forever Chet
PS I also think we should work on a remediation for this with the appliances
Fascinating that this issue hasn't drawn more attention before Imhotep raises it. For 100 years we have inductive power consumption costs misrepresented to consumers, with very smart EEs, electricians, and academics missing that we are billed by Volt-Ampere hours instead of KWh. And possibly just as bad, the lack of adding some cheap capacitors to our appliences and now lighting increases heat in throughout our home wiring, damages our motors and electronics, and possibly increases threat of fire.
I hate to go the legal route, but this smells like class action law suits towards the power companies and the consumer product companies.
How are UL standards influenced? Am I missing something or isn't this a very inexpensive capacitor issue for products?
Regarding measurements, this is tough in that there are many variables, mostly with the batteries. Remember that these radiant pulses will charge differently than a "regular" charger would. The desulfating "conditioning" effect happens in them; and the very nature of the charge changes a bit. So perhaps the only accurate way is to have 2 identical, new batts that have both been fully discharged/charged a few times by the pulses first; then try to measure the charge levels in the Source and Charge batts. Overwise the quirks of radiant pulse charging could interfere in getting good results.
UL is a joke and has been for a long time. They are just rubber stamps for the manufacturers, who pay them for the "tests". I knew this from past experience, TUV and CSA (Canada) are 10 times more stringent and difficult to meet. You can see this in the cheap lamp fixtures that come from China: They are "UL Approved" but then you look at them closely you'll see things like "Not recommended for bulbs larger than 40 Watts" lol. Jeez, a light fixture that can't even take a 60 watt bulb safely without risk of burning up? With the UL approval stamp "proudly" displayed ;)
Last week i asked my power compay for a meter that reads Real Power. Lol what a tizzy that raised. If they can be believed, the request is now sitting on the desk of the CEO . I also had a question with my bill being too high the previous month, and had a person come out and re-check my meter. When i discussed the issue with him, he claimed to not know what Real and Apparent Power was ;)
quote author=jibbguy link=topic=5296.msg122681#msg122681 date=1219329162]
Regarding measurements, this is tough in that there are many variables, mostly with the batteries.
Remember that these radiant pulses will charge differently than a "regular" charger would. The desulfating
"conditioning" effect happens in them; and the very nature of the charge changes a bit. So perhaps the only
accurate way is to have 2 identical, new batts that have both been fully discharged/charged a few times by
the pulses first; then try to measure the charge levels in the Source and Charge batts. Overwise the quirks
of radiant pulse charging could interfere in getting good results.
[/quote]
@jibbguy
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I would focus on the behavior of new batteries as the Bedini
charging process should keep them in fairly good condition. I would not want anomalous behavior
of used batteries from interfering with the primary goals of getting relatively new batteries handled
properly. I'd had planned to completely disconnect battery and have a brief idle period before
instrumenting it. The measurement circuit most likely wouldn't survive the pulsing anyhow. Also
a Bedini Fan charger cannot be left to stop spinning as it cannot currently start itself. I consider
imhotep's Bedini Fan nearly the ultimate because it has an RFI interference/magnetic footprint that
should be at least somewhat consistant with the existing fan it is made from.
I don't subscribe to the theory of radiant energy calling rather free electron energy BTW.
Sorry for the OffTopicPosts - these (Bedini) CF processes seem to be all over.
@ALL
I guess I figure that the UL is probably out to save consumers lives rather then their money.
They really test what happens to the products during failure modes. It's somewhat humorous
but product prototypes usually come back from UL totally destroyed in multiple ways.
:S:MarkSCoffman
What comes to my mind while watching this video is those battery operated Fluorescent lights,
that run on a 6 volt battery. You should be able to modify one of those to do the same thing.
Anyone have one of those lights kicking around to try it?
Quote from: jibbguy on August 21, 2008, 10:32:42 AM
Regarding measurements, this is tough in that there are many variables, mostly with the batteries. Remember that these radiant pulses will charge differently than a "regular" charger would. The desulfating "conditioning" effect happens in them; and the very nature of the charge changes a bit. So perhaps the only accurate way is to have 2 identical, new batts that have both been fully discharged/charged a few times by the pulses first; then try to measure the charge levels in the Source and Charge batts. Overwise the quirks of radiant pulse charging could interfere in getting good results.
UL is a joke and has been for a long time. They are just rubber stamps for the manufacturers, who pay them for the "tests". I knew this from past experience, TUV and CSA (Canada) are 10 times more stringent and difficult to meet. You can see this in the cheap lamp fixtures that come from China: They are "UL Approved" but then you look at them closely you'll see things like "Not recommended for bulbs larger than 40 Watts" lol. Jeez, a light fixture that can't even take a 60 watt bulb safely without risk of burning up? With the UL approval stamp "proudly" displayed ;)
Last week i asked my power compay for a meter that reads Real Power. Lol what a tizzy that raised. If they can be believed, the request is now sitting on the desk of the CEO . I also had a question with my bill being too high the previous month, and had a person come out and re-check my meter. When i discussed the issue with him, he claimed to not know what Real and Apparent Power was ;)
jibbguy, thanks for the comments about the batteries.
UL certification is expensive. It depends on the product type, but it is at least $20,000US per device. And then many products that produce RF have to be FCC certified as well, about $10,000. Then each time you make little changes in your product, they have to be submitted again.
Great job pushing your power company. Let us know if they ever give you an answer.
Regards,
jeffc
Steve (Jibbguy)
The article you referenced talks of putting a capacitor across the CFL for power factor correction. All my bench tests show this is exactly the wrong way to go. It lowered the power factor instead of bringing it closer to 1.0.
The CFL's scope shots show a high peak charging current of the internal capacitor. I was able to raise the PF closer to 1.00 by adding inductance in series with the lamp.
The 14 watt lamps I tested had an uncorrected PF of 0.63. With a some inductance I was able to get near 0.80 PF.
Any attempt at adding capacitance in series or parallel to the CFL made things worse, with PF going down to 0.39
Most uncorrected switching power supplies have high peak charging currents creating a leading PF. It seems they need inductance to bring PF in line.
Top trace is voltage across lamp, lower trace is current. Notice how the peak current leads the voltage creating poor PF. Can anyone comment on this ?
This trace shows voltage and current nearly in phase with a 33 mH inductor in series with the lamp. PF=0.80
Quote from: HEYDUDE on August 22, 2008, 12:45:45 PM
Steve (Jibbguy)
The article you referenced talks of putting a capacitor across the CFL for power factor correction. All my bench tests show this is exactly the wrong way to go. It lowered the power factor instead of bringing it closer to 1.0.
The CFL's scope shots show a high peak charging current of the internal capacitor. I was able to raise the PF closer to 1.00 by adding inductance in series with the lamp.
The 14 watt lamps I tested had an uncorrected PF of 0.63. With a some inductance I was able to get near 0.80 PF.
Any attempt at adding capacitance in series or parallel to the CFL made things worse, with PF going down to 0.39
Most uncorrected switching power supplies have high peak charging currents creating a leading PF. It seems they need inductance to bring PF in line.
Top trace is voltage across lamp, lower trace is current. Notice how the peak current leads the voltage creating poor PF. Can anyone comment on this ?
Unfortunately, I was concerned about this.
How does the KilloWatt meter display differentiate between a capacitive power factor, vs an inductive power factor?
The magnitude = |absolute value|. Is there a minus sign?
If it doesn't, that means the whole problem could go back to an original imhotep error assuming that the PF reading was
inductive. Maybe the CFL's have an inherient capacitive power factor rather than an inductive one and maybe Killowatt
meter doesn't differentiate? That is what *heydudes* experiment strongly suggests. Heydude are you in the US, did
you buy your CFL bulb in the US? Anyone care to comment about the meter?
:S:MarkSCoffman
A 2-channel scope shot of the original circuit would show us if the unit you have has leading current capacitive or lagging current inductive (by comparing the phase of the voltage and current traces). It would also show what kind of harmonic distortion was there (which could possibly explain why you couldn't PF Correct it fully). **~Imhotep**~ did mention to me recently that these may need a slightly more complex circuit to PF Correct for than a simple cap, requiring a hand-full of components. I have not been able to find a schematic for a Euro PF Corrected version yet (they are not published anywhere publicly apparently). Also, i'm thinking these circuits could be finely impedance-balanced and adding a cap may "unbalance" them without the addition of other active components... sending them into increased distortion or phase shift (...although if the circuit was completetly re-designed one would think this would be avoidable). However, caps alone should still PFC for appliances unless a more active circuit was needed to correct for harmonic distortion; which is the other contributing factor to PF but should be comparatively minor in consumer AC motor products.
Edit:
Ah, just saw your traces, very nice btw ;) Where on the circuit are you getting the current signal from? Just out of curiosiy what is the scope probe , x10 or x1 (interested in the impedance, 1M or 10M and if it has any effect).
The scope shots were posted. These are n:vision 14 Watt (60 equivalent) lamps made in China, sold by Home Depot, soft white 10,000 hr. life. I am in the US. I always double check the Kill-O-Watt meter with scope readings of phase lead or lag. Kill-O-Watt does read absolute value. I also have A General Radio phasemeter.
I also test the light output with a PHOTODYNE 33XLC CHOPPED LIGHT MULTIMETER. These are spot on at 700 Lumens @ 1 Meter.
I am currently playing with more advanced circuitry for PF correction. I will post any new findings ASAP.
QuoteAh, just saw your traces, very nice btw Wink Where on the circuit are you getting the current signal from? Just out of curiosiy what is the scope probe , x10 or x1 (interested in the impedance, 1M or 10M and if it has any effect).
Scope traces using X10 10 Meg probes. Current read across 0.10 Ohm precision noninductive resistor in series with lamp. I also read with current probes.
Regards...HD
Great thx for the answers. One more Q: Do you know if your CFL is the kind that is "dimmable"? These appear to have totally different ballast circuits than the simple non-dimmables and would more match the shape of the current waveforms from what i have seen published, the others i have seen with non-dimmables are considerable more sinusoidal.
I have not explored the dimming question therefore can confess to lack of knowledge in this area. Nothing on the package indicates they are or are not. They are not too happy when put on a variac, so I would guess they need special circuitry.
I do have some large dimmable ballasts made by LUTRON for 48"tubes which I intend to play with sometime., and am good friends with an engineer that once worked in their design lab. I'll pass it by him.
Maybe some will find it interesting how controllers are used to get good PFC. Atmel has some docs about theirs on http://www.atmel.com/dyn/Products/tools_card.asp?tool_id=3925 (I guess this is a slightly different price class than low-budget CFLs from China).
ORB
Thanks for jogging my memory with that app note. Looks like you can only get so close with passive components and the trick is to use a boost regulator to charge the main V+ cap and modulate the pulse distribution. Now I remember reading some app notes on PF correction, but it was over 15 years ago.
I like a good challenge so I am going back to the bench to see how well I can approach PF =1.0 with strictly passive parts.
Regards..HD
Cool. Thx Heydude for bringing this out. Looks like my doc is in error. I'm gonna be studying this further to come up with the proper correction. Something i've found so far is that magnetic ballast does appear give a different waveform signature than electronic ballast does.
But all this of course has nothing to do with **~Imhotep~**'s great project which is not in error ;)
For those who like circuit diagrams, here is reverse-engineered one of a CFL that was published in Elektor (http://elektor.com) 6/92 and 9/92. A similar, newer one is also on ELO (http://franzis.de/elo-das-magazin/entwicklung-und-projekte/elektronische-bauteile/bauteile-in-der-energiesparlampe). Note that both are for 230 V AC, not 115 V.
Quote from: orbs on August 23, 2008, 12:48:44 PMNote that both are for 230 V AC, not 115 V.
I meant:
230 V (Volt) 50 Hz (Hertz) AC (Alternating Current), not 115 V (Volt) 60 Hz (Hertz) AC (Alternating Current) (but this board doesn't let me edit postings anymore!).
It seems that only the "moderator" of the specific forum has the power
to edit posts. Such as done in certain ones now.
thaelin
Free Energy from the Phone Line:
Here's another unethical free energy
device, image below:
SirMIkey1
A good way to fry the power supply for the phone line. Not only yours, but
all on the same leg. Then no phone at all. Also think of the ring voltage that
will be sent. 90v.
thaelin
Quote from: Thaelin on August 26, 2008, 10:27:15 AM
A good way to fry the power supply for the phone line. Not only yours, but
all on the same leg. Then no phone at all. Also think of the ring voltage that
will be sent. 90v.
thaelin
thaelin,
I'm thinking maybe use it charge a battery instead, less hazardous. May be
good to light the home with the new LED bulbs, after work, and all weekend.
SM
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 12, 2008, 09:37:10 AM
here is the new vid with one pin on each side running the 48 inch full size eco lux ge bulbs .this is getting fun !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=user)
Damn imhotep, this is exciting, but is it OU?
Upgrade the pulsing circuit and let the race
begin.
SM
Quote from: Thaelin on August 26, 2008, 10:27:15 AMAlso think of the ring voltage that will be sent. 90v.
70 V 25 Hz AC in some parts of Europe (was 23 Hz at one point).
Quote from: z.monkey on August 05, 2008, 09:55:54 AM
Howdy Vortex1,
I agree. You put X amount of current into the coil, and you get X minus efficiency factor out of the coil as Back EMF. But there is another factor there that none of us completely understand yet. This is the Free Energy Factor. Transformers can be designed in a way that exploits this Free Energy Factor. There are examples like Tesla's Radiant Energy Receiver, Henry Moray's Radiant Energy Generator, and the Hubbard Coil. Their designs exploit the Free Energy Factor and use it to draw Radiant Energy into their Coils. This results in a Power Gain, thus Free Energy. I have been working hard to understand these concepts, and I believe that I am close to an understanding. I'll keep working, and let you know as I make advancements. We are so very close...
Blessed Be Brothers...
Hi there,
I would like to quote John bedini at this point when he states that after 35 years of searching for FE, he has come to the conclusion that all that has been discovered is "reactive" power. He's talking BEMF in my opinion.
Also, IMHO, you will not induce the FE that you want to find using inductors alone. Why? The reason is the BEMF. As soon as an inductor - with or without load - is "charged", it requires a constant charge to maintain its polarisation - my definition - until it reaches a point where this charge cannot be maintained and reverses- even if you hold the charge at the point before BEMF, a charge is required to create a field change. Anyway you look at it, inductances cannot serve to provide a continous flow. It has to "pulse" a flow. Which is why we have a reference to reactive power. Pulse flow brings us back to "grid" power
The question you have to ask yourself, and not with the notion of classical theory, is why does the inductance have to return to a neutral level? The reason is, perhaps. that the earth magnetic field requires it. The flux generation in an inductance can always only be a temporary distraction in a larger field. In direct contrast, if you charge a capacitor - without a load - it will retain its charge, and can in fact spontaneously increase its charge. The difference in comprehension of these two naturally occurring phenomena will lead to understanding in greater depth, the way to creating FE.
Regards
Hi Chaps
In the UK you can buy a power factor correction box just plugs into the mains near ther meter.
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Power-Electricity-Energy-Saver-Save-5-to-30-UK-Pins_W0QQitemZ330278143356QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item330278143356&_trkparms=72%3A1301|39%3A1|66%3A2|65%3A12|240%3A1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
Peter
QuoteGenerally "volts" is not a technically acceptable measurement for the state of battery charge.
Generally, state of a battery charge is
useless when trying to find out, if your circuit is OU or not. Electrical energy is stored in a chemical form and that causes
problems. When you charge the battery and then stop charging, the voltage starts to go down for a while.
What is the current charge of your battery right now? Are you sure? No you are not!Using battery will cause
huge errors in your energy calculations all the time. You can not ever accurately state how much energy is in your battery. Also, all cheap normal meters give huge errors when you are using pulsed DC or just any other shape of AC than pure sine wave. You can not state how much energy went in to the battery.
Instead of batteries, you can use capacitors. Again, electrolytic capacitors are not the best choice because they attend to develop charge after you have emptied them. Again because of the chemicals.
If you want to measure the energy production of your circuit
very accurately, here is what you can do.
And this is very accurate and easy!Just use two capacitors, another one is the
charged power source and the other is
the one that you charge. Even easier if the capacitors are identical. Run your circuit for a while and
if you end up with more volts than you started, you have OU!Say, you have 0.5 Farads capacitor charged to 12 Volts. You then run your circuit for a while and shut it down. Then you have 9Volts left in the source and 3Volts charged to the empty one. Congratulations, your circuit is 100% efficient. There is just no chance of error!
If you end up with 9Volts in the source and 9Volts also in the empty one then
there just is no possibilities, you have Free Energy! You have 150% efficient circuit. But you can not make a statement like this if you use batteries. The error marginal is just so huge when using batteries that you are just wasting your time.
When you use capacitors as the source and to store the output, all you need is a cheap ass voltage meter and
you can have very accurate results.(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotlinkfiles.com%2Ffiles%2F1940749_ajiul%2FOUdevice.JPG&hash=32d3f320ed7f6a3b5a085245662f7b5a94beb94d)
It is very likely, that when
one of us makes a circuit that is over unity, the free energy is only a small amount, say, like 5% gain in total energy. This is likely to happen like this, because we don’t yet have a law of free energy, so we will bump into it
by accident. And if your system has a 0…50% error factor in it all the time, then
you will miss this valuable free energy that you just made.
Greatest invention of a human history, that you made, but missed it just because your experiment was so poorly made.After you have found a circuit that produces just a little amount of free energy, we can all replicate your circuit and start to fine tune the circuit to maximize the free part of it!
Dear one,
you mix up Charge ( Q ) with W ( Energy ) in your formula.
Energy W for 12 Volt in a Capacitor with 0.5 Farad = 12 V exp2 * 1/2 + 0.5 F = 36 Joule ( Watt sec )
Two caps with 9 Volt will have : W = 2 * ( 9 V exp2 *1/2 * 0.5 F ) = 2 * 20.25 J = 40.5 Joule
which gives you 107,5 % more energy in both caps related to 36 Joule - not 150 %
Please be more accurate.
Kator
Oh! How stupid of me! :o
If the energy stored in capacitor (12V 0.5F) is divided in two capacitors the resulting voltages would be 8.5V and 8.5V not 6V!
My bad! Well, it was two a clock at night in my time zone.
The point was, using only capacitors, gives a firm proof of the efficiency of your circuit, without the need of a fancy and expensive measurement instruments.
Anybody can do this and the results are there for others to replicate. This is not the case when the system involves unknown amount of energy stored in a chemical form. You just can not replicate something that includes an “almost dead battery that is almost emptyâ€.
Voltage of a battery does not tell accurately about the energy stored in it. Even if it where brand new off the shelve one. Voltage of a capacitor does tell you that.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotlinkfiles.com%2Ffiles%2F1942192_kydsw%2FOUdevice.JPG&hash=0d578919a3c95e8568a813dfb909f374f0446cca)
Hi Everyone,
I've been following this forum and the Imhotep Radiant Oscillator for a while now but this is my first post...
I just wanted to share my simple replication with everyone.
This video is great for someone starting out at this who wants to get a radiant oscillator working. Instead of a relay I'm using the Earth Ground sort of as an antenna/oscillator:
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKR7rJdze8 (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=wXKR7rJdze8)
This video goes more in depth into the radiant oscillator, now using a PWM circuit. I can achieve some 'Tesla Like' Transmission of energy and one wire transmission. I can also light up 100V neons on the low voltage side and create one wire spark gaps that spark into thin air. Anyway its al explained in the video, check it out.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=1_AGbBsa45E (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=1_AGbBsa45E)
I have been noticing some very strange things happening with this circuit and am haing loads of fun experimenting with it. If someone can tell me how i could implement secondary battery charging into this it would be much appreciated
-shlodo
I haven't had much success
Quote from: sulake on October 11, 2008, 07:55:19 PM
Generally, state of a battery charge is useless when trying to find out, if your circuit is OU or not. Electrical energy is stored in a chemical form and that causes problems. When you charge the battery and then stop charging, the voltage starts to go down for a while. What is the current charge of your battery right now? Are you sure? No you are not!
Using battery will cause huge errors in your energy calculations all the time. You can not ever accurately state how much energy is in your battery. Also, all cheap normal meters give huge errors when you are using pulsed DC or just any other shape of AC than pure sine wave. You can not state how much energy went in to the battery.
Instead of batteries, you can use capacitors.
What is a battery if its not a form of Capacitor? If you look at your circuits/experiments and treat the battery as a capacitor you might be surprised how your thinking/concepts can be extended. IMHO, it is not mission critical to understand the minutae of capacitor - battery differential. If your " device " is OU you will know!! A lot experiments out there are rehashes of other experiments. To get to OU you have to start thinking about how capacitors can be charged without being charged!!!
Regards
Quote from: Vortex1 on August 05, 2008, 10:47:54 AM
The Hubbard design is one of about five devices that I have any faith may be made to work.
Vortex1, my entire search for free energy has consisted of narrowing down the possibilities, to the most promising avenues and devices. I have gained a lot of knowledge in wide areas by
getting an overview of theory and machines.
Would you be so kind as to list the other 4 devices and any other footnotes that would help a young seeker of wisdom? I would like to move forward with a minimum of duplication, and it seems you can be a big help! Thanks so much,
Rob
Quote from: ourbobby on January 17, 2009, 04:34:55 PM
To get to OU you have to start thinking about how capacitors can be charged without being charged!!!
Quote from: JustAnElectrician on December 05, 2009, 01:05:28 AM
Would you be so kind as to list the other 4 devices and any other
footnotes that would help a young seeker of wisdom?
You should download this:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk
Quote from: **~imhotep~** on August 04, 2008, 05:56:37 PM
thank you very much, me and Dr Peter Lindemann worked hard on this project and if you have been in the fe community very long you know Peters reputation he is a genius . i tried very hard to make something that could easily be built to study tesla as well as bedini and get some efficient EMERGENCY light. if you want dont take a chance on a 1.50 cent bulb then use it for a ultra efficient ssg i have tested my setup for months for 1 hour intervals and it still works great .the first test ran for 72 hours straight and did not run down the source battery and charged a second battery to boot you got to love the simplicity. if you need more detailed schematics they will be on my new website www.imhotepslab.com soon i will be investigating ,with experts all fe devices and releasing to the public all findings i am here to serve you all for free. get it free energy (my energy) i will be releasing power factor correcting for the standard cfl's as well as a 2 part simple charger soon keep watching and i hope you all like it. **~imhotep~** ;D
YOU TELL THEM IMHOTEP!!! I'm getting more pissed as I read the BS here, I know this is old
stuff BUT I HAVE USED your Devices FOR ALMOST A YEAR NOW AND TEHY WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am currently conditioning some NiMH batteries and others for OU TRIALS, it is so compelling
that I believe it will work! BTW, I abide @ Imhotep's Lab and TEEP, there is definite critical
thinking both places, but NOT the snide undercutting remarks like I am seeing here, and OU
is a good forum, but I believe it has it's share of MOLES and FE Hating Jack Asses that just try
and disrupt the process and cast doubt, NON-constructive criticism, and hate.
No offense to those who are really trying to work together, none whatsoever.
If the shoe don't fit, then don't wear it!
Rob
Quote from: Vortex1 on August 08, 2008, 01:29:24 PM
Omega_0
This dual battery scheme with one charging the other is just sleight of hand. With a little skill, the circuit could be arranged with a single primary battery such that the flyback pulse charges the primary battery. The circuit will still run down the primary battery.
SO? PUT UP OR SHUT UP, Hundreds of Bedini experimenters have tried and failed to "CLOSE THE LOOP" so IF YOU KNOW HOW, then PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
Hate to be rude, but IMO it's just a red herring. PROVE ME WRONG.
Do extremely careful measurements of the energy budget in this type of circuit to cut through the BS.
To get a quick look at how the energy moves around the circuit, use large electrolytic capacitors instead of batteries as pointed out by others many times earlier.
Bedini will not do this (the single battery), thats why he is able to keep his snake oil show on the road.
Sooner or later, the truth of this type of intellectual scam will be revealed. Sorry Bedini believers, I bought his book, built his devices, and followed his claims from the very beginning (80's) and my tests show no OU.
But Bedini slips and slides around a lot, and when confronted on the OU issue, he backtracks to "just a better way to charge batteries". Pulse battery charging has been around a long, long time.
If any disagree, go ahead with it, you will certainly learn a few eye opening facts along the way, but only if you take careful energy measurements.
Just tryin to save y'all some time.
Let's see it V1
TIA Rob
Quote from: ourbobby on October 11, 2008, 08:41:57 AM
Hi there,
I would like to quote John bedini at this point when he states that after 35 years of searching for FE, he has come to the conclusion that all that has been discovered is "reactive" power. He's talking BEMF in my opinion.
Also, IMHO, you will not induce the FE that you want to find using inductors alone. Why? The reason is the BEMF. As soon as an inductor - with or without load - is "charged", it requires a constant charge to maintain its polarisation - my definition - until it reaches a point where this charge cannot be maintained and reverses- even if you hold the charge at the point before BEMF, a charge is required to create a field change. Anyway you look at it, inductances cannot serve to provide a continous flow. It has to "pulse" a flow. Which is why we have a reference to reactive power. Pulse flow brings us back to "grid" power
The question you have to ask yourself, and not with the notion of classical theory, is why does the inductance have to return to a neutral level? The reason is, perhaps. that the earth magnetic field requires it. The flux generation in an inductance can always only be a temporary distraction in a larger field. In direct contrast, if you charge a capacitor - without a load - it will retain its charge, and can in fact spontaneously increase its charge. The difference in comprehension of these two naturally occurring phenomena will lead to understanding in greater depth, the way to creating FE.
Regards
A quote without context is ??? When and where? Not calling BS, but
I need to see more on this. I agree with your summation BTW.
Rob
Quote from: Paul-R on December 06, 2009, 06:38:59 AM
You should download this:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk
Another site address:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/PJKBook.html
Warning:
32 MB @ ~2,200PP 4 1/2 to 6 mins to download.
--Lee
test
Quote from: triffid on January 09, 2012, 10:56:54 AM
test
triffid,
I'll be spending my time on OUR.com for then foreseeable future. It's got the most potential for my future research efforts, IMHO.
There's something else: Cultural American evolution and the human Free Will working all the time, may make my prediction of an economic collapse
gradual rather than sudden. For example, people may finally realize, in Europe and America, that the Muslim threat to the West is getting worse and finally do something about their violently aggressive religious zeal. And not necessarily with another 9/11.
The world is different than I thought it would be when I started the
"I see an economic disaster coming..." thread.
--Lee