I'm skeptical of these motors...

[mike3]

You know, I just can't help it but have skepticism about all these motors and things. For one, this "Bedini" motor thing has batteries in there. The result is supposedly that more energy comes out the "out" terminal than goes into the "in" terminal. Which therefore makes me wonder, why bother with the batteries? Why not just hook the out to the in and then give the flywheel a kick? If more energy comes out the out, then when the initial pulse here is given, it should self-amplify (or pick up more energy from the vacuum) as it passes through the machine, so the wheel should start to speed up "all on its own". What I'm wondering about though is why this has not been done. If these motors really do work, this should work, no? Why shouldn't it? That's the only way to really prove beyond a reasonable doubt it works -- no batteries or other power systems in the loop -- just the mysterious device itself, and then give it a push and see if it accelerates itself. Only sustained acceleration would prove beyond a reasonable doubt this device actually works. If you don't want it to burst then just have some brakes on there (or yank out the coil or some other fail safe). If it can sustain an acceleration, then we can see it is working, as obviously more energy is coming into the wheel than our push put in.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Now having a real, working machine that actually does indeed produce over-unity would be extraordinary proof. But the way these things are rigged seems to leave open the possibility the battery could be supplying all the energy, and since it's infeasible to put up a video that is as long as the estimated lifespan of the battery with no over-unity effects, they do not seem to show that such extraordinary proof exists, and so I don't believe the claim.

Any comment on why this test is bad or problematic or otherwise hasn't been done?

[Hoppy]

You know, I just can't help it but have skepticism about all these motors and things. For one, this "Bedini" motor thing has batteries in there. The result is supposedly that more energy comes out the "out" terminal than goes into the "in" terminal. Which therefore makes me wonder, why bother with the batteries? Why not just hook the out to the in and then give the flywheel a kick? If more energy comes out the out, then when the initial pulse here is given, it should self-amplify (or pick up more energy from the vacuum) as it passes through the machine, so the wheel should start to speed up "all on its own". What I'm wondering about though is why this has not been done. If these motors really do work, this should work, no? Why shouldn't it? That's the only way to really prove beyond a reasonable doubt it works -- no batteries or other power systems in the loop -- just the mysterious device itself, and then give it a push and see if it accelerates itself. Only sustained acceleration would prove beyond a reasonable doubt this device actually works. If you don't want it to burst then just have some brakes on there (or yank out the coil or some other fail safe). If it can sustain an acceleration, then we can see it is working, as obviously more energy is coming into the wheel than our push put in.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Now having a real, working machine that actually does indeed produce over-unity would be extraordinary proof. But the way these things are rigged seems to leave open the possibility the battery could be supplying all the energy, and since it's infeasible to put up a video that is as long as the estimated lifespan of the battery with no over-unity effects, they do not seem to show that such extraordinary proof exists, and so I don't believe the claim.

Any comment on why this test is bad or problematic or otherwise hasn't been done?

With respect you misunderstand the Bedini Motor. It is not OU or even unity. In fact it is very inneficient, around 40% - 50% efficiency electrically. Any gains are claimed to be seen in the battery when it has been conditioned. This is why it's referred to as an energiser, not a battery charger. A lot input energy is required for battery conditioning, even with a new battery. It does beg the question is it all worthwhile. That's down to the opinion of anyone who has had the time and patience to go through this process with all the verifying load testing that is involved, not for people who have never gone through the complete process.


Hoppy

[mike3]

Which of course makes me wonder as to why bother with the thing in the first place. If it does not provide any more energy out than you put in (i.e. is not "over unity"), but is actually an _under_-unity device, what's its point? It just doesn't make any sense. Then you just have an energy waster, not an energy source. Why is everyone so amazed at trying to build this thing? Just a fun "toy"? What?

And what the heck does this "battery conditioning" mean? How does the _battery_ need to have some sort of special property?

[citfta]

The whole point is the SSG is used as a demo to show how to rejuvinate "dead" batteries.  I have already recovered a couple of batteries that would not hold a charge anymore.  The SSG produces pulses that clean up the sulphation in a dead battery.  Also if the unit is built and tuned correctly the battery will become more efficient and therefore able to hold a larger charge than it could originally.  I have built one and it works just like the people on the monopole site said it would.  citfta

[Hoppy]

Which of course makes me wonder as to why bother with the thing in the first place. If it does not provide any more energy out than you put in (i.e. is not "over unity"), but is actually an _under_-unity device, what's its point? It just doesn't make any sense. Then you just have an energy waster, not an energy source. Why is everyone so amazed at trying to build this thing? Just a fun "toy"? What?

And what the heck does this "battery conditioning" mean? How does the _battery_ need to have some sort of special property?

As citfta points out, its just for learning and enjoyment purposes. Its not a magic machine, just simple EE stuff, an electro-mechanical oscillator which can rejuvenate and re-charge sulfated batteries.  The same thing can be done a lot simpler with solid state but the spinning wheel looks nice and can make an attractive feature in the garden or novel fan for the house (matter of opinion of course). If some of the coil discharge is fed back (back-popped) to the primary, the power requirements are low, so a small PV panel can be used to run it as a garden feature (COP infinity!).

The real McCoy if it exists is the property of John Bedini and he is understandably not going to reveal this and jeopardise his commercial interests.

Hoppy