It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


'Free Energy' DIY Anyone?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 06:07 PM
Yeah, I know they start out with basic learning groups, but even the advanced group circuit is easy. With that schematic, there is nothing left to really experiment with, build it and it should work. Any one who's built circuits on proto/bread boards should have no problem setting it up, the only thing left to the imagination is the measurement part.

Now if they could demonstrate something like the Steven Marks TPU in the same clear way, then I'd say they have something.

Untill they get it to run forever on a tiny 1-4AH lead acid and post time lapse video, I will have mixed feelings about it. Even a video of it working for 10minutes off a 1farad car amp capacitor would make me happy.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 06:38 PM
Solar thermals are making the way slowly to market. If you don't understand solar thermal: a set of Fresnel lenses to concentrate solar energy to a small point, like a magnifying glass does. Using this method could make a heat point hot enough to melt steel in seconds, but is slightly spread to a larger spot. From then on it works like any steam electricity plant burning coal, oil, or gas to boil water and uses the steam to power a turbine.
One company is still in Beta testing on a closed loop rooftop model of 20kw or there about. In the simplest models, you do all of your energy intensive tasks during daylight, then with a small bank of batteries you run on inverted power @ night. Your hot water needs are provided by a heat exchanger---running the steam through an insulated storage tank as part of the cooling circuit.
You do have to modify your lifestyle a bit, but not as much as you would think, and cloudy days and short winter days can hamper your style a bit, so a secondary backup is advisable. My solution----use some of your electricity to make hydrogen, store it, and use for heating and cooking, and also to power a backup generator.

posted on Mar, 31 2009 @ 06:57 PM

Originally posted by XL5
Yeah, I know they start out with basic learning groups, but even the advanced group circuit is easy. With that schematic, there is nothing left to really experiment with, build it and it should work. Any one who's built circuits on proto/bread boards should have no problem setting it up, the only thing left to the imagination is the measurement part.

From what I've read, it seems like Bedini initially felt the same way. 10 years of trying to help experimenters made him reconsider. My impression is that there seems to be some subtleties on the motor-end of the construction process, and in the resonant aspect of the Bedini devices. He also simply seems fed up with people asking him the same basic questions over and over again.

Untill they get it to run forever on a tiny 1-4AH lead acid and post time lapse video, I will have mixed feelings about it. Even a video of it working for 10minutes off a 1farad car amp capacitor would make me happy.

That's fine, I have mixed feelings myself (particularly in regards to measurement methodology), but calling it a cult was a bit overboard.

[edit on 31-3-2009 by theWCH]

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:21 AM

Originally posted by XL5
Yeah, I know they start out with basic learning groups, but even the advanced group circuit is easy. With that schematic, there is nothing left to really experiment with, build it and it should work.

So why don't you quit bitchin and do it?

Here's how I see it:

This is Bedini's life work. Many people would like to profit from it. He has the right to set entrance to his 'inner circle' at whatever level he likes. Others would be charging huge sums of money, John Bedini merely asks those that say they are interested to build his simplest motor, test it, and document the results. Really, why is that so much to ask?

For those that like to say 'prove it', John Bedini replies 'prove it for yourself - here are the instructions'. I have no problem with that. In fact, I enjoy his cryptic nature, it's refreshing

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:30 AM
reply to post by gotrox

I was considering using solar tubes to create steam to drive a turbine. The latest tubes at the time heated water to around 220 celcius. In the end, I decided to wait a few years to see what happened with the tech in the market place. My panels currently can heat water to way over 150 degrees celcius which gives us more or less unlimited hot water in the summer, but they fail miserably in the winter months when the days are short and the sun much lower in the sky.

The problem with solar as you rightly say, is it only works when the sun is shining and high enough. Great in Arizona or Morocco but not so great in other places.

Another thing I'd like to avoid are the banks of batteries that become toxic junk after a few short years, which is really why I'm so keen on the elusive devices that tap zero point.

My interest in the Bedini monopole motors is there ability to prolong the life of batteries, according to Bedini, for up to 20 years or more. Still, it seems like a clumsy solution. I'll keep looking

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 04:39 AM
reply to post by theWCH

I think you are right about Bedini's reasons for setting an entry level higher than zero.

One of the issues with a self runner, is of course friction.

Even if you tap zero point (radiant energy), you still need more of it than you lose in bearing friction and other heat losses.

My setup gets something extra, which I am assuming is the 300/400v radiant spikes (although without a scope I can't confirm that), but it is still way under unity.

'Conventionally' what goes into the battery is less than what comes out, because the measuring instruments do not measure the radiant spikes.

So more amps appear to come out than go in.

I think this is what Bedini refers to as confounding the electronics people, and why he suggest Amperes are somewhat meaningless in certain contexts.

From my limited understanding, the idea is to get potential without current, which by chemical processes can be converted in the battery and stored to do work later.

The reason the SSG cannot be looped is to do with the way the radiant affects the battery physically.

Apparently, the 'radiant in' creates a crystalline structure on the plates that is broken down by the 'pulsed draw' if it is looped or cycled.

Please don't quote me, that's just my limited understanding. There are discussions about it in the group, but I haven't engaged much in them to date, as was still testing my model and not ready to get theoretical.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:43 PM
OK, it's time to post some results.

A quick recap:

I built a Bedini Monopole motor with SSG (simplified schoolgirl circuit).

The motor is designed to tap radiant energy (zero point/vacuum energy) through the collapse of a coil which is bi-filar and triggered by a small input current.

The output from the circuit is dumped into a lead acid battery.

Current from the circuit going into the battery is measured with an Ameter, average voltage calculated from rest voltage and load term voltage, and the number of seconds charging recorded. From this, we calculate energy in. This is the conventional energy in, and does not account for the radiant spikes which are the 'free energy' component and not measurable on the Ameter (can be seen on an oscilloscope)

The battery is then discharged back to the same voltage using a constant load (I used a 4W bulb) at approximately the C20 rate. Again, the average voltage, time and current draw are measured to get the 'Energy Out'.

Energy IN is then compared to Energy OUT and a COP assigned.

I did the charge/discharge cycles approximately 20 times and averaged a COP of about 1.3, meaning 30% more energy comes back out of the battery than 'conventionally' goes in.

Please note, this does NOT mean the motor is over-unity, it is simply showing that there is something else adding charge to the battery than the conventional current. Bedini says the radiant spikes are around 300/400V, but without a scope, I could not measure this.

We are not concerned with the COP of the actual motor in this experiment, or even the input energy to the circuit. For those interested, the current draw on the input (I used a small 12V DC transformer) was approximately 250% larger than the output, so I have considerable losses in the motor - most likely due to the wheel bearings which were standard bicycle wheel bearings. I've read in the group that this can be reduced to around a 50-60% efficiency if attention is given to the bearings. I didn't bother, as it is the nature of the output that is of interest in the SSG experiment.

The idea was to stay within a range of around 80% of full charge (don't ask me why), which I did for half the cycles, then I decided to vary in case I was creating some memory anomaly within the battery. I did at least half a dozen cycles pretty much fully charging and discharging (as far as I felt safe without killing the battery).

The battery was brand new to begin with, not some old sulphated car battery. Anyway, the COP has remained pretty constant, no matter what charge/discharge range I picked, over the entire experiment, which has taken about 2 months.

The intention of the experiment is for the builder to convince themselves that there is something coming out of the circuit which defies convention, and is the 'free' aspect. I have zero electronics background, so wouldn't know convention if it bit me in the ass, so any comments are welcome.

Is this radiant energy/zero point/vacuum energy?

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 04:04 PM
reply to post by RogerT

Feel a bit lame giving my own thread a bump, but am surprised there has been no response.

I thought tapping zero point energy was a big deal here on ATS?

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 06:53 PM
reply to post by RogerT

Still following the thread with keen interest RogerT but don't know what to say really besides giving you a star.

This "level 2" yahoo group sounds very interesting and it will be great if you get in

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 09:30 PM
Look into closed loop or open loop geothermal, you do not need to be on a volcano or hotspring, they can be installed anywhere there is a difference of more than 25 degrees between ground and air temperature.

posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by RogerT

Sorry, Roger, this slipped past me.

It sounds like you are making steady progress, and let's say some of your assumptions have merit. That's not to imply any are wrong, but you're on the right track.

There are things that cannot be measured "going in" but only measured once they've arrived.

It's great to hear you posting your results.

Now tell the truth. Did you follow exact directions, or did you re-engineer the device to meet modern EM advances in circuitry?

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 09:08 AM
reply to post by RogerT

Sorry RodgerT, I'm also checking with your thread daily for updates. As far as my HHO generator, I played with the amperage and found my production did not increase with more amperage. I must have max out with 7 spoons. I'm now going the route of the 'Stanley Meyers' type. I have been working on different flame arrestors since the burn speed of 'Brown's Gas' is 1000 times faster than LPG. I have a bubbler installed but it still sounds like a 22 going off with what little residue gas I have in the line.

As far as your project goes, I'm keeping up with your findings and plan on playing with that idea as soon as I can get the materials together. Hearing your processes and findings seem to sink into my 'braincell' alot easier than the other articles I've tried to comprehend.

Keep posting. We're here.


[edit on 11-4-2009 by geo1066]

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 02:15 PM

Originally posted by dooper

Now tell the truth. Did you follow exact directions, or did you re-engineer the device to meet modern EM advances in circuitry?

I followed exact directions regarding the circuit. I wouldn't know how to re-engineer even if I wanted to.

The only thing I deviated from was the cycling procedure, although I did follow initially. Reason for this was 1) Didn't really understand the instructions to begin with 2) wanted to test a theory of my own during later testing.

thanks everyone for adding a few posts, it definitely keeps me interested in moving with the project and sharing my journey with you guys.

posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 02:19 PM
reply to post by geo1066

Cool Geo.

It's great that we now have to DIY projects here in this thread. I'm excited to join your experimenting but will have to wait till later after the summer.


posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 04:37 PM
reply to post by RogerT

I've decided to get excited by the lack of challenge or alternative comments to my posted results (notwithstanding the positive feedback - thanks)

I guess this means that the ATS free energy deniers cannot explain Bedini's findings away with their pompous intellectualising, when a total noob can recreate it.

So it seems, from an ATS perspective anyway, that zero point energy is real, and can be tapped extraordinarily easily. Cool.

Onward and inward



posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 04:54 PM
Roger, in my own mind I can explain it away, I can't convince you or any one else who can not use just a bit of logic to see that if it can't be looped, what good is it. Its like the people who still think the WTC was taken down with holograms and lasers and will NEVER be convinced otherwise unless god him/her self comes down and says so!

I just choose not to reply as I've discovered that my logic is wasted on you. The other reason I don't try it for my self is because I don't see the logic in making it if you can't loop it, theres no point.

Your post came off as very trollish roger and I'm sure you meant it like that, thats the kind of back patting that turned people off the whole 9/11 issue. Its self defeating.

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 05:07 PM
My post was intended to get 'peer review' and I am very glad you have responded to it, thank you.

However, I do wish you would let go of the need to 'loop it to prove it' idea, which is limiting your ability to experience something new.

I'll state one more time for you my limited understanding: The SSG experiment is designed simply to expose the existence of radiant energy and demonstrate one way to tap it. The motor setup itself is not designed to be looped, but that doesn't mean it can't be developed into a form that can be looped.

Of course, that is wasted on you if you continue to insist that you won't investigate a new phenomena (new to you) unless the new phenomena complies with your current knowlege limitations.

If you can offer an alternative explanation as to where the extra charge in the battery comes from, please do - most genuine request! I do not wish to be hoodwinked by some fraudulent 'Bedini Cult', so will give any explanaiton you offer the attention and energy it rightly deserves.


posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 05:41 PM
reply to post by XL5

XL5, the problem is, your logic is flawed. The only thing I've heard you protest is that it can't be looped.

Why, exactly, does it have to loop?

Does it have to loop as you want it to loop?

In your mind, is it necessary to loop to maintain self-sustainment?

If one wishes to go from point A to point B, then why in hell would one demand a loop?

The truth is, it can loop, but not exactly like you wish it to.

At the more advanced level, it can SELF-SUSTAIN. Not only self-sustain, but self-sustain AFTER you've pulled out whatever quantity you require to run a house, or run a car.

Bedini has given one the keys to the county gas tanks. But damn, someone wants to bitch because they have to pump it themselves.

This logic is the very reason that Bedini gave up on responding to folks.

This is the very reason he decided to only help those who COULD.

This is the very reason he quit trying to prove anything, because of this bone-deep circular logic, which won't allow anyone to learn anything new.

This is the very reason we can't advance our science. Engineers who only want the universe to work the way they want it to work.

Good luck on that. You're in for a lot of disappointments.

The very reason I asked if it was built according to specific directions was to hopefully turn on a light to "electromagnetic engineer" types.

First thing you know, they want to modify the circuit, add this, remove that, multiply the other, and then they bitch because it doesn't do anything.

Surprise, surprise.

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 05:59 PM
I use this @ the moment, the 1500 watt model, in each room.
My PC has been off the grid now for over 3 years, I found that for the most part, it is not how much you produce but, how you use what you make....
I am experimenting with many different ways of charging my batteries, yes plain old car
The most cost efficient method so far is a car alternator with an ordinary 20" box fan blade, and a remote control car transmition.. There is no need to worry about running the batteries dead the invertor, has an automatic off, when it drops below 11 volts....
I will go into more detail, if you request....


posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 01:26 AM
Why it has to loop is because it can if its free energy. If I had made it and found it was 130% eff, the first thing I'd do is try every way I know how to loop it! For me, to prove to my self that "I" haven't miscalculated or measured, I would have to loop it and see if it keeps on going and not just puts out more energy but "makes" energy as well.

I would make something exactly as stated, then, WHEN IT WORKS I would moddifiy it one step at a time.

I suggest a test that doesn't need a loop to work, Roger, how many amp hours is the battery? Charge it on a normal charger and let it sit at 14V for 6 hours, then 5 hours of rest, then discharge it at the 20hour rate (if its 10Amphour, discharge it at 0.5amps) then see how long it takes to get to 10.8V. Then, do it again but use the SSG as the charger. No loop needed and it tests real output power, if the battery measures its rated AH rating in the first test and exceeds in the SSG test, then you have free energy.

Dooper, you really think I'm by the book huh? I am not, not at all, I just think that if you want to claim that cars are powered by hampsters on wheels, you better produce the wheel and or the hampster. You had also better not say opening the hood will turn that hampster/wheel into a V8 or I will get the funny feeling its a trick. I think you should try to recreate the Hans Coler device as I personally believe its almost like the Steven Marks TPU device, both of which hold some promise.

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in