It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by MajorDisaster
Whenever you have a dipole (magnet), there's a ridiculous amount of Negative Energy or Radiant energy coming in
Yeah, this looks like a silly speculation at the very best. Do you know how magnets work anyway? Nothing to do with "cosmic vacuum" or acoustic energy of Steorn's flatulence.
Originally posted by HaTaX
I think if someone on the board wants to try this out, I would start with making a Bedini "School Girl Motor" with cheap parts that would prove that you're charging the secondary battery faster then draining the primary source battery. If you can do it on a small scale and actually keep the other battery charged at a greater rate then you deplete the source, then you'll have your answer as to whether these designs work or not. Only questions after that is, how well does it scale and do the effects scale linearly with size?
Now, who's going to sign up to make a school girl motor?
Originally posted by TheRedneck
I do believe that there is an inherent property in permanent magnets that appears to defy the laws Conservation of Energy
Originally posted by buddhasystem
And no, over-unity can not be obtained for real.
Originally posted by MajorDisaster
Originally posted by buddhasystem
And no, over-unity can not be obtained for real.
Well, tell that to RogerT, and the hundreds of other people who have built a Bedini SG motor and got a COP > 1.0
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Yeah right, that's exactly why half of all discussions in the fora that these people participate in is strictly about properly charging batteries, and the other half are complaints about "batteries losing conditioning". Sorry pal, but once the battery is gone, they cry mama and rush to an outlet to recharge it. Some perpetual motion.
Originally posted by HaTaX
My real hang up with systems that claim over unity never are shown in a manner where the inventors are using them to do something that shows a daily use for the technology. Perhaps the batteries can't take this type of application for long periods of time? Maybe there is a large danger when you scale it up to the Kw production needed to run a home that would kill many "garage scientists"? Or just maybe these devices are incredibly efficient, but don't actually produce more output then input?
Appearance is a good word to use here.
A piece of metal (such as copper) can shoot up when placed next to an electromagnet, when you inject a pulse of current in that magnet. In that case, there is an appearance of telekinesis. When you look inside a water-moderated nuclear reactor (I did), the water appears to burn like a blue flame.
And no, over-unity can not be obtained for real.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by malcr
If any device produces more power than it uses, one should be able to disconnect the battery after start-up without stopping it from running. If I were setting up a demonstration model, I would have a quick-disconnect
to remove the battery easily during a demonstration.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with needing an initial charge, but the videos and descriptions so far have been concerning a device which requires a battery for operation continuously.
Now, if they connect this motor to a generator which charges the battery without it running down (meaning the battery could be removed during operation), we have something to get excited about. There are expectations for this to happen, but until they do happen talk about this being over-unity is premature.
TheRedneck
ny theoreticall efficency level is utterly worthless if it is as unreliable as steorns white elephant is .
the company ` engineers ` cannot even get it to run - what chance does it have in the real world ?
also whats its peak torque , and power to weight ratio ?
Originally posted by TheRedneck
My reasoning is this: A single NIB (Neodymium-Iron-Boron, or 'rare earth') permanent magnet will retain its properties of attraction and repulsion of other magnets for years, even while it is being used as such. The same electromagnet will require a great deal of energy to do this. So where is the energy from the NIB magnet coming from?
Originally posted by downisreallyup
Redneck, you are assuming that the battery is used in a conventional means, but if you go and study the Bedini motors, you will find out that the batteries are used as a ZPE/Energy converter. In this type of motor, the battery is not there to power anything, it is there to convert the back EMF pulses into usable energy.
Redneck, you are assuming that the battery is used in a conventional means, but if you go and study the Bedini motors, you will find out that the batteries are used as a ZPE/Energy converter.
If you are going to be involved with science, you really need to understand that not everything is so simple that a child could understand it.
To really see if this is producing more energy that it consumes, you just need to use reliable meters. They don't lie.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
They could have done it with a diode and a capacitor. But they didn't. The reason why the battery is indeed to obtain the deceptive result lies in chemistry of a battery -- it is possible to cause a transient effect of voltage being higher than usual (although total energy stored of course does not change).
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by downisreallyup
Redneck, you are assuming that the battery is used in a conventional means, but if you go and study the Bedini motors, you will find out that the batteries are used as a ZPE/Energy converter.
I have studied it, but admittedly some years ago. I am going back over the design now to refresh my memory. I have been working in electronics for over 30 years, and one does tend to forget details over that course of time.
The conversion you are speaking of can be accomplished with an inductive/capacitive network just as well as a battery. For initial tests, a battery would be appropriate, since they are typically fairly hardy devices and capacitors are not. Once the values of the pulses are determined, there is no need to use a battery; indeed, a battery would only give the impression of a need for outside current from a conventional source.
If you are going to be involved with science, you really need to understand that not everything is so simple that a child could understand it.
You know, it does seem strange to me that some people complain that I am being too technical, while at the same time others accuse me of being simplistic.
Forgive me for not typing in a language that most people can not read.
To really see if this is producing more energy that it consumes, you just need to use reliable meters. They don't lie.
They also do not excite.
The purpose of a demonstration prototype is to excite, to demonstrate (hence the name) operation to the public in the most effective manner. That means that you can throw all the technical jargon out the window and just crank the critter up to get your point across. Of course, one must be able to explain the workings of the model to those with a detailed background, but scientists and engineers do not finance projects: bankers and investors do. Bankers and investors do not understand the jargon. They understand, however, that when something is running with no external power source and no possible known method of powering itself, that it works. Even the US Patent Office now requires that any design which claims over-unity must be accompanied by a working prototype... not readings on a meter.
Really, you do realize this SchoolGirl motor design was hosted on YouTube, right? How many YouTube viewers would understand how to design and construct a simple circuit, much less interpret results obtained on a numeric display?
I cannot comment further on the SchoolGirl motor until I have re-researched it more.
TheRedneck
Originally posted by TheRedneck
Originally posted by buddhasystem
They could have done it with a diode and a capacitor. But they didn't. The reason why the battery is indeed to obtain the deceptive result lies in chemistry of a battery -- it is possible to cause a transient effect of voltage being higher than usual (although total energy stored of course does not change).
Possible, but a poor design approach, Depending on the voltage you would expect from the source as well as the pulse duration, frequency, and rate of voltage drop after the pulse, a capacitor that can withstand that amount of voltage and still have enough capacitance to operate effectively as a voltage buffer can cost thousands of dollars and be the size of a small building. A simple inductor-capacitor arrangement would allow for much cheaper, smaller, and more available capacitors to be used.