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.

 

Turkish Inventor Ready to License Free Energy Motors and Generators for Production

page: 10
59
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I'm following your logic on starting with fully discharged output batteries. Makes perfect sense.

Now, how do you measure what you had to put in to charge the battery? If people are trying to measure non-sinusoidal waveforms with meters designed to give accurate readings only with DC or sinusoidal AC, could they be making measurement errors?


You got me there. I don't know.

Is there no simple way to measure how many amp-hours are used up from the input battery?




posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 


I'm not worried about what ATS management thinks, I'm not sure they have the expertise of an independent test lab anyway, that's what's needed, not ATS. ATS would probably have to contract out testing services to testing experts. So why not skip ATS management and go straight to the testing experts?

If a qualified, certified independent test lab can make measurements that would show these things work, that's what we need. I could quickly find lots of places with fleets of electric forklifts that spend a lot of money charging batteries and would love to save money, if I was armed with test results from a certified independent test lab to help show what their cost savings will be.

So it comes down to putting your money where your mouth is. If I had something I thought worked, I'd get an independent lab to test it. Then if it worked, I'd make a fortune and make the world a greener place at the same time by reducing carbon emissions. If you have something you really think works, then that's what you should be doing.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I'm following your logic on starting with fully discharged output batteries. Makes perfect sense.

Now, how do you measure what you had to put in to charge the battery? If people are trying to measure non-sinusoidal waveforms with meters designed to give accurate readings only with DC or sinusoidal AC, could they be making measurement errors?


You got me there. I don't know.

Is there no simple way to measure how many amp-hours are used up from the input battery?


Yes, that experimenter who posted the 3 oscilloscope screenshots showed what that way is, if you add enough capacitance to the circuit, it will smooth out the oddly shaped waveforms and make it close enough to DC to measure. And when he did this, he's not getting over unity.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Okay here's the thing. And this is something I've only heard through the grapevine and I can't verify it, but I'll say it anyway.

I have heard that Bedini has had all sorts of engineers and experts in to test his systems, but none of them are willing to put their credibility and careers on the line by publishing positive results in his favor. None of them are willing to say "Yes, this device appears to just create excess energy out of thin air".

I mean, we have all seen how much flak and ridicule Steorn have taken for saying the same thing, right?

So what it really boils down to is, WHO has the courage to do a completely fair and unbiased test and publish all the data - even if the results are actually positive? Who's willing to put their credibility on the line?

Well, Rick Friedrich from New Energy Congress, for one - but now he's just Bedini's "buddy" and he's in on the "scam".

See the problem?

A lot of people simply don't want to believe it, no matter how much data or evidence is shown.....



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by cupocoffee
And as for me, I'm not going to spend thousands of my hard-earned cash just to try to convince a handful of pessimists in a forum thread.

Well, if you have $200 a month average electric bills like a lot of Texans do, it doesn't take long to spend thousands on electric bills, so it would pay for itself in a couple of years then all the electricity in your house would be free! So why not do it to save money? You just need to spend maybe another $800 on a large AC inverter and you can run your household electricity from batteries.


Well said, and I've been making comments like this all along. The thing will pay for itself in a reasonable amount of time, and in situations where fuel is scarce (expeditions, remote outposts, UAV, the military etc) will be worth its weight in gold. Since we don't see adoption, there are conclusions to draw.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
So what it really boils down to is, WHO has the courage to do a completely fair and unbiased test and publish all the data - even if the results are actually positive? Who's willing to put their credibility on the line?

Well, Rick Friedrich from New Energy Congress, for one - but now he's just Bedini's "buddy" and he's in on the "scam".

See the problem?


Well that's why I kept talking about an INDEPENDENT test lab! like this one (for example, there are others but I've worked with some labs from this company before and reviewed some of their testing laboratories):

www.intertek.com...

I would have to work with them a while to get the test set up correctly and outline the testing protocols because it wouldn't be a standard test for them, but they do have some very bright people on staff that are capable and some outstanding test facilities.

They would sign a non-disclosure agreement before doing the testing, that's pretty standard for them. And they get their test fee no matter what the results are so their only interest is publishing accurate results, no motiviation for bias that I'm aware of.

When I mentioned independent testing before, cupofcoffee replied about allowing people to come over:


Originally posted by cupocoffee

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Has he sent it to an independent lab to have them confirm his calculations?

Bedini has, reportedly, refused to allow independent investigation.

Is that true and if it really works why wouldn't he want someone to independently confirm it works? If he got a testimonial from an independent test lab, it would help him sell more "kits", right?


It's obviously not true. He has allowed people like Bearden and Lindemann and Friedrich to work with him in his lab


OK let's be clear. allowing people to come over and work with him in his lab does NOT qualify for "independent"!



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 




So what it really boils down to is, WHO has the courage to do a completely fair and unbiased test and publish all the data - even if the results are actually positive? Who's willing to put their credibility on the line?

These guys?


A couple of NASA scientists, Mike Nelson and Ken House, who work on the Space Shuttle project in Huntsville, Alabama have been following the free energy world for years and would like to believe that Tesla type of technology is possible that harnesses limitless energy from the environment via electromagnetic means.

However, this is not a free-for-all invitation for anyone who thinks they have an overunity device. Mike and Ken's pre-requisites are pretty stringent.

In their spare time, they are willing to put their reputation at stake in validating bona fide electromagnetic overunity (more energy out than what was put in). But "spare time" is the key word. They don't have much of it, so they don't want to spend time on things that haven't first been tested to show overunity by others; and they want to review the data that has been collected.

source


[edit on 6/24/2010 by Phage]



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Well, Rick Friedrich from New Energy Congress, for one - but now he's just Bedini's "buddy" and he's in on the "scam".

See the problem?



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Well that's why I kept talking about an INDEPENDENT test lab!


Friedrich was an INDEPENDENT person. He started out as a member of Sterling Allan's New Energy Congress, he started replicating Bedini's School-girl motor and other stuff, he was thoroughly convinced of the validity of the technology, and he moved to Idaho to work with Bedini full time.

pesn.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Friedrich was an INDEPENDENT person. He started out as a member of Sterling Allan's New Energy Congress, he started replicating Bedini's School-girl motor and other stuff, he was thoroughly convinced of the validity of the technology, and he moved to Idaho to work with Bedini full time.

Whether he was independent before is another issue, he's obviously not independent now.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Okay I've had a closer look at this and these guys may not be the right choice after all. They are giving a lot of strict pre-requisites and demands that don't jive with the Bedini kit.

They want to see testing data from other third parties first before they'll even consider it. (What is the point of testing something if others have to test it first???)

They also demand that it be a motor running a load - not an energizer/battery-charger like the Bedini kit.

etc etc.....



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
These guys?

they want to review the data that has been collected.

source
They are smart to do the screening by reviewing the data collected first. I see all kinds of problems with the data collected on the tests I've reviewed. There are a lot of ways to get it wrong.

I see the last correspondence with them was a little over a month ago, I wonder if they got any suitable submissions?



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by cupocoffee
 





I mean, we have all seen how much flak and ridicule Steorn have taken for saying the same thing, right?


Steorn was given credit for putting their stuff out to a 'panel' even if it was hand picked.

On the other hand, Steorn has taken flak for

  • denigrating their own hand picked panel when their results showed that they didn't work and pretending those results don't exist or that they gave their own panel the wrong equipment.

  • putting on a classic textbook performance at their demonstration, including each and every one of the 'free-energy' scam artist favorite hits.

  • scamming 2million euros (their numbers) from marks last year. They are not even selling kits, just plans for experimental devices and the license to use their plans.


Its simple. No really it is. Steorn claim to have an over unity device. They use a battery to power some equipment and charge a battery as output. If they are over unity they can power their equipment from the battery they are charging. But they can't and they won't because they aren't.

They wave their hands a lot and give some bull manure explanation why the two batteries are incompatible or something. But the fact remains if the output battery is being charged in a way that makes it useful for me to run my radio or whatever, then they, being Electronic Engineering Geniuses an all, can figure out how to connect that output battery to the input. But they can't, and they won't, because they aren't.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa

They wave their hands a lot and give some bull manure explanation why the two batteries are incompatible or something. But the fact remains if the output battery is being charged in a way that makes it useful for me to run my radio or whatever, then they, being Electronic Engineering Geniuses an all, can figure out how to connect that output battery to the input. But they can't, and they won't, because they aren't.


Have you ever considered that it might actually be advantageous to leave it as an open two-battery system and NOT close the loop?

That looping current back around to the input might actually be detrimental to the input? That trying to have a battery charge and discharge at the same time might be detrimental to the battery or cause a loss of energy?

I know Bedini has been doing it that same way for years, with an input battery and at least one output battery, and he claims that it works better that way too.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Have you ever considered that it might actually be advantageous to leave it as an open two-battery system and NOT close the loop?


The loop doesn't even need to be closed at all times. You can automatically cross over batteries in a specified period of time, the electronics to do that is downright trivial... And voilia -- you have a true blue perpetual motion machine!

Again, the fact that it's not being done is another red herring.


I know Bedini has been doing it that same way for years, with an input battery and at least one output battery, and he claims that it works better that way too.


Why am I not surprised?



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Again, the fact that it's not being done is another red herring.


How do you know it's not being done?


Bedini has proprietary systems that he hasn't released yet.....



I know Bedini has been doing it that same way for years, with an input battery and at least one output battery, and he claims that it works better that way too.




Why am I not surprised?


Cause it's the way that works best?



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Bedini has proprietary systems that he hasn't released yet.....
Wait a minute, this thread isn't even about Bedini, but the way we got to talking about him is that I mentioned none of these things including the one in the OP seem to be working models, they only sell licenses, etc.

Then you cite Bedini and say he's got something that works, then when we start asking questions about it you play the "not yet released" card?? :shk:

That's the story of just about every perpetual motion machine, "under development" or "experimental". So it seems like there is nothing out already that works, and is not "pending release"?

I mean besides the Atmos clock, that one does actually run on thin air.

By the way, have you noticed how long the list of perpetual motion machines is? In a way, all those inventors have all helped prove the laws of physics as we currently understand them, by making devices that don't do what they claim.

History of perpetual motion machines


1981-1999
John Bedini claimed development of several free energy devices.[72][73][74] Bedini has, reportedly, refused to allow independent investigation.
And we are still waiting for the release of his proprietary systems in 2010?

And another reason you shouldn't trust Bedini, or at least I can tell you why I don't... His Bedini Dual Beam Ultra Clarifier is totally bogus.

Bedini Dual Beam Ultra Clarifier


Reader Mike St. Clair refers us to a review that appeared in Home Theater & High Fidelity back in March of 2002, written by reviewer Jason Serinus about the Bedini Dual Beam Ultra Clarifier, yet another quack "high-end" audio device. It can be seen at www.bedini.com/jsreview.htm. The home page of this line of nonsense can be found at www.bedini.com.

Advertising on the site says, "Don't miss this opportunity to experience the only patented and proven process for all digitally recorded media. . . . If you haven't yet tried our Clarifier then you truly have not heard your systems [sic] total capability." That certainly sounds like a very firm and confident claim, don't you think? Says Mike:


Many people on the audiophile forums have raved about the results of the Bedini Clarifier. It [claims to] improve the sound of your CDs by spinning them and bathing them with "electromagnetic beams." I wish I were making this up. If you add it to the challenge, I might come up with a person or two (in Florida, no less) that actually think they can pass the test.


I assured Mike that such a device certainly comes under the JREF Challenge, then I sent this message to the Bedini people:


To Jason Serinus and/or anyone who thinks they can detect the effect of the Bedini Dual Beam Ultra Clarifier: Please refer to my web page at www.randi.org/jr/080504string.html (#8) and see the million-dollar challenge made there. To date, I've not had any response to this offer, a tactic you also may wish to adopt.


No, none of those 13 people I e-mailed about the audio challenge weeks ago have replied, a fact that I'm sure will not surprise my readers. They won't because they can't. They're fakers, irresponsible quacks, and they've gone under that huge rock where the other fakes have retreated.


So Bedini isn't the only one with a few screws loose. Other people claimed his product worked and they could hear the difference. So, they were told they could get a million dollars if they can prove what they claimed, that they can hear the difference. But not one person accepted the offer????

If they really could hear the difference, why not take the challenge and be a million dollars richer and help Bedini sell more units?

Could they be shills or something, who were lying when they said they could hear the difference? I can't think of a better explanation. And I know enough about how DVDs work to know this product is total nonsense. So we have even more reason to be skeptical of any claim Bedini makes.



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Wait a minute, this thread isn't even about Bedini, but the way we got to talking about him is that I mentioned none of these things including the one in the OP seem to be working models, they only sell licenses, etc.


Yes, and you said that the inventors should be building and selling working models, like the Atmos clock. And I pointed out that Bedini and Friedrich are selling a unit, exactly like what you asked for.




Then you cite Bedini and say he's got something that works, then when we start asking questions about it you play the "not yet released" card?? :shk:


So, what, the man's not allowed to have proprietary systems that are still in development that he's not ready to release to the public yet??


You of all people should know that things have to go through an extensive testing and tweaking phase, you don't just release something to the public as soon as it works.

Anyway, buddhasystem pointed out that the electronics to swap batteries automatically are trivial - so why don't YOU do it? The schematics for the School-girl motor are free, you just have to join the Yahoo group and get them, so why don't YOU make one that swaps batteries automatically and runs indefinitely?



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Yes, and you said that the inventors should be building and selling working models, like the Atmos clock. And I pointed out that Bedini and Friedrich are selling a unit, exactly like what you asked for.
But Bedini's item isn't a working model, it's an "experimenter's kit" which means he doesn't make any claims it will actually work.


Anyway, buddhasystem pointed out that the electronics to swap batteries automatically are trivial - so why don't YOU do it? The schematics for the School-girl motor are free, you just have to join the Yahoo group and get them, so why don't YOU make one that swaps batteries automatically and runs indefinitely?

If you read my previous post you'll know exactly why I won't do it, Bedini is a known scam artist with his DVD enhancer, that's a complete fraud without a doubt. So why would I waste time trying to work on a project from a known con artist.

That type of fraud also taints the Keppe motor folks with their modern version of "snake oil" in their "Keppe motor DNA" that cures whatever ails you and makes you younger. Yeah, right. I won't spend any time with Keppe motor either, even though their claims for a "more efficient motor" are some of the least outrageous, the only part of their claim that's outrageous is that the increased efficiency comes from space energy or something.

Maybe the NASA guys have the right idea though, there could be someone out there with a good idea that doesn't violate the laws of physics like the Atmos clock, but produces even more power, so I hope they do get a valid submission to test from someone who is not trying to scam people like Bedini and Keppe.



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by cupocoffee
Anyway, buddhasystem pointed out that the electronics to swap batteries automatically are trivial - so why don't YOU do it?


Let's say Bedini posts on his site that there is a genuine 10ct diamond lying in plain view on 42nd street and Times square. Would I bother go check out either the presence of the diamond or its authenticity?

If HE's passing this opbvious opportunity to actually build the real perpetual machine, the only reason he does is because his device is crock.

EDIT:
Continuing the analogy, Bedini tells you there is a 10ct diamond out there at a particular address. Then he sells you a brochure about how to properly handle diamonds. That's what he does with his "kit".



[edit on 25-6-2010 by buddhasystem]



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But Bedini's item isn't a working model,


How do you know it doesn't work, when you haven't tried it? Haven't even tried building a School-girl motor for that matter? A little 10-year-old girl can build one for the school science fair and wow the socks off all the science teachers, but you won't?




If you read my previous post you'll know exactly why I won't do it, Bedini is a known scam artist with his DVD enhancer, that's a complete fraud without a doubt. So why would I waste time trying to work on a project from a known con artist.


How do you know that's a complete fraud? Cause the mighty Randi says so?

All these numerous inventors are all liars and con artists and snake-oil salesmen but the mighty Randi's word is gospel, is that how it works? Bedini's every utterance is suspect but we must believe everything Randi says without question? Inventors can lie and have ulterior motives and hidden agendas but the holy Randi cannot?

Anyway, the DVD enhancer thing is irrelevant. The schematics for the School-girl motor have been freely available for years and the parts cost maybe $100 but you have never even tried building one. Why?

If Bedini's trick of building an open-loop system with at least two batteries really works, that creates the possibility of making a real "perpetual motion" machine, and the schematics are freely available, have been for years now, but you have never even attempted that simple experiment. And yet you claim to have a legitimate interest in free energy? Hmm........




top topics



 
59
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join