So you want Free Energy?

Originally posted by cupocoffee

Bedini sells CD 'Clarifiers' that don't do anything at all, battery chargers that don't do anything any better than any other battery charger,

How do you know that? Have you tested it yourself?

I'm sorry, but someone with even an elementary understanding of digital audio can see this is complete and utter bunkum. Puts the rest of claims in an interesting light to say the least...

Originally posted by Matyas
Do you know what the reality is? Do you have any idea how much resources goes into suppressing this kind of technology? Can you tell me how it is that the dollar is backed by oil?

So you are saying that this is dangerous? Yes I know that.

People want science, not hocus pocus stage tricks. We know it was done, long ago by our reckoning. The copy cats do not work, and in fact are not meant to.

But HOW do you know it doesn't work, if you haven't tested it yourself?

Please provide evidence of yourself testing these Bedini systems, so we can establish that your opinion is based on direct experience.

So you couldn't care less about theory.

It's not that I don't care about theory or that theory isn't important. But sitting around arguing theory with a bunch of guys who refuse to try the experiments or test anything is a complete waste of time. I need to hear from people who are willing to actually try things.

Why do you have to unify the four forces and demystify subatomic particles to have a theory on free energy?

You are gonna have to. You can't have a repeatable process without one. You can't have a science without the foundation. Until all myths are dispelled, there is no way any device like this will become mainstream.

Look I am no theoretical physicist. I know it has something to do with virtual particles - particles which are there but can't be observed. But you do certain things like create a magnet or a charge and the virtual become observable.

Your four forces, including Gravity could all be explained as various functions and properties of these virtual particles, as well as Tesla and Bedini's "Radiant" energy.

Bearden is the nuclear physicist, he explains all this much better than I ever could.

Originally posted by Pilgrum
But why involve batteries at all?

Bedini says that a battery is the only thing he has ever found that can capture and transform Radiant energy into useable power. That is why. The function of the batteries is to absorb all the Radiant energy coming off the Energizer.

reply to post by john_bmth
That's absolutely correct john_bmth, and no cupofcoffee, we don't need to try the clarifier to know it's bunkum. You could actually win a million dollars if it worked, which of course it doesn't.

But since cupofcoffee seems to think it means something to actually try it (it doesn't, not in this case) here's a guy who did buy it and try it:

Beware Bedini Ultra Clarifier Quad Beam Total Snake Oil Rip Off

The battery charger on the other hand, may do some things that SOME other battery chargers (like mine) don't do, and that is discussed here:

Official Bedini 10 Coil Kit Infomercial

There are two options with the clarifier I can think of. Either

1. Bedini thinks it really works meaning he's not too bright, or
2. Bedini knows it doesn't do anything except make his bank account bigger, in which case he's bright enough to laugh all the way to the bank.

Neither option is particularly appealing, but I honestly don't know which one is the case.

But yes, it does cast in interesting light on all his other claims

Originally posted by rnaa
If you ever get to 8th grade, you'll study all about it in your Physical Science course. But for a teaser, here is the summary from the Wikipedia article on Electromagnetism:

Electromagnetism is one of the four fundamental interactions of nature, along with strong interaction, weak interaction and gravitation. It is the force that causes the interaction between electrically charged particles; the areas in which this happens are called electromagnetic fields.

Yeah, wow, you can quote from Wikipedia. But where do all electromagnetic fields come from in the first place? Your 8th grade teacher and Wikipedia didn't explain that to you, did they?

I get it that we have a good understanding of how these fields work and what you can do with them, but I am asking you WHERE they come from.

It's OK to say that you don't know....

I know the School-Girl motor plans are free. But you are trying to encourage me do get the kits and do the experiments; you are using weasel words so that you can deny it, but you are never the less trying to claim that I can't make a valid review based on other peoples work, that I have to get the kits and do it myself. And I didn't restrict my comments to Bedini's kits; I refered to any of the snake-oil salesmen.

This is supposed to be a thread for people who "Want Free Energy". Yet it has devolved into you and Matyas and others ganging up on me trying to convince me that it's impossible, it doesn't work and we shouldn't try.

The exact same little drama that has played out countless times before, on countless different sites and forums and threads. Big surprise!

The bottom line is this: If you are unwilling to even try, then I don't care about your opinion or anything else you have to say. I am looking for people who "Want Free Energy" and have the curiosity and enthusiasm and willingness to actually try.

And, as I already explained, I am not trying to sell anything or get anybody to spend money - I will supply the kits myself.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
That's absolutely correct john_bmth, and no cupofcoffee, we don't need to try the clarifier to know it's bunkum. You could actually win a million dollars if it worked, which of course it doesn't.

But since cupofcoffee seems to think it means something to actually try it (it doesn't, not in this case) here's a guy who did buy it and try it:

Beware Bedini Ultra Clarifier Quad Beam Total Snake Oil Rip Off

Excuse me, I never once said anything about these 'Clarifiers' in this thread, so please don't put words in my mouth.

I don't care about that at all, my interest is in the 'Radiant Energy' technology. Which many people claim to have successfully replicated

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by spikey
How can you seriously think he could possibly be talking about increasing the input power, to see a gain?

Why would that be a difficult thing for an electronics engineer to admit?

I think they set a trap and you're falling into it.

That video was carefully edited. They don't really say enough of anything to put what they are really claiming in context.

On the one hand it's supposed to make us think they've discovered something new and amazing, and I agree with you those comments are suggestive of that. But when you really analyze what is said, they really don't make any great claims.

I think it's vague enough to keep them out of jail if they get sued or charged with fraud, but suggestive enough to lure some people into buying their stuff. It's kind of clever actually.

I hear you, i really do. And believe it or not, i am not 100% convinced of anything either, but by the same token, i refuse to dismiss it out of hand as a con or fantasy or even a miscalculation, based solely on our current perceptions of what is possible and what isn't, for the reasons i've already given earlier in this thread.

I should say, the perceptions we are taught to foster, rather than just 'our current perceptions'.

Look at the transcript of this video i posted earlier...you will see for yourself that at least one of the participants appearing in the 'sound bites' that make up the video, does explicitly say that the device was tested (and in one case built by him) and was shown to be overunity.

Here is where it is said..there is NO ambiguity, no get out of jail free, legal double talk, no covering of any backsides;

Craig Coates, Electronics Engineer. (third appearance on screen) "The gain is there, and it has to be looked at, you can't dismiss it out of hand. We're not talking silly figures like 101% or 102% overunity, we're talking 200%, 300%, 400%."

There it is...in black and white, and on video. He says overunity.

reply to post by Matyas


But aren't you claiming it is in fact possible too?

If you're saying the only people to design overunity systems were Tesla and Marconi, aren't you saying it is possible then?

By the same token, the fact that their OU systems are not widely known about and used, infers there is a high level conspiracy to bury the technology and hide fact that OU is indeed achievable.

This lends considerable support to cupocoffee's assertion that the LOUD dissenting voices have either been heavily and negatively influenced to disbelieve, or are part of the disinformation campaign that has been continuously waged against experimenters, doesn't it?

It also means global warming and the 'fuel/resource crisis' is also a manufactured scam, as if these devices were indeed developed by Tesla and / or Marconi and the designs and machines are under official lock and key, they would be the solution to every resource / climate problem the authorities have ever mentioned.

Originally posted by spikey
This lends considerable support to cupocoffee's assertion that the LOUD dissenting voices have either been heavily and negatively influenced to disbelieve, or are part of the disinformation campaign that has been continuously waged against experimenters, doesn't it?

Hehe, what do you mean, there are never any disinfo campaigns waged against anybody on ATS, wink wink

Originally posted by cupocoffee
So you are saying that this is dangerous? Yes I know that.

It isn't us against them. It's them against us.

But HOW do you know it doesn't work, if you haven't tested it yourself?

The probability is pretty low. I don't see the world beating a path to his door. Not to mention all the inconsistencies.

Please provide evidence of yourself testing these Bedini systems, so we can establish that your opinion is based on direct experience.

Or you can give me 50K and I'll give one to the world. Sounds like a bargain to me.

I need to hear from people who are willing to actually try things.

I'll try to teach you theory. That is a task.

Why do you have to unify the four forces and demystify subatomic particles to have a theory on free energy?

Your four forces, including Gravity could all be explained as various functions and properties of these virtual particles, as well as Tesla and Bedini's "Radiant" energy.

Correct to a point. Until you get to Bedini and radiant.

Bearden is the nuclear physicist, he explains all this much better than I ever could.

He can never be the nuclear physicist my friend Paul Brown was.

Originally posted by cupocoffeeYeah, wow, you can quote from Wikipedia. But where do all electromagnetic fields come from in the first place? Your 8th grade teacher and Wikipedia didn't explain that to you, did they?

Don't jump on rnaa. Wikipedia doesn't reflect his full knowledge. He knows enough to find the relevant crumbs. Like me.

I get it that we have a good understanding of how these fields work and what you can do with them, but I am asking you WHERE they come from.

This is the second time you have asked this. Or third, maybe more, I don't know. I will tell you, and don't you forget it.

An electromagnetic "field" is a result of a charge in motion in the Aether.

This is supposed to be a thread for people who "Want Free Energy". Yet it has devolved into you and Matyas and others ganging up on me trying to convince me that it's impossible, it doesn't work and we shouldn't try.

"Oh woe is poor me" argument won't work. Nor generalization. You don't like what I have to say because it is the truth. What you call "ganging up" are people actually trying to help you. If you want we'll go away.

The exact same little drama that has played out countless times before, on countless different sites and forums and threads. Big surprise!

No truer words were ever spoken, although I am aware of the context you mean them in.

I am looking for people who "Want Free Energy" and have the curiosity and enthusiasm and willingness to actually try.

Nothing wrong with curiosity and enthusiasm. There is with naivety and stupidity.

And, as I already explained, I am not trying to sell anything or get anybody to spend money - I will supply the kits myself.

Your generosity is noted. However we don't want the school girl toys.

Originally posted by spikeyBut aren't you claiming it is in fact possible too?

Yes.

If you're saying the only people to design overunity systems were Tesla and Marconi, aren't you saying it is possible then?

Yes.

By the same token, the fact that their OU systems are not widely known about and used, infers there is a high level conspiracy to bury the technology and hide fact that OU is indeed achievable.

Yes. And No. Their OU systems are meant not to work in order to bring discredit to the field.

This lends considerable support to cupocoffee's assertion that the LOUD dissenting voices have either been heavily and negatively influenced to disbelieve, or are part of the disinformation campaign that has been continuously waged against experimenters, doesn't it?

Somewhat. The really LOUD ones are know-nothings. Then there is the class of disinfo "experimenters" who reinforce the first. The real ones are quiet, patiently watching in the background. Hello, I see you.

It also means global warming and the 'fuel/resource crisis' is also a manufactured scam, as if these devices were indeed developed by Tesla and / or Marconi and the designs and machines are under official lock and key, they would be the solution to every resource / climate problem the authorities have ever mentioned

Yes. It is that big of a scam. Possibly the greatest in history, easily eclipsing the UFO phenomena.

Originally posted by spikey
Here is where it is said..there is NO ambiguity, no get out of jail free, legal double talk, no covering of any backsides;

Craig Coates, Electronics Engineer. (third appearance on screen) "The gain is there, and it has to be looked at, you can't dismiss it out of hand. We're not talking silly figures like 101% or 102% over unity, we're talking 200%, 300%, 400%."

There it is...in black and white, and on video. He says over unity.

Yes he does say over unity, and there's nothing at all unusual about an over unity circuit, I've designed and built them myself. There's lots of ambiguity because he talks about gain. so that's a get out of jail free card. Wikipedia isn't always the best source but since I have expertise in electrical engineering I can tell you it's more or less right about these claims:

Gain

In electronics, gain is a measure of the ability of a circuit (often an amplifier) to increase the power or amplitude of a signal from the input to the output. It is usually defined as the mean ratio of the signal output of a system to the signal input of the same system....

Thus, the term gain on its own is ambiguous. For example, "a gain of five" may imply that either the voltage, current or the power is increased by a factor of five

Which would be 500% gain, which is over unity. There is nothing impressive about that, it's a common type of circuit design.

A gain of factor 1 (equivalent to 0 dB) where both input and output are at the same voltage level and impedance is also known as unity gain.

So yes he's claiming over unity, and I have made over unity circuits before, it's very common in electronics to have over unity, in fact the basic function of a transistor is to take an input and make an over unity output from that input. So there's really no extraordinary claim at all, just some ambiguous words strung together that don't mean anything out of the ordinary.

Again I agree with you they are trying to IMPLY it's something extraordinary, but they never make any SPECIFIC claims to that effect, which may help keep them out of jail, so they are being quite clever about it.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur...but they never make any SPECIFIC claims to that effect, which may help keep them out of jail, so they are being quite clever about it.

You watch, someone somewhere actually pulls it off and there will be a new law on the books overnight...

Originally posted by cupocoffeeHehe, what do you mean, there are never any disinfo campaigns waged against anybody on ATS, wink wink

Hee hee, are you paying attention to your lessons? I am waging an education campaign on your arse.

1. Fields do not cancel or cut. They superimpose.

2. An electromagnetic wave arises from the relative motion of a charge in the Aether.

Pay attention 'cause there will be a test on this later.

reply to post by mbzastava



mbzastava, Well said.

You touched on a point I wanted to make, as well, that is our concept of a system.

The pervasive arguments against harnessing energy in a way that can not be regulated, is that it breaks the laws of conservation of energy.
A useful conceptual framing to give one a fair opportunity at coming up with a misguided understanding that is remotely close to 'reality'.

Even if, for arguments sake that, our current understanding of fundamental laws of physics is 'true' and ubiquitous. The very definition of a 'closed system' is ambiguous at best.
Meaning, that there is most likely energy flux occurring that we have no awareness of or a way to measure directly, what we see is much like the ripples on pond. Some say electron flow is just a manifestation (side effect), from the real energy flow (see Thomas Bearden, for a practical take -- www.cheniere.org... )

That through magnetic, harmonic, electric, gravitron, and other unknown energy forces at play, there is a macro balance of energy flow, and that if one could just push, a little, on one aspect in an area, that you can harness the system 'recoil' energy which may have non-linear reactionary aspects.

I think the normative response is clouding whats trying to be debated here.

Those who are posting in favor of so called free energy don't have empirical data to support their belief.

Those who are posting against "free" energy have enormous amounts of data to support their belief.

It's highly likely that physics will continue to evolve, but that doesn't mean what we have now is wrong. What many people seem to forget is that science isn't a sort of "be all, end all", but a journey to understand.

I have professional and academic experience with electronics so I would love to see some mathematical proofs in favor of over unity energy. It should be noted that many devices have a gain above 1 (over unity) but to my knowledge thats only in reference to an input signal, the device itself needs a different power source to increase the original signals gain. example: an amplifier- it increases the gain of the input signal (a voice, instrument, audio signal, ect...) by adding DC power to the AC(input) signal. so while the input signal is amplified, it requires additional power to do so. sorry if this doesn't make much sense, I'm having trouble explaining it.

Also, no known system is 100% efficient.

Originally posted by Matyas
The probability is pretty low. I don't see the world beating a path to his door. Not to mention all the inconsistencies.

No, the world isn't beating a path to his door. But that could be due to the suppression, disinfo campaigns, the 'Mythbusters hatchet-job' etc.

Anyway, I don't care about 'probability', I only care if you have tested this unit or not. You haven't, so you don't know for certain.

I'll try to teach you theory. That is a task.

Don't bother. I don't need to be quantum-field-theory guy or electrical-engineering guy. I just want to donate the technology to the right person/people and have someone else worry about all that.

Your four forces, including Gravity could all be explained as various functions and properties of these virtual particles, as well as Tesla and Bedini's "Radiant" energy.

Correct to a point. Until you get to Bedini and radiant.

Why? If you can accept that Gravity and Electromagnetism are manifestations of the virtual particles, why couldn't his "Radiant Energy" just be another one?

Originally posted by Matyas
This is the second time you have asked this. Or third, maybe more, I don't know. I will tell you, and don't you forget it.

An electromagnetic "field" is a result of a charge in motion in the Aether.

Yes thank you for connecting EM fields to the Aether. Bearden and Bedini think so too!

You don't like what I have to say because it is the truth.

But you haven't tested the unit I am interested in, you have no direct experience of it, so how can you know the truth about it?

Your generosity is noted. However we don't want the school girl toys.

No, not the school girl toys. The bigger, more expensive, more useful toy with the output ~ 10KW. That could be modded to power somebody's house.......

Originally posted by cupocoffeeDon't bother. I don't need to be quantum-field-theory guy or electrical-engineering guy.

That is going to cost you in the long run. Besides, it is quite simple. The math doesn't need to go beyond high school algebra.

Why? If you can accept that Gravity and Electromagnetism are manifestations of the virtual particles, why couldn't his "Radiant Energy" just be another one?

Gravity and electromagnetism are different manifestations of the same force. Those so called virtual particles are electron-positron dipoles which constitute the Aether. They are not the cause of electromagnetism or gravity, they are the medium of transmission. The only radiant energy is radiation and relativistic particles.