Basic Free Energy Device

[moflint]

Think about the following TRUE statement and you will have your answer as to why you CANNOT use caps in the 3 battery system and get the same results.

"When capacitors are connected in series, the total capacitance is less than any ONE of the series capacitors' individual capacitances. ... If two or more capacitors are connected in parallel, the overall effect is that of a single equivalent capacitor having the sum total of the plate areas of the individual capacitors."

In other words, capacitors in parallel act like batteries in parallel, but capacitors in series do NOT act like batteries in series.

Yeah - my maths does not compute in that case!

EDIT:
.... but are not the total joules the same whether in series or parallel? So why are those joules in the 16.2v bank not transferred through the motor to the 2.7v bank to fill it up?

[Turion]

If you have a full capacitor on the high side, you CAN run it through the motor to empty capacitors in parallel on the low side, but you CANNOT then move those capacitors from the low side back to the high side and recycle that energy. It won't work because the capacitors you charged in parallel which now have (as an example) 12 volts each, cannot be put in SERIES to give you 24 volts on the high side. It doesn't work like that with capacitors. So with a group of caps you only get to use the potential difference ONCE.

[ricards]

If you have a full capacitor on the high side, you CAN run it through the motor to empty capacitors in parallel on the low side, but you CANNOT then move those capacitors from the low side back to the high side and recycle that energy. It won't work because the capacitors you charged in parallel which now have (as an example) 12 volts each, cannot be put in SERIES to give you 24 volts on the high side. It doesn't work like that with capacitors. So with a group of caps you only get to use the potential difference ONCE.

pardon my intrusion, but you can actually do that, that's how Marx Generator works, and you can move the energy from the low side to the high side via transformer, but I doubt that would be efficient.

[Turion]

Info

ricards,
Thanks for reminding me of that. I knew about it but discounted it because I always thought of it as tech for a large pulse, which would kill a motor, but maybe there is a way to utilize it.

It probably isn't appropriate to bring this up here, as this thread was started to talk about a BASIC free energy device that is modeled after John B's original device that simply used a pulsing motor, a flywheel, and a generating section, but for those who understand how I have incorporated the 3 battery system into this to increase the efficiency and INCREASE the COP, just think about the little Matt motor. Does it HAVE to run on just 12 volts? Can it run on MORE?? The answer is "YES it CAN!"

And where could you get more voltage to run your motor? Well here's a thought. Open voltage production of a single coil pair on my machine, even WITH magnetic drag is 64 volts AC. AC voltage connected to a load is about 36 volts at 5.4 amps actual USABLE power, and D.C. Voltage is about 19 volts at the same 5.4 amps usable power. So in this case, and believe me, much MORE research is needed, and I am in the process of doing that, the DC voltage is 25% of the open voltage. By the way, the motor running the machine is running on 36.6 volts at 5 amps BEFORE speed up under load (and drop in amp draw) and WITH the magnetic drag I can significantly reduce with my newer machine.

Well, that gives me enough info to BEGIN modifying my coils for further testing. For the moment, lets assume that it takes the output of all The coils to give me enough to run my motor. So what GOOD does that do me? I run the output of the generator THROUGH the motor as if it were the "high side" on the three batter system and into storage capacitors or batteries. Then I connect an inverter to the capacitor or batteries and run a 1000 watt load. Maybe even split that output and run TWO 1000 watt loads. So the generator runs its own motor and charges a battery bank and I get to use the SAME energy TWICE because the 3 Battery circuit has shown us HOW to do that.

Does that begin to give you guys some idea about what is possible here once you figure out how to get the speed up under load out of your generator? The only REAL question is,can you get MORE out of your generator than you put into your motor. On a small scale, with only a couple coils, the answer is "Maybe" because there is a baseline of power required to turn the rotor on the generator, and unless your coils are putting out at LEAST that much power, it has to come from somewhere, and that means draining your batteries. But IF you can add more coils to the generator without increasing the amp draw of the motor (or reduce it through speed up under load) You begin to see a relationship between the increase in production vs COST in amp draw due to magneticdrag. There is one ( as Trump would say) "Believe me." But it is worth it.

[Satyam108]

Slide On By

So here is my plan to move forward. I attached 2 images to this message. Look at the first one.

Slide one

. . . .

Look at slide2. Again ignore the switch.


Matt

Hey Matt,
Still slogging thru old posts - playing catchup. No Slide one or 2 - no attachments or links. Will you please attach them again? Or insert?

Thanks
Jim

[joe_born_again]

using pulleys to multiply AC cycles of electricity

Free Energy from a GEM perpetual power supply is so simple, https://free-energy.yolasite.com/ that it can be
generate with a large 100 cm circumference pulley attached to a DC motor, + at least one mini-pulley of 1 cm
circumference, connected to an AC generator of the same voltage, 4 diodes - to build a full wave bridge rectifier,
some wire to connect your electrical components together, and a belt to connect the two pulleys together.
-
The way this works, is that you are using the 100 cm of moving belt off of one rotation of your large 100 cm
circumference pulley, which does not cost 100 times more power to rotate than a 1 cm circumference pulley,
yet if you run this 100 cm of moving belt past a 1 cm circumference pulley, you would gain a multiple of 100
cycles of AC electricity,,,,,,,,,,,, all from one spark of DC current..
-
The best part about this is, you can get a return of 100 cycles of AC electricity for as many mini-pulleys that
choose to attach to the same belt. So if you added 10 mini-pulleys, you could gain a multiple of 1000 cycles of
free AC electricity. These mini-pulleys + AC generators would truly run extremely freely, because although
you are winding up massive voltage with them, (exactly what you need to crank over your large 100 cm pulley)
you only need to generate the one spark of DC current, to rotate your DC drive motor. Torque is caused when
generating power, and power is calculated by multiplying voltage times current, so even though you are winding
up massive voltage, it is multiplied by practically zero current, so in the end you are generating practically zero
power, costing practically zero torque.
-
You are seemingly cheating the laws of thermodynamics by using pulley mechanics to multiply the # of
rotations, and then by adding an AC generator to your mini-pulley, you are actually multiplying AC cycles
of electricity. The AC generator is running very free, as it is only winding up massive voltage, as it only
needs to generate one mere spark of DC current, just enough to rotate your DC drive motor + large 100
cm pulley the one single time.

[wrtner]

Free Energy from a GEM perpetual power supply is so simple, https://free-energy.yolasite.com/ that it can be
generate with a large 100 cm circumference pulley attached to a DC motor, + at least one mini-pulley of 1 cm
circumference, connected to an AC generator of the same voltage, 4 diodes - to build a full wave bridge rectifier,
some wire to connect your electrical components together, and a belt to connect the two pulleys together.
-
The way this works, is that you are using the 100 cm of moving belt off of one rotation of your large 100 cm
circumference pulley, which does not cost 100 times more power to rotate than a 1 cm circumference pulley,
yet if you run this 100 cm of moving belt past a 1 cm circumference pulley, you would gain a multiple of 100
cycles of AC electricity,,,,,,,,,,,, all from one spark of DC current..
-
The best part about this is, you can get a return of 100 cycles of AC electricity for as many mini-pulleys that
choose to attach to the same belt. So if you added 10 mini-pulleys, you could gain a multiple of 1000 cycles of
free AC electricity. These mini-pulleys + AC generators would truly run extremely freely, because although
you are winding up massive voltage with them, (exactly what you need to crank over your large 100 cm pulley)
you only need to generate the one spark of DC current, to rotate your DC drive motor. Torque is caused when
generating power, and power is calculated by multiplying voltage times current, so even though you are winding
up massive voltage, it is multiplied by practically zero current, so in the end you are generating practically zero
power, costing practically zero torque.
-
You are seemingly cheating the laws of thermodynamics by using pulley mechanics to multiply the # of
rotations, and then by adding an AC generator to your mini-pulley, you are actually multiplying AC cycles
of electricity. The AC generator is running very free, as it is only winding up massive voltage, as it only
needs to generate one mere spark of DC current, just enough to rotate your DC drive motor + large 100
cm pulley the one single time.

.
.
You got shut down by Stefan and l have moved here to post your drivel.
For Heavens sake, take the advice of experts.
.
.

.

[Aaron]

he's banned

same pulley spam for years

[Turion]

Final thoughts

Life is a series of choices we all have to make. Some are easy and some are hard. Lately I have not been on the forum much, mostly because I have realized that there are so few builders here and the forum is filled with lurkers waiting to see something of interest that they can run off and sell, making money off the hard work of others, as was done with the modified motor Matt Jones designed and was generous enough to share here.

I will be the FIRST to admit that I have taken everything shared by Matt, Tesla, John B. and others who have contributed a WEALTH of information to the cause in order to put together the devices I have working NOW and those I know how to build and will build in the future. But I will NOT forget those who have shared with me, and if and when I am successful at marketing anything, they will be remembered in other ways.

Because beating dead horses is my favorite pastime, I am going to repeat myself one final time before I fade into the woodwork. This thread has died, and you can bury it. I have shared what I felt was enough information for anyone to build an over-unity machine. That most folks choose to ignore it is their problem, not mine.

Most efficient pulse motor you can find
Run on the proper circuit
Turning a generator that speeds up under load

The Matt motor
Running on a modified 3 Battery circuit
With a generator that has two things
1. Coils that allow it to speed up under load
2. Elimination of "cogging" or the attraction of the magnets on the rotor to the iron core

Where to look for your answers
The Patents of Benitez
Tesla Patent 512,340
The attached file. Understand that in the attached file, the coil that is directly under the magnet must be fired as the motor coil in THIS design to eliminate cogging. That means the motor and generator would be ONE machine. There are other ways to do it when the motor is SEPARATE from the generator.

I may be around from time to time, and you can always PM me, but I don't have the time to spend here anymore.

My machine, which incorporates the information I have gained from all these sources runs on 36 volts at 7 amps and outputs 123 volts open voltage, 60 volts AC under load at 4.5 amps or 33 volts DC under load at 4.5 amps per coil pair. There are 5 coil pairs on the machine. Do the math. Build the machine. Or don't. Life is about choices. Make the right one.

[BroMikey]

Lately I have not been on the forum much,
mostly because I have realized that there are so few builders here
and the forum is filled with lurkers waiting to see something of interest
that they can run off and sell, making money off the hard work
of others...........

Don't worry in 10 years or so when we are long gone someone will
find these messages. They will reply and like I did trying to find a
reply from Dave Lawton on his circuit to split water.

There really are that few people who are like we are. When you are a
bright light, you shine, the absence of which some seem to grovel in.

I am glad you reposted the Benitez thought, then last week was it
you suggested the same when you showed a bank of caps in series
then some in parallel.

That patent is hard to read. I am reading it again. How many Tesla's
were there? How many Matt's? How many Turion's? How many do you
think? I have lived all over the USA. Been to thousands of social
gatherings in many places meeting 10's of thousands.

What I found out was staggering. What I found out is that 99.9999
percent of the people want baseball, football, basketball or things like
racing, musical events, something where they can follow what everyone
else is doing. They are peer pressure driven and that is the way is
should be. That is the way it was meant to be.

Hello .0001 percent, welcome to the lonely lead.

You guys are my hero's, I don't care about the rest. You guys are it.

It is lonely at the top.

I know I been here since childhood. Here is the patent I am reading and
am reminded of Matt's past entries using coils in conjunction with
charge transfers. T Switch.


http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Benitez/GB191514311A.pdf

I wondered if the double transformer in this patent might be acting
in a sort of reflection mode? What is it called? Phase conjugate mirror?



................................................

[gsmsslsb]

Benitez

Don't want to but in here and I have not built this but I did some work on it a while ago.
In case its any use to anybody I typed out the Benitez Patent attached below.
Its like a tesla switch with capacitors and he states that even though the energy is halved in step two. In step 3 it is doubled. I cant quite get my head around it but it may help you guys.

[RAMSET]

Dave
quote
lurkers waiting to see something of interest that they can run off and sell, making money off the hard work of others, as was done with the modified motor Matt Jones designed and was generous enough to share here.

end quote

Somebody stole Matts open source work for their own personal gain??

please post their contact info [or send it to me ]?

if this is really verifiable ,it cannot go unanswered ,and I would gladly go way out of my way to stop by and visit such a person [if they are anywhere in the
NE corridor between NYC and Boston.

this should not be like taking candy from a baby, there needs to be consequences for open source thief's.

Chet
PS
I have been outa the loop a long time ,will touch base later
Thx for all you do, you truly are 1 in a million

PPS
small comment on recently banned Joe,I completely support that choice [since in this case its the only choice]
I just wanted folks to know that Joe suffered a traumatic brain injury many years ago and seems to be unable to understand,

I had spoken to him last year [similar issue at Stefan's]...he has a very ruff situation ,he is a good man with good intentions

if you are so inclined
perhaps
"say a prayer"

[Turion]

Info

Chet,

Will PM you info

[Satyam108]

536% cop?

My machine, which incorporates the information I have gained from all these sources runs on 36 volts at 7 amps and outputs 123 volts open voltage, 60 volts AC under load at 4.5 amps or 33 volts DC under load at 4.5 amps per coil pair. There are 5 coil pairs on the machine. Do the math. Build the machine. Or don't. Life is about choices. Make the right one.

Hey Dave,
Did I do the math right? Your machine has a COP of 536%? 1350 out over 252 In? Awesome! XLNT! and Congrats! I haven't given up on building a Split the Positive 3+2 ("resting") battery switch - working on another project while waiting on parts, and trying to glean some gems from this and other threads and from other sources. Takes a LOT of late night reading, and my right eye is still healing up - getting over the cloudy film from lens replacement/cataract surgery.

WRT my original post in BroMikey's Split the Positive thread here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/304278-post515.html,
I'm thinking about a return to basics on Split the Positive - with a view to discovering how the OU energy is pulled in from Tesla's Medium - from the Aether. Maybe "Bedini Cigars" for a thread title? LOL Here's something from Dr. Lindemann that I found at this link:
http://panaceatech.org/Tesla%20Switch.pdf

John has told me that his "cigar box" unit ran a small electric motor for more than 6 months without discharging the batteries AT ALL. He also told me that the original working model was smashed by a "guest" in his shop who was infuriated by its operation, while John was out of the room. At this point, he decided not to rebuild it.

I know John personally, and have no reason to doubt this report. Obviously, the voltage drops in the transistors and diodes present a CONSTANT loss during operation, not to mention the energy dissipated at the load. Therefore, the system defies all standard explanations and energy use equations. The batteries apparently stay charged and run loads simultaneously for a reason that is not conventional. Since Ronald Brandt has run a car on this system, and John Bedini has run small motors on [a] miniaturized version, it seems reasonable to assume it is worthy of more study by experimenters.

I've spent considerable time - even searching with the Way Back Machine - Internet Archive - but haven't found a photo of JB's Cigar Box device (first displayed at the Tesla Birthday convention in Colorado Springs, I think. Mid to late 80's? More importantly, the only schematic/pictorial we're all familiar with (see attachment if you need to,) reveals zero "transistors and diodes."

I disassembled the LiMn battery that reversed on me. I expected it to be several cells in series, but it's not. I will post some photos when I jump back into this fray. I have removed the diode from the circuit for now, and have confirmed that the cordless drill motor I am using has 2 permanent magnets for stator and brushes to power the rotor. I got the LiMn battery (really it's just one 3.7 volt cell - not a battery) to reverse - to go back to positive on the plus terminal, and moving it into the bottom series position, I recorded that it was gradually charging - VERY gradually - mere millivolts per hour - and there wasn't enough current to turn the motor.

I found an interesting phenomena when I turned the motor clockwise with my fingers, I could get the voltage up to several hundred millivolts across it, and it is definitely a pulsing voltage, with a waveform very similar to the generators in old cars and trucks, that Peter showed from JB's first book during his final Bedini SG Advanced presentation in 2015 or 16. When I turned the motor armature CCW with fingers, I could make the voltage across the dead battery go several hundred millivolts negative. So you were correct in your intuition that perhaps I needed to reverse the motor connections. Turning the motor with fingers also reveals cogging, which I believe is the source of the pulses.

Along that line of thought - related to this quest - in Yaro Stanchak's Zero Force Motor presentation at last summer's Energy Science and Technology Conference, which presented for the first time JB's notes on the Zero Vacuum Engine, it is repeatedly emphasized that "there is no iron in the system" - no iron in the cores of the coils that attract the permanent magnets (Neo's no less) in the rotor, yet in this "teaser" video for buying Yaro's presentation, JB himself showed that current decreased, the motor sped up, and the pulse peaks were much higher, when he put what looks like a small piece of galvanized pipe into the center of the drive coil.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-GZerEwObo

As David Byrne (Talking Heads) would say, "Puzzling Evidence."

In my "gleaning" I have only slogged thru about half this thread, but will finish - noting especially your and Matt's posts - the wheat from much chaff. Thanks for sharing your work and knowledge gained the Tesla way - by hands on experiment.

Regards
Jim

[Turion]

Opinion

As I have stated before, I believe the Zero Force motor is the greatest gift John B. gave us. I have built SEVERAL different models of the ZFM, and am hopeful that a larger version will provide the motive force to turn my generator. The version we are working with now is NOT exactly the version Peter L. built and John B. later demonstrated, but runs on the same principles. It has much more torque while still running on next to NOTHINGin input. The ZFM needs no iron in the core to work.

Batteries charge best when there is a pulse. That's why a pulse motor on the 3 Battery system is better than an off the shelf motor. The higher the frequency of the pulse, and the sharper the gradient, the better result you will get. Period. It is NOT magic. It is fact. I am not the first one to say this and I hope I am not the last. It is ALL in the old patents for those who read and research.