Basic Free Energy Device

[Hotdog]

Turion,

Sir, would you correct the sentence, "...needs to iron to work.." please? Thanks!

[boguslaw]

May I ask if somebody here know the experimental method of measuring the magnetic field intensity required to saturate given core (with unknown properties like cut yoke core from old TV) and to choose the amps and voltage of applied DC to do that ? I have such own made core cut from tv yoke and I want to know how much power I can squeeze from it at chosen frequency of DC-DC converter.

[bistander]

saturation curve

May I ask if somebody here know the experimental method of measuring the magnetic field intensity required to saturate given core (with unknown properties like cut yoke core from old TV) and to choose the amps and voltage of applied DC to do that ? I have such own made core cut from tv yoke and I want to know how much power I can squeeze from it at chosen frequency of DC-DC converter.

Hi,

What I'd do, and have done, is use a variac or variable voltage fixed frequency AC power supply and apply a steadily increasing current to a coil (around the subject core) and record the voltage as a function of the current. The result, when plotted, will be the saturation curve, or perhaps more correctly, the magnetization curve. If you have enough power supply and turns on the coil, you will see the shape of the B - H curve or close to it, depending on the geometry of the core. Reference: https://www.duramag.com/techtalk/tec...-in-workpiece/

If your core has a large air gap, you may not be able to supply enough mmf (ampere turns) to saturate. So your graph will be linear. Otherwise saturation is just past the knee of the curve where increased current yields little or no increase in voltage.

Let me (us) know if that works for you.

bi

[Turion]

Correction

Spelling error

NO iron for the ZFM to work. The rotor magnet follows the movement of the current through the wire and rotates.

[gyula]

I'de like to build a ZFM if i knew what that material was shaped in
a toroidal. I just assumed it was some form of Ferrite or metglas. I
guess I haven't found the details or forgot where they were.

So is that toroidal shaped piece made out of wood?
....

Hi Bro,

Here is a link where Peter Lindemann shared further details on his prototype that was on display last year at the conference:
Zero Force Motor Replication Project - Page 9

So the coil holder was made from a "4" diameter black ABS sewer pipe". You need to log in to be able to see the drawings.

Gyula

[Turion]

Review

I started this thread with the idea that we have been given EVERYTHING we need to know to build a Basic Free Energy Device. That position has not changed. In fact, I am more certain of it now than I was when I began this thread just over THREE YEARS ago.

At that time I had a small working prototype that was producing "free energy" and PROVED the concept. It was a replication of something Matt Jones built and shared with me. I had scaled it up, but was still having problems with the larger version because it had many more coils and magnets on the rotor, which increased magnetic attraction and the amp draw of the motor. I had ideas for solving all those problems and I could see the potential, so I wanted to bring it here to share with others. The output was THERE. The mechanics were THERE. It was just a matter of controlling (reducing) the input. Something all of you will struggle with if you attempt to replicate this device.

I was immediately jumped on by naysayers and all kinds of efforts were made to steer this thread down alternate paths. Only I keep returning to that basic concept.
1. Circuit
2. Motor
3. Generator
4. Flywheel (Not currently using one, but don't need it for prototypes)
That's it. Simple. Only not so simple, as I will lay out here.

I want to review a few things, and then I will be on my merry way. You should know that I am MORE than satisfied with the results of my work, and I would not be where I am without the ideas of folks like Matt Jones, John B. and Citfta (Carroll) and others. I have incorporated so much of what they have showed me into my designs that it isn't funny. Most of what is actually MY idea has to do with the physical construction of the device. I have applied the info I got from others to build a working unit. I have applied things I learned from DIFFERENT THREADS on this forum to make this machine, but I can tell you right now that every single thing on my machine came from information I obtained on this forum, only I may have used it in a different way than it was presented.


So lets start with the Circuit. Why is that important. Until you have worked with the 3 Battery system to see what can be accomplished with big deep cycle batteries running loads between the positives, you really do NOT understand what an incredible thing that simple circuit is. I spent 7 years of my life, and CONTINUE to work with that circuit. Benitez CLEARLY explains in his patent (17.811) what the secret is to getting that circuit to work up to its potential. And he has other patents that show HOW to accomplish what he says is necessary. Read the patents and it is all THERE. Then build it, test it, and USE it to run the motor for your system between the positives and recover the energy that you used to run the motor. How much of that energy can you recover? That's up to you. It depends on the system you build, how well you understand what Benitez says to do, and how well you implement that design. I'll give you a hint though. When he says you can run your load for "free" he means it, provided it is the CORRECT kind of load.

On to the motor. Matt's razor scooter motor was a HELL of an idea. You all know that when you turn a motor it also generates voltage. Matt's motor is no exception. But when connected between the positives according to the correct CIRCUIT, it outputs more voltage than went into the motor, and acts as a charger to the third battery. I LOVE that motor. It does however consume some amps. The BEAUTY of the circuit is that it doesn't MATTER how many amps it consumes, because you get them all back. So you can be satisfied with that motor, or you can build the Zero Force Motor of John Bedini. The ZFM motors I have seen John, Peter and others build do NOT have the torque necessary to start and run a generator, but may be able to do so with a clutch arrangement of some kind because of the HIGH RPM that motor can reach. Bob French and I have been working with our OWN modification of the ZFM that has far more torque while still running on the same watts as the original. I think it is the PERFECT motor to run the Lenz free generator, but like I said, if you recover everything Matt's motor uses to run by using the right circuit, do you really NEED the ZFM.

Finally we have the generator. A rotor with magnets on it turning past coils of wire wound around a core. First of all, ANY coil will cause the motor turning the rotor to speed up when the coil is under load at the right frequency, so you have two choices. Increase the frequency by adding more magnets to the rotor or running it at a higher speed, OR build coils that will speed up at a lower frequency. The choice is yours. Tesla's patent (512,340) on the coil tells you WHY you need to wind coils in a specific way and HOW to do it. There are only TWO issues you have to overcome in the construction of a "free wheeling" generator that will put out SIGNIFICANT power while costing you NOTHING to run it. The first is LENZ, and the Tesla patent shows how to get around that. The second is the attraction of the magnets to the iron cores of your coils. There are ways of reducing this, by going with ferrite or met glass cores. There are also ways of neutralizing this. I spent the last three years figuring out how to do exactly that, and it is the reason I have a working machine putting out around 1800-2000 watts (It speeds up under load, so the output goes up because the frequency changes) for an input of about 250 watts, and can recover (with that circuit, remember?) almost ALL of the input. And it is the ONE thing I will not share here. WE have shared EVERYTHING else, and no one believed us anyway. Nobody is following the threads I started. Nobody is building things the way Matt and I told you to build them or running them the way Matt and I told you to run them. But it's all here. Million dollar ideas we could have kept quiet about and exploited for our own gain that we chose to share publicly.

So there you are. A Basic Free Energy Device. You CAN build a proof of concept machine that will demonstrate to you that you get more out than you put in. It is NOT rocket science. If you figure out the magnetic attraction issue, you will see everything I am seeing. Good luck all

I only bother to come back here and summarize all this because it breaks my heart to see this thread fall off the front page of this forum. I don't just BELIEVE these things work, I KNOW they work. I have had independent tests run on my generator, and they verified EVERYTHING I say about it EXCEPT for two things. They couldn't understand that when connected to a 12 volt load, the coils put out 12 volts and when connected to a 30 volt load the coils put out 30 volts according to THEIR test equipment. They had never seen a machine where the voltage would rise to meet the load while the current stayed the same.
Each coil pair appeared to produce 33 volts at 4.5 amps with a 300 watt load in place and the 300 watt bulb attached to each coil pair lit up.
The motor speeds up when the generator is under load.
The amp draw of the motor goes down when the generator is under load.
The motor is running on 250 watts under load
The secondary batteries do not appear to charge, but neither do the primary batteries appear to discharge during the period of the testing. They could not verify that this was a long term effect, a lasting effect or some anomaly with the unusual wiring configuration that was showing a charge to the batteries that was not real, and had not run battery analyzers on the batteries before the test runs nor did they analyze them after test runs.

[gotoluc]

I have a working machine putting out around 1800-2000 watts (It speeds up under load, so the output goes up because the frequency changes) for an input of about 250 watts

Please post a video demo of your working machine.

Regards

Luc

[Turion]

Response

Luc,
I have already shared the videos I am willing to share over the years. Those videos are already posted, although I may have taken some of them down. As it became clear to me that this was actually going to work, I became much more selective in what I posted on the forum. What is it you want to see? Watts in vs Watts out? I have already stated that. Either I am telling the truth or I am not. Simple. It would be easy to fake that anyway. I will not show videos of my current machine running under load, or running at all. I have plans for that machine that do not involve giving away the ONE thing I have learned that makes it work. Sorry that's where I draw the line. Especially since so many folks have worked so hard to discredit the important things I have ALREADY shared that are ESSENTIAL components to a working system. Whether you know it or not, YOU are one of those people.

Time and time again I have posted information about how to successfully run loads between the positives on the 3 or 4 battery system, and the most important point I have made is that it will NOT work with toy batteries because they just flat have too much impedance. It will only work if done properly with large, deep cycle batteries and a PULSE motor. There are a couple other specific things you have to make sure happen, and DOING THOSE THINGS is the ONLY way to assure that the third battery (or batteries in parallel) is charged at a rate GREATER than what the primaries are discharged.

You say you are familiar with the work I have done, yet you posted a series of videos on you tube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdj9eG6_1Zg

basically discrediting what I worked on for SEVEN YEARS using EXACTLY the kind of batteries I stated a thousand times would not work. You said at the time it was in response to the videos Rick came out with where HE uses little batteries, but you didn't JUST discredit him with your videos. You also discredited ANYONE who is trying to show what can be done with that system, because the people who saw those videos may have NEVER seen the work done on these threads.

I am familiar with your work also. I have watched MOST of your videos, and you have posted a LOT of them. You have done some great stuff, but you have missed the boat on this one. So why would I give up something to the public domain that could make me (and people I am close to) a LOT of money to show something that will be built incorrectly and then that incorrect build will be used to discredit all the work I have put in for so many years? Not going to happen. People can wait until they can buy it at Walmart. And that may be sooner than you think. I understand why John B. became so frustrated with folks that he just didn't want to deal with them. I have given away all the specifics of the coils I am using and the rotor dimensions and everything someone needs to build a working machine with a couple of coils and see that the output is greater than the input, but that's the limit they will reach. Just a few coils. Until they figure out how to eliminate the magnetic attraction of the rotor magnets to the iron cores that will cause the amp draw of the motor to go through the roof on a machine with very many coils. That's the secret to success.
Everything else has all been shared on these threads before. I have listed the patents and talked about how things work and why. You can have a (dang near) FREE WHEELING rotor that will go by coils and generate as much power as the coil is capable of generating for the size of magnet and number of magnets you put on the rotor. Whatever the coil is you have built that puts out the most power, that's the coil you can have on your generator, and you can have as many of them as you like...well, up to a point. The motor can only handle a load so big. You are limited by the weight of the rotor , Magnets, shaft, and the friction of the bearings, plus a little magnetic drag. Say 10% of what it SHOULD be but probably less.

[gotoluc]

I will not show videos of my current machine running under load, or running at all. I have plans for that machine that do not involve giving away

why would I give up something to the public domain that could make me (and people I am close to) a LOT of money

Because this mindset is what perpetuates the plague of greed in this world!

but it's good to know where you stand.
Hope you know you're not going to get praises from open source Free Energy members by continuing to post about a OU device you don't share?... that wouldn't be sensible.

I didn't think you were in it for the money... thought your earlier posts said something that you wanted to help the world.

I must be wrong

Luc

[Allen Burgess]

BS.

Because this mindset is what perpetuates the plague of greed in this world!

but it's good to know where you stand.
Hope you know you're not going to get praises from open source Free Energy members by continuing to post about a OU device you don't share?... that wouldn't be sensible.

I didn't think you were in it for the money... thought your earlier posts said something that you wanted to help the world.

I must be wrong

Luc

This is the same guy who stated that he built an "Oscillating Reed Switch Motor" that he couldn't show us because I was mentally ill.

[Turion]

Lol

Luc,
We gave away the design of the pulse motor. A few people built it, but mostly we were ignored.

We gave away the circuit and how to improve it for free. We were almost COMPLETELY ignored on that count. In fact we were decried as fakes and frauds. Oh by YOU as well.

I have showed the TWO patents time and again that should be the BASIS for ALL free energy research, yet there is hardly ANY discussion of them here.

We have given you the meat and potatoes of a WORKING free energy system, and now, because I refuse to ladle the gravy on top, you question my motives? LOL.

Build a Matt modified motor. Build a REAL version of the 3/4 battery system as we shared it. Add on the improvements we showed. Then tell me HOW MUCH you are paying in energy costs to run your load (motor, etc.) and what THAT is worth.

That was all given for free. We could have kept that all to ourselves and patented a few things, because there was NO discussion of running motors between the positives ANYWHERE before I brought it to this forum. John and others may have done it, but it was NOT being shared here. And if you just stick a motor in there it won't work anyway, so what we learned and shared here is IMPORTANT. If your motor runs for free, THEN worry about adding a generator to it. Have you got THAT far? Nope, and I have been preaching here for a while now on exactly HOW to do that. And you have the information showing HOW to actually get the secondary batteries to show a charge increase while running the load. It was given for FREE. If you can run an off the shelf electric motor absolutely for FREE, no matter the load on it, what is that worth? We haven't given you that, but people should do SOME work on their own and once you see the system working and begin to understand WHY it works, you will be able to do that too.

You CAN'T help people that won't help themselves. We gave you the meat and potatoes and it is rotting on your plate because you are too stubborn or stupid to eat it. And that's my fault? My final suggestion would be this: EAT IT. ;-)

[Satyam108]

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.

Thanks Dave/Turion,
Working on two other (one related) project(s) - so pardon my absence from here. I'm not trying to be contrary - genuinely seeking knowledge - but in this post I'd like to revisit the "no iron" statement.

Zero Force Motor Demo 1 by John Bedini - posted by Aaron on 7-21-17 at this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-GZerEwObo
We can sort of hear John over the noise of the running motor, explaining what he's doing - what he's showing us. What I see is this:

* The timing wheel on the right makes it clear that this is a pulse motor, as does the scope display of those pulses;
*Rather than two curved coils on opposite sides of the rotor as in Yaro and Peter's replications, John only has a single coil of magnet wire on a spool at the bottom.
* It's clear that there is no iron in the coil.
* Appreciable spikes of what John calls "The Radiant" appear on the waveform of the scope. He states that he is not capturing these spikes but that they can be captured and put to use.
* At the 1:17 mark or so, he shows the current at .2 Amps
* At about 1:47, he inserts what appears to be a short piece of 1/2" ID galvanized steel pipe into the coil.
* It sounds like the motor turns faster (maybe just my poor hearing)
*The spikes are more pronounced; AND
* The input current drops to 0 on the 5 amp meter.
*He removes the pipe section and (maybe) the motor slows a bit (judging by sound - with admittedly poor hearing in my "good" ear.)
*The current goes back up to .2 amps
* The spike amplitude decreases.
* He repeats the above sequence again with the same results.

I realize that your, Yaro and Peter's replications have no iron in the cores and I understand the diagrams in John's notes in the Zero Force Motor - Full Disclosure video/PDF's about the flow of magnetic current (Leedskalnin) and how the magnets on the rotor are attracted to the coils.

From my bit of work and experimentation on the 3 (Plus 1 or 2 "resting") battery configuration switching system, I can also see how a ZFM (or version like the one John showed in the video) could be powered, and how, as Peter Lindemann did in his final Bedini SSG "Beyond Advanced" presentation, DID capture the radiant and used it to charge the charging battery. He had also incorporated "resting" the just charged battery for a period of time - to let it's chemistry settle. (I noted your and/or Matt's remark that both the just charged and just discharged batteries need to rest before being connected into the rotation again. That's why I'm going for 3 + 2 system - 3 batteries working and 2 resting at any given moment.)

SO

If you'd be so kind, I'd like your thoughts on this video - why putting the pipe section in the coil core increased the radiant and decreased the current being drawn from the battery. If the radiant spikes come from "the medium" (space/Aether/Akasha/Primordial Sound,) supply current to the coil to move the rotor and reduce the draw on the battery to zero, then how does the piece of iron in the core facilitate that and why?

I also found his, Yaro's and Peter's use of Neodymium magnets very interesting, as on the Bedini "Motors" (SSG) - John was very adamant that Neo's couldn't be used because they would saturate the cores in the coils. I guess with no iron in the cores of the ZFM's - that is not the obstacle it was. But then the above questions seem to increase in importance.

Thanks for your help, and for creating and working on this thread for these years, Dave, I for one appreciate it and I wish you all success in profiting from your efforts. Most of us are in league to vanquish the REAL greedy bastards of the world - the trillion dollar energy sector, with their lies about "fossil fuels," "peak oil," and "global warming," er "climate change," er uh "climate disruption." All designed to keep us (mankind) enslaved and funding our own enslavement.

Hail Victory!
Peace and Love
Jim

[gotoluc]

For the past 10 years I've built, tested and shared only the things I've found to be interesting and or in hope to bring a better understanding.
I've done my best to measure and share results truthfully being good or bad.
Over the years I've gains experience and got better at measuring my test devices.
However, I've noticed when I share results that are not supporting OU claims I get accusations and judgements like what's going on here now.
Another noticeable patterns with OU claims is we most often see no acceptable power measurements demos to support the claims.
We also often get excuses like they don't want to give everything away but somehow made to believe they are here to share and claiming they've given most everything away.
However, interestingly enough not one single reliable power measurement or a working replication has been presented by someone else who has participated in the topic.

It's very strange but seen these patterns time and again over the years and disappointed to see it happen here since I had hoped it would end differently and why I kept an eye on the topic over the years and did my tests (in private) in hopes to find something with measurable proof so I could help confirm.
Unfortunately I found nothing and when I ask to see working proof the above common excuses come up and I'm made to look like a bad guy.
If what is claimed is true then I shouldn't be seen as a threat but rather someone who is interested and willing to support what is true which should help others and the very reason for these forums.

If you or any other member can prove me wrong with measurable proof I will be more than happy to admit I have built my experiments wrong and will be more then happy to publicly apologize to everyone

Regards

Luc

[Turion]

Luc,
When you say you have followed what we have been sharing and then post a video that discredits our work using batteries we have said a thousand times will NOT work, what am I supposed to think, other than that you are NOT just a skeptic, which is COMPLETELY understandable, but a disinformation specialist?

If I post a video today of a system with four batteries running 600 watts of load between the positives, what does that prove? NOTHING! Any idiot can hook that system up and run it. And it will run for a while, even when hooked up INVORRECTLY, before there are significant losses enough to prove it doesn’t work. So how do you prove it works? You let it run for a month and THEN measure the batteries. How do I put THAT in a 3 minute video.

I do not care whether you believe me or not. I do not care whether you build this or not. What I object to is someone saying this doesn’t work when they have made no REAL attempt to actually replicate what we have shared. I could name 20 people who have replicated it correctly and have seen that it works. At least to the extent that you get much longer runs than possible off the four batteries connected in parallel. I even know of a couple who figured out before I did what it takes to keep the third battery or batteries in that position charging faster than the primaries discharge, and for THAT I owe them.

[gotoluc]

Luc,
When you say you have followed what we have been sharing and then post a video that discredits our work using batteries we have said a thousand times will NOT work, what am I supposed to think, other than that you are NOT just a skeptic, which is COMPLETELY understandable, but a disinformation specialist?

The video you keep referring to was not related to your work. Don't know why you keep bringing it up or why you or Mat were so offended by it. Please point out anything in the video that refers it to your work.
If you can't find anything referring it to your work then stop using it to discredit me as it's not about what you guys shared.

If I post a video today of a system with four batteries running 600 watts of load between the positives, what does that prove? NOTHING! Any idiot can hook that system up and run it. And it will run for a while, even when hooked up INVORRECTLY, before there are significant losses enough to prove it doesn’t work. So how do you prove it works? You let it run for a month and THEN measure the batteries. How do I put THAT in a 3 minute video.

It's unrealistic to think a 3 minute video would prove anything. However, if you explain the devices main components, power source and what it can achieve in a said time then maybe it can be done in a 20 to 30 minute video without revealing your secret.

I do not care whether you believe me or not. I do not care whether you build this or not. What I object to is someone saying this doesn’t work when they have made no REAL attempt to actually replicate what we have shared.

Again, please post a reference where I say your device doesn't work.
If you can't which I know you can't then stop making false accusations.

I could name 20 people who have replicated it correctly and have seen that it works. At least to the extent that you get much longer runs than possible off the four batteries connected in parallel. I even know of a couple who figured out before I did what it takes to keep the third battery or batteries in that position charging faster than the primaries discharge, and for THAT I owe them.

I don't need 20 independent replications. Just 1 will do as long as the power calculations are done correctly.

Looking forward to it.

Regards

Luc