The bistander thread

[Turion]

Blah, blah, blah. Do you want to make a bet or not? You insist I am wrong. Put up the $$ or shut up. That simple. This will be the THIRD time you have ignored the opportunity to make me "PAY" for being wrong. But we both know THAT'S not going to happen now is it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7-HRBxLkrc

[BroMikey]

You say "neutralizing magnetic drag .............................

Most designers look at core material to.........................................

Those designers are still living under a rock and when confronted with the new innovation, they put their tail between their legs and run away shaking their heads. Old school 100 years plus, trapped thru mind control. Go outside, it's nice.

[Turion]

There are two reasons modern generators run the standard way cannot be run with a small electric motor. The first is “Magnetic Drag”. At slow speeds the motor requires “torque“ to break the magnetic lock each time a magnet on the rotor passes the core of the coil. As it approaches the iron core the rotor magnet is attracted and pulled in. As it tries to leave, it is pulled back. There two forces are as equal as I have been able to measure with the equipment I have. But there is an instant in time where the magnet is neither approaching nor leaving but is centered on the coil core. This is the instant of magnetic lock that we must pay to undo. There is an inrush of amps into the motor in order to provide it for the instant of time it is necessary. It causes a jerking action referred to as “cogging.” This is an additional LOAD on the motor above and beyond what is required just to turn the rotor that would NOT be there if the coil was not there. Now multiply the increase in amps over time required by the number of coils and ALSO by the number of magnets on the rotor. This is a significant increase that will simply burn up your motor. The faster the motor turns and the more magnets you have on the rotor the less time there is between one magnet on the rotor going by a coil and the next magnet going by the same coil, so that jerking action Or “cogging” goes away as the additional LOAD becomes almost CONSTANT. This constant load is NOT “cogging” or a jerking action, but what I call Magnetic Drag. The increased amp draw required to move magnets past iron cores has not gone away. It has simply smoothed out. But you still pay for it. It’s the reason falling water at a damn is used to create electricity. You pay for what you get and the cost is AS great or greater than what you can generate. Unless you NEUTRALIZE it as I have shown how to do. It is one of TWO things required to get more out of a generator than you put in. At least with iron cores. There are other options with faster switching core materials, like ferrite. These are FACTS that can be proven on the bench with a small motor and a couple coils. By any COMPETENT researcher. And possibly even by our friend bi.

[bistander]

There are two reasons modern generators run the standard way cannot be run with a small electric motor. The first is “Magnetic Drag”. At slow speeds the motor requires “torque“ to break the magnetic lock each time a magnet on the rotor passes the core of the coil. As it approaches the iron core the rotor magnet is attracted and pulled in. As it tries to leave, it is pulled back. There two forces are as equal as I have been able to measure with the equipment I have. But there is an instant in time where the magnet is neither approaching nor leaving but is centered on the coil core. This is the instant of magnetic lock that we must pay to undo. There is an inrush of amps into the motor in order to provide it for the instant of time it is necessary. It causes a jerking action referred to as “cogging.” This is an additional LOAD on the motor above and beyond what is required just to turn the rotor that would NOT be there if the coil was not there. Now multiply the increase in amps over time required by the number of coils and ALSO by the number of magnets on the rotor. This is a significant increase that will simply burn up your motor. The faster the motor turns and the more magnets you have on the rotor the less time there is between one magnet on the rotor going by a coil and the next magnet going by the same coil, so that jerking action Or “cogging” goes away as the additional LOAD becomes almost CONSTANT. This constant load is NOT “cogging” or a jerking action, but what I call Magnetic Drag. The increased amp draw required to move magnets past iron cores has not gone away. It has simply smoothed out. But you still pay for it. It’s the reason falling water at a damn is used to create electricity. You pay for what you get and the cost is AS great or greater than what you can generate. Unless you NEUTRALIZE it as I have shown how to do. It is one of TWO things required to get more out of a generator than you put in. At least with iron cores. There are other options with faster switching core materials, like ferrite. These are FACTS that can be proven on the bench with a small motor and a couple coils. By any COMPETENT researcher. And possibly even by our friend bi.

Hi Turion,
You just choose to ignore Lorentz Force Law. Nevertheless it applies.
Regards,
bi

[Turion]

What about the bet you continue to avoid discussing. If I’m as “wrong” as you claim it should be easy money. But this is your strategy. Avoid discussing by any means the things you know you can’t win. Shift the focus whenever possible. Nitpick everything else, How about that bet? Put up or shut up.

[Turion]

Hi Turion,
You just choose to ignore Lorentz Force Law. Nevertheless it applies.
Regards,
bi

I didn’t “choose to ignore” Lenz. If you bothered to actually read my post I said there are TWO reasons modern generators run the standard way cannot be run with a small electric motor. I explained the first, and how to overcome it. Now I will explain the second.

Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change in a magnetic field is directed to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force which opposes the motion.

Which means a magnetic field is created in the coil that repels the approaching magnet. This puts a tremendous strain on the motor. The more coils the greater the strain, It’s why you need gas or Diesel engines to turn generators using current technology. If you tried to use an electric motor to turn the generator the amp draw from that strain would burn the motor up, not to mention you would use more power than you produced.

Not included in Lenz law is ANY statement of “time.” You ASSUME that the opposing magnetic field will be formed prior to the rotor magnet reaching top dead center. Therefore you ASSUME that the coil will resist the magnets approach. But what if the rotor is turning at 99,999 RPM? Is there still time for that magnetic field to form in time to resist the approaching magnet? Not hardly. So time CAN be a factor in the application of Lenz Law that violates NO LAWS. RPM is one way to outrun Lenz and reach TDC before the Lenz reaction (because it IS just a reaction) takes place. WHEN it takes place is dependent on several things. The strength of the magnet, the capacity of the coil and the core material are the ones I know for sure. There may well be others.

So let’s take a look at what happens in the real world shall we? As the magnet approaches the steel core, the core material begins to absorb magnetic flux, actually CREATING a weak magnet that is attracted to the approaching magnet. At some point enough flux is absorbed for electricity to begin to be produced in the wire. So the larger the core, the more flux that can be accumulated before generation starts. The longer the wire, the more capacity the coil has to store that electricity evenly throughout the wire slowing the start of a change in the field around the core. BOTH of these things can delay the ability of the generated electricity to first, REVERSE the polarity of the magnetic field the approaching magnet had begun to create in the core material and second, create an electromagnet from that SAME core material that repels the approaching magnet. You CAN outrun Lenz and your rotor magnet can be at TDC or BEYOND before the reaction takes place. If you are BEYOND TDC you get an assist from Lenz, but do NOT get as much generated power. Max Generated power occurs if the motor is neither sped up nor slowed down by the coil.

I have a machine with a freewheeling rotor that is spun EASILY by a small electric motor. Lenz does not slow it down. It can put out MAX power from the coils. Magnetic drag does not slow it down either. I have shown exactly how to build that machine. All of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge and supported by ten years of experiments. Build it or don’t. Not my problem.

How about that bet bi?

[bistander]

I didn’t “choose to ignore” Lenz. If you bothered to actually read my post I said there are TWO reasons modern generators run the standard way cannot be run with a small electric motor. I explained the first, and how to overcome it. Now I will explain the second.

Lenz's law states that the current induced in a circuit due to a change in a magnetic field is directed to oppose the change in flux and to exert a mechanical force which opposes the motion.

Which means a magnetic field is created in the coil that repels the approaching magnet. This puts a tremendous strain on the motor. The more coils the greater the strain, It’s why you need gas or Diesel engines to turn generators using current technology. If you tried to use an electric motor to turn the generator the amp draw from that strain would burn the motor up, not to mention you would use more power than you produced.

Not included in Lenz law is ANY statement of “time.” You ASSUME that the opposing magnetic field will be formed prior to the rotor magnet reaching top dead center. Therefore you ASSUME that the coil will resist the magnets approach. But what if the rotor is turning at 99,999 RPM? Is there still time for that magnetic field to form in time to resist the approaching magnet? Not hardly. So time CAN be a factor in the application of Lenz Law that violates NO LAWS. RPM is one way to outrun Lenz and reach TDC before the Lenz reaction (because it IS just a reaction) takes place. WHEN it takes place is dependent on several things. The strength of the magnet, the capacity of the coil and the core material are the ones I know for sure. There may well be others.

So let’s take a look at what happens in the real world shall we? As the magnet approaches the steel core, the core material begins to absorb magnetic flux, actually CREATING a weak magnet that is attracted to the approaching magnet. At some point enough flux is absorbed for electricity to begin to be produced in the wire. So the larger the core, the more flux that can be accumulated before generation starts. The longer the wire, the more capacity the coil has to store that electricity evenly throughout the wire slowing the start of a change in the field around the core. BOTH of these things can delay the ability of the generated electricity to first, REVERSE the polarity of the magnetic field the approaching magnet had begun to create in the core material and second, create an electromagnet from that SAME core material that repels the approaching magnet. You CAN outrun Lenz and your rotor magnet can be at TDC or BEYOND before the reaction takes place. If you are BEYOND TDC you get an assist from Lenz, but do NOT get as much generated power. Max Generated power occurs if the motor is neither sped up nor slowed down by the coil.

I have a machine with a freewheeling rotor that is spun EASILY by a small electric motor. Lenz does not slow it down. It can put out MAX power from the coils. Magnetic drag does not slow it down either. I have shown exactly how to build that machine. All of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge and supported by ten years of experiments. Build it or don’t. Not my problem.

How about that bet bi?

Hi Turion,
Your theory is fantasy.
If you have a device where there is relative motion between a magnetic field and a conductor, a potential difference is generated in that conductor (see Faraday's Law). Then, if you complete a circuit with that conductor, a current flows in it, in the presence of that magnetic field, and consequently a force develops which opposes that relative motion (see Lorentz force law). Simple as that and all your little tricks cannot change it.

You made an extraordinary claim to the world. By not providing proof, you fail to be creditable. Maybe someday you'll realize that.
Regards,
bi

[Turion]

All those things you state about what happens are true. You just repeated everything I said would happen only using big words to make yourself sound important. It didn’t work. What YOU don’t seem to grasp is by the time that all happens the magnet it would oppose is already at TDC so there is no negative effect. No laws are violated. You have to allow for time in your equation. That’s YOUR failure. And again you sidestep the bet. Put your money where your MOUTH is But you won’t. Because you know you are WRONG. LOL. And now everybody knows you have sidestepped the issue four times. Do I hear chickens??

[Turion]

You keep repeating the dogma over and over like the mantra in a religious cult. It’s not going to change the FACTS. Free energy is SIMPLE and POSSIBLE when the rotor actions do not negatively reflect back onto the drive motor. Your output is limited only by what your coils can produce and the number of coils minus the energy to turn a basically free wheeling rotor. Simple. But you will never see it because you will never build it. The people who HAVE are the only judges of my credibility I care about and you ain’t one of them. How about that bet?? Ready to part with some cash yet? You say I’m a liar and a fraud but when it’s time to back up your mouth with money you ignore the challenge completely. So either YOU’RE the fraud and liar, or you just have no spine. Which calls into question YOUR credibility. Come on. You can do it. Reach into that pocket and pull out a hand full of money. Either that, or just shut up.

You sit in the dark and call me a liar and a fraud because I won’t back up my claim with proof. Then when I SHOW proof you discount it and do your BEST to discredit it. You are allowed to malign the reputations of others and YOU have nothing to lose because you hide your identity in the dark. The minute you HAVE something to lose, like $$$ you completely back off the issue. My NAME is on what I put out here. My reputation. The minute you have anything to lose you run away. LOL. We all see you now. The dark can’t hide what you are. You will leave a trail of feathers wherever you go.

[bistander]

You keep repeating the dogma over and over like the mantra in a religious cult. It’s not going to change the FACTS. Free energy is SIMPLE and POSSIBLE when the rotor actions do not negatively reflect back onto the drive motor. Your output is limited only by what your coils can produce and the number of coils minus the energy to turn a basically free wheeling rotor. Simple. But you will never see it because you will never build it. The people who HAVE are the only judges of my credibility I care about and you ain’t one of them. How about that bet?? Ready to part with some cash yet? You say I’m a liar and a fraud but when it’s time to back up your mouth with money you ignore the challenge completely. So either YOU’RE the fraud and liar, or you just have no spine. Which calls into question YOUR credibility. Come on. You can do it. Reach into that pocket and pull out a hand full of money. Either that, or just shut up.

You sit in the dark and call me a liar and a fraud because I won’t back up my claim with proof. Then when I SHOW proof you discount it and do your BEST to discredit it. You are allowed to malign the reputations of others and YOU have nothing to lose because you hide your identity in the dark. The minute you HAVE something to lose, like $$$ you completely back off the issue. My NAME is on what I put out here. My reputation. The minute you have anything to lose you run away. LOL. We all see you now. The dark can’t hide what you are. You will leave a trail of feathers wherever you go.

You just said: "Then when I SHOW proof you discount it and do your BEST to discredit it."
You have never shown proof of any device, circuit, trick, scheme, or contraption which delivers output power which exceeds the input power for a sustained period long enough to rule out transients. That's what I've been talking about ever since you went public with the claim that your generator puts out 1800 or 2000 watts of real power while using less than 300 watts of input power.

That is an incredible, extraordinary claim and if true would change the would, yet here you are playing games. Get busy and prove that claim. People would then take you seriously and give you the Nobel Peace Prize.
Regards,
bi

[BroMikey]

There are two reasons modern generators run the standard way cannot be run with a small electric motor. The first is “Magnetic Drag”.

These are FACTS that can be proven on the bench with a small motor and a couple coils. By any COMPETENT researcher. And possibly even by our friend bi.

Common Bye test it all out. Look at how fluent Dave is on a keyboard, he flies like a butterfly and on top of that is precise concerning this technical evaluation of this project. Go ahead and slap a couple of coils on a rotor, then we can see you are legit when you try to correct all of our work.

Dave is so kind, I beat'em up all the time and he just keeps bringing home the bacon. Put sump'in into this BYE, try. Wow isn't Dave a good teacher BYE, I like to listen to him more now that he is in check not withstanding the hail mary's.

[Turion]

Turion,
Your tricks and data and theories about methods are irrelevant to the claimed performance. You may believe they are important, but they are not. Most are wrong anyway as I have pointed out repeatedly.

MOST are wrong you say? Most means more than half. I have only ever claimed that TWO THINGS contribute to the success of the generator. And they don't just contribute, they are ESSENTIAL: Magnetic Neutralization and Coils that COULD speed up under load but should NOT in order to get the most output. So you are saying BOTH are wrong if "MOST" are wrong. I asked if you would care to make a very large wager that the amp draw and/or rpm of the motor is not affected by the addition of coils around the rotor? NEUTRALIZING that effect is HALF of the secret to the performance of the Generator. You say it is irrelevant, I say it is critical. I showed the data, which you disregard. That's data that supports HALF the reasons I show for this thing working. It is the kind of test data that ANY REAL RESEARCHER would want to see. But not you. You "claim" it is irrelevant to performance. It isn't. So I say PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. You HAVE no reputation to put on the line since you hide in the dark, so put up something of value. But you won't. And you will continue to ignore this challenge. But it isn't going away. I'll be here every day, following the chicken tracks you make all over this forum. Cowarde. Yeah, I know that spelling is obsolete, but so is this technology.

Waiting for your response to the bet.

Still waiting....

Going to ignore it again?

Probably.

Is it lonely out there in the dark? Aren't you tired of hiding? Come out, come out. Tell us who you are and face the music like a man. Oh wait, THAT'S not possible! LOL

[bistander]

MOST are wrong you say? Most means more than half. I have only ever claimed that TWO THINGS contribute to the success of the generator. And they don't just contribute, they are ESSENTIAL: Magnetic Neutralization and Coils that COULD speed up under load but should NOT in order to get the most output. So you are saying BOTH are wrong if "MOST" are wrong. I asked if you would care to make a very large wager that the amp draw and/or rpm of the motor is not affected by the addition of coils around the rotor? NEUTRALIZING that effect is HALF of the secret to the performance of the Generator. You say it is irrelevant, I say it is critical. I showed the data, which you disregard. That's data that supports HALF the reasons I show for this thing working. It is the kind of test data that ANY REAL RESEARCHER would want to see. But not you. You "claim" it is irrelevant to performance. It isn't. So I say PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. You HAVE no reputation to put on the line since you hide in the dark, so put up something of value. But you won't. And you will continue to ignore this challenge. But it isn't going away. I'll be here every day, following the chicken tracks you make all over this forum. Cowarde. Yeah, I know that spelling is obsolete, but so is this technology.

Waiting for your response to the bet.

Still waiting....

Going to ignore it again?

Probably.

Is it lonely out there in the dark? Aren't you tired of hiding? Come out, come out. Tell us who you are and face the music like a man. Oh wait, THAT'S not possible! LOL

I've said this before, many times. The only way you can prove you have something which provides or enables or contributes to O.U. or free energy is demonstrate it delivering more power output than it uses over a reasonable period with simultaneous measurements using appropriate instruments. This is something you have never done, nor has any replicator.

Come out, come out. Tell us who you are...

It doesn't matter who I am. Deal with what I post. If you want creditability for anything I write, research it. I have hundreds of years and millions of proofs to back my statements. You've got BroMikey.

Regards,
bi

[BroMikey]

I have hundreds of years and millions of proofs to back my statements. You've got BroMikey.

My proofs are weak one's compared to folks in the background. We are giving you a heads up. The rest is up to you to prove it to yourself. If you have even 10 years experience you can do the tests for tiny amounts. All generators built today consume more energy than they put out. Let's take the ratio 85% + 15% . 15% losses for an 85% efficient generator is what we have on the market today. If you have an input of 100% or a single unit of input you will get back 85%.

On the other hand our generators will be running along and we plug in a load of 5 watts no increase takes place on the input side. Explain that will ya. Or a 100 watt load, nothing happens, no increase on the input. See you can't explain it, you are not qualified. Most engineers are not capable. Don't feel bad BYE, you are not alone.

These are the basic questions you fail to address, willfully. We see you.Thanks 4 playing.

[Turion]

oh bi, you are just so funny. You can't accept the bet because losing it will make you look like a FOOL. LOL. YOU know it. I know it. Everybody knows it. But you claim you are right and I am wrong. You're NOT right. Not now, not ever. Not about this stuff. Never will be. So you continue to avoid it. Keep trying, and I will just keep bringing it up. Put your money where your mouth is or just shut up. Doesn't it make you sick to your stomach supporting what you know is such a losing position when eventually everyone will know how little you actually know? I'd have nightmares!

bro,
There's an old saying. You can lead a mule to water, but it won't learn anything so you might as well shoot it. Or something like that

oh, and I've got lots more people who understand what is going on with this than you might believe. Some of them probably have much more credible credentials than YOU do no matter WHO you are. They just don't happen to feel like wasting their time arguing with YOU when they could be building and researching.