Validating claims

[Aaron]

Hey Aaron, you're a smart a guy with great marketing chops. That's a compliment from someone who knows one. Look at it this way, for a product to sell it needs authority and trust. I know you know this. These days though with social media trust has to be earned. Verified Testimonial platforms is a huge business. Trust Pilot, Judge.me, Yotpo, Google the list goes on. Like many of us here I've built a bunch of things which never lived up to claims on the package.

The Internet has evolved and more than ever extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So for me personally I wouldn't blame a bloke if they third party verification of an effect. I only work on replications from other builders who's work I'm familiar with and trust or others work that is recommended by them.

Seems to get a lot more heated in here these days.

Thanks Jim.


Thankfully, quite a few of the people I've worked with already had a following since they were seen as authorities on their topics and people certainly had trust in what they were offering in terms of their knowledge, claims and demonstrations. Bedini, Lindemann, Dollard, Murray and others as you know. The new generation(s) do not know who they are, who I am or what any of this is supposed to amount to so communicating it properly to them is of course very important.



With or without the trust factor, it's true that many people have failed in replicating the claims, especially overunity claims. I've pursued this heavily since 1999, the year I met John Bedini and have spent a good chunk of change on my own builds and failed miserably in a number of experiments. Those failures aren't necessarily on builds related to the names I mention, but from other claims online for the last 20 years and there are a lot of them. But then there are all my successes as well. And I have an advantage compared to most since I'm very close to the action with a number of people with working technologies.



One of the most common failures in much of this is too small of batteries with too high of impedance and too small of builds. None of this is linear so as the builds get bigger along with the batteries, the gains go up and become more and more presentable. It's been said for years, but still we see people with small builds with small batteries saying they can verify any over 1.0 COP action. From my observation, this kind of thing accounts for most failures which comes down to most people simply not taking the advice of those who are successful.


With replications, RS Stafford is someone who has replicated the results and presented them at the conference (with a battery bank that probably weighed over 1000 pounds). Peter Lindemann also replicated some of John's claims and presented them twice regarding the SG type circuit with and without battery rotation schemes. There are quite a few successes, but unfortunately, most get some results and don't want to put their name forward. The reason Peter did the last few presentations revolving around the Bedini SG and low drag generator concepts is because all those details were in the 3rd book of the SG series for everyone to see but most stay completely silent so he decided he'll just show it himself since nobody else wanted to do it.



We already know that even most electrical engineers are not qualified to analyze input vs output. I personally know hundreds of people with electrical engineering degrees but could count all the ones that I trust and believe to give an authoritative assessment on validating input vs output claims on one hand because it is a dark art and is not as obvious as many think.



Fortunately, Jim Murray is one of them and last year, he presented on Segregated Load Analysis, which points out more blind spots in the measurement process than any other presentation or book that I've seen. This is very empowering and anyone interested in this field should take a close look at what he shared.



Of course validating claims is one thing and actually achieving them is another but they do go hand in hand. Someone can be producing free energy gains but will never release it because it is hiding in plain site in low system efficiency, which is different from conversion efficiency. With that distinction, it seems that there is much more success in replicating these than one might imagine - it's just that most people do not know how to recognize the distinctions.



I do the same as what you mention, I only invest my replication time on those things that I can personally vouch for or what appears to me to be self-evident.



I've never used testimonial platforms - I'm aware of them but need to learn more. How does it play into this kind of scenario from your perspective? I understand the power of testimonials and the most powerful are not our own but from those that we helped achieve success.

[jimboot]

Hi Aaron I was referring to systems that have verified comments about a product service or company. I work primarily with retailers. These systems greatly improve the ecomm conv rate. So people are used to trusting their systems. That's why, if some extraordinary claim or product appears in my newsfeed I immediately look for some verifiable endorsement. So these systems verify the testimonial is a real person. Not the claim itself.

[bobo36us]

Please accept my message with love, I wish you no ill

Thanks Jim.

Thankfully, quite a few of the people I've worked with already had a following since they were seen as authorities on their topics and people certainly had trust in what they were offering in terms of their knowledge, claims and demonstrations. Bedini, Lindemann, Dollard, Murray and others as you know. I've listened to most of these guys talk for hours and hours over the years, is there a single one of them that are powering their own home or showing a device capable of such? Heck, Eric Dollard just seems pissed at the world lately when I watch him talk!

With or without the trust factor, it's true that many people have failed in replicating the claims, especially overunity claims. I've pursued this heavily since 1999, the year I met John Bedini and have spent a good chunk of change on my own builds and failed miserably in a number of experiments. Those failures aren't necessarily on builds related to the names I mention, but from other claims online for the last 20 years and there are a lot of them. But then there are all my successes as well. And I have an advantage compared to most since I'm very close to the action with a number of people with working technologies. No one would EVER fault you for trying, and most importantly sharing both successes and failures! But if you know people with working devices, why the F aren't they coming forward with them? Isn't it a well known fact that greed kills every single free energy device out there? We all have the dream of having tons of money for our idea or invention, but can't one single human that has figured it out step up and open source it for the greater good???

One of the most common failures in much of this is too small of batteries with too high of impedance and too small of builds. None of this is linear so as the builds get bigger along with the batteries, the gains go up and become more and more presentable. It's been said for years, but still we see people with small builds with small batteries saying they can verify any over 1.0 COP action. From my observation, this kind of thing accounts for most failures which comes down to most people simply not taking the advice of those who are successful. I hear you, but that's not always the case. Just recently I watched a video on the Skinner device. I don't know how this device never caught my attention before, but as I watched it, it really resonated with me, and I really understood the concept and, not being very knowledgeable with electronics, thought this might be something I could actually duplicate, especially with ALL the detail you provided! Then I started watching replicators. and really getting into it until I stumbled across GotoLuc's replication done on a full scale and at 10x a level I probably would have ever achieved, but to no avail! From what I could tell comparing his video to your detailed analysis and Skinner's original video, I felt he nailed it! But still we don't see a working unit, so why would a novice such as myself even attempt (without having a single idea on what I might improve)? This is just a recent example, but I see others frequently too........HUGE coils, strong magnets, HUGE gravity machines, HUGE water/air displacement devices, still not a single one open sourced and replicate-able by the layman!

With replications, RS Stafford is someone who has replicated the results and presented them at the conference (with a battery bank that probably weighed over 1000 pounds). Peter Lindemann also replicated some of John's claims and presented them twice regarding the SG type circuit with and without battery rotation schemes. There are quite a few successes, but unfortunately, most get some results and don't want to put their name forward. The reason Peter did the last few presentations revolving around the Bedini SG and low drag generator concepts is because all those details were in the 3rd book of the SG series for everyone to see but most stay completely silent so he decided he'll just show it himself since nobody else wanted to do it. For the love of God, what the hell is it going to take for you and/or Peter to actually show a easily replicate-able device to power a home? You both claim to have seen dozens of them, right? I get it, you're both businessmen, both need to still earn that paper somehow (as do we all), but is there a dollar number where we could actually get you guys to disclose something useful? I know, you guys keep saying you want us to be able to understand the device before building it, but is that really that important at these crossroads of humanity? I don't need to know what happens physically and microscopically in my body when I drink water, but I know where to find it and that I need it! Hope that analogy makes sense! In either case, I do very well for myself and wish that I was smart enough to figure this out myself, but I haven't (notice I didn't say can't, I F-ing HATE that word!). So, what's it going to take to get one of you guys to break your silence and post a device capable of powering a home on ANY scale? 10k? 50k? 100k? 500k? 1000k??? Any of those amounts I can cover personally, and if needs to be more then I can call some friends, but for the love of God (or Creator, or whatever you call it) will someone please SPEAK UP!!!!!

We already know that even most electrical engineers are not qualified to analyze input vs output. I personally know hundreds of people with electrical engineering degrees but could count all the ones that I trust and believe to give an authoritative assessment on validating input vs output claims on one hand because it is a dark art and is not as obvious as many think. I think we can all agree self powered is self powered, regardless of whatever the instruments say :-)

Fortunately, Jim Murray is one of them and last year, he presented on Segregated Load Analysis, which points out more blind spots in the measurement process than any other presentation or book that I've seen. This is very empowering and anyone interested in this field should take a close look at what he shared. The same Jim Murray that supposedly has an entire labratory full of working devices, any ONE of which could save humanity, right? If these guys have been bought off, why are they even talking AT ALL??? If I personally bought their idea or patent or whatever, I would NEVER allow any of them to even speak of energy in any way, shape, or form, so for the life of me I just can't figure out why they all keep putting out these useless (to most) videos?!?!

Of course validating claims is one thing and actually achieving them is another but they do go hand in hand. Someone can be producing free energy gains but will never release it because it is hiding in plain site in low system efficiency, which is different from conversion efficiency. With that distinction, it seems that there is much more success in replicating these than one might imagine - it's just that most people do not know how to recognize the distinctions. Again, I think we can all agree self powered is self powered, regardless of whatever the instruments say :-)

I do the same as what you mention, I only invest my replication time on those things that I can personally vouch for or what appears to me to be self-evident. We all love your passion for free energy!

I've never used testimonial platforms - I'm aware of them but need to learn more. How does it play into this kind of scenario from your perspective? I understand the power of testimonials and the most powerful are not our own but from those that we helped achieve success.If you had a platform for testimonials, I wouldn't be leaving you any positive feedback. I wouldn't leave you any negative either because we're all just trying to figure out what the hell we're doing here (on Earth), but I have purchased several of your products and have been very disappointed (similar to the neutral response from the gentleman in a thread a few days ago that I now can't find). Whether or not you deleted that post, or I simply can't find it is certainly your right as a business owner and website moderator, but again goes to prove my point, this is a business for you, so again, just name your price to show us a device capable of powering a home! I have a business and know all about marketing, and that is how you convinced me to buy several of your products, but again, I was very disappointed with the misleading claims, particularly how you would provide enough information to easily duplicate the free energy device that was the subject of the book!

Please accept my message with love, I sincerely do love all fellow humans and your passion for free energy!

[Aaron]

@bobo36us

bobo36us

1. You're grouping everyone so maybe haven't really listened to them. Blatant example - Eric Dollard, he doesn't believe in free energy and is very open about that. Bedini did power his home off the grid when he lived in California and got harassed by the power company. Bedini & Lindemann both showed a device capable of powering your home. The 10-coiler ran on a golf car battery bank while charging a very large cell phone tower battery bank at a COP of 5.0 or 500% above the draw from the small input battery bank. In the 3 battery thread, I said 10.0 COP but I was reminded of what the numbers were - my mistake. Proving a concept does not equal a responsibility to make it available to you to power your home and it is a faulty assumption to believe in such ideas. The information is there, you have the information so apply it as you see fit.



2. People with working devices have brought them forward. Bedini's large Ferris Wheel motor produced a LOT of mechanical work while the input and output batteries stayed charged to the top - self running - demonstrated to hundreds of people who were free to take whatever measurements they wanted. Graham Gunderson showed two - one that was barely over 1.0 COP to prove the point and all replication details were given. And one that showed COP of 7.0 or so - the Magnetic Implosion Transformer. Jim Murray and Paul Babcock showed COP of almost 50.0 lighting 50 watts of bulbs for a net loss of close to 1 watt from the input. The principles of how it worked were given in their presentation and I only know of maybe one person who even tried to replicate it - I think Mario tried from what I recall and didn't get the same results but results or not, that is only one person I recall even making the attempt. RS Stafford showed the 6 coiler Bedini machine powering loads while the batteries stayed charged up and the 2nd SG presentation Peter showed, he did the same thing with the automated battery swapper - mechanical work, making electricity with generator coils, operating on crappy Walmart garden batteries, but while doing all that work all weekend without being charged up, they kept themselves charged up. The Kromrey was demonstrated by Peter showing twice as much went to the battery as what left the input - all meters show different on that machine and it's not a power factor trick. The know-how on most of these has been provided. I've told everyone plenty of times exactly how I built my self-running-self-charging Bedini oscillator and after all these years, ZERO people have contacted me and said, "Aaron, I did what you said and it did work or it didn't work". I'm not responsible for what anyone does with the information and neither are any of the presenters. Open source is irrelevant. Bedini and others have a right to patent and protect the commercial value of their inventions - it's there work and they do not owe anything to anyone. What is equally true is that nobody owes you anything. Being that this is the case, they still openly shared their work and encouraged people to learn their work and build it for PERSONAL use. That disqualifies any belief that something has to be open source to be of benefit to people or the "layman" who you believe should be able to build these things. There are plenty of people who have patented game-changing technologies who have openly taught the public about them and encouraged them to learn and use it. That includes not just Bedini, but Babcock, Murray and others. Murray disclosed his Dynaflux Alternator and Transforming Generator that were patented, patents expired and he openly disclosed the details that were missing from the patents and gave everyone the blessing to do with it what they want. The list goes on...


3. Gotoluc - Luc Choquette is a liar, fraud, charlatan and more. He is the thief that claimed he invented my plasma ignition circuit and had himself listed on the patent for my invention. His replication of Skinner is garbage and so is his analysis. The input is elliptical, not circular, which keeps it an equilibrium machine - elliptical makes it non-equilibrium, which is required - otherwise, you're missing a large part of the gravitational input. Everyone is trying to do it with a circular input because they aren't able to comprehend or believe what is shown in the original Skinner video. I know Skinner's daughter and learned more about it than most and I only know one single person who built a large scale 4 quadrant machine that is working on making an elliptical input because that is obviously how it works. The only thing gotoluc nailed is another nail in his coffin of disinformation, pretentiousness and lies. He claims to be some benevolent humanitarian (first of all someone who is will not share that with anyone but he shouts loudly about all his charitable work) - he is a greedy fraud that is only interested in money and I have all the emails to prove it. You are also acting as if the average layman can replicate these machines. There is a such thing as engineering and physics. If everything that is open and known could be made by the layman, everyone would be building their own cars, televisions, computers, homes, etc. but we don't see that for obvious reasons. Your argument doesn't hold any weight.


4. If you don't think anything useful has been disclosed, then why are you still looking here? Again, it is nobody's responsibility for what anyone does with the info (nor can they be!). There are a heck of a lot of people that watch this forum that are way smarter than you and I combined, they get what is presented and they stay very quiet behind the scenes. I regularly communicate with PhDs who do understand the validity of what is taught - some are very very well-known academics, engineers for NASA, Boeing, etc. that I have discussions with and even govt scientists from around the world - if you don't think they aren't taking this all seriously, you would be kidding yourself - usually I get to learn more from them than what they learn from our publications, etc. but they're not the run of the mill conformist academics. For those who come forward such as RS and others are clearly putting the information to use on a larger scale and for very practical applications and they have results. If everything was meant for a layman to replicate, then that invalidates the entire concept of having different trades. With respect to electrical or mechanical engineering, I'm a layman. Most people hire plumbers, electricians, auto mechanics, etc. because the average person isn't able to deal with those kind of things, most people can't even change their own sparkplugs - especially in new cars, yet you expect some explanation to be given to the layman so they can build their own machine that powers their home????? Bedini disclosed a circuit so people can replicate the RPX Sideband Generator - 100% disclosed - different from the production circuit but doe the same thing. One competent engineer tried it and it took 10 builds to get it tuned right. You have got to be kidding! Don't take offense, but there is no way that is a realistic expectation. And what crossroads for humanity? There is a lot of emotional propaganda for humanity right now, there is no energy crisis, even with oil, it self regenerates non-stop and even for conventional solutions - with serious insulation and weatherization and conventional solar done right - it solves almost all the energy problems for homes and businesses but it isn't sexy, doesn't feed the poverty consciousness narrative pushed by the radical nutjobs who are dedicated to convincing themselves and the naive that the sky is falling, etc. I just had to buy a new washer/dryer set and just got what is probably the world's most efficient set by Miele with a heat pump dryer that dries as fast as a heater element dryer - max load is about 900 watts or less to do the same drying as an electric heater element dryer of several thousand watts. The solutions to the "crossroads" of humanity as far as energy is concerned is boring old conservation whether you want to believe it or not and is not some advanced electromagnetic free energy machine. Those are important because they are a solution to many things including overturning erroneous scientific principles but don't be deceived that these are needed to save the world because they don't. We've put more into the public's hand regarding real "free energy" science, principles and know-how than all other publishers combined in history. I stand behind that.



5. I have never understood the obsession by some with the idea that something has to be self powered to prove or be free energy. It's complete nonsense. Refrigerators are free energy devices moving about 200% the amount of heat in electrical equivalent compared to what the compressor draws and it doesn't need to be self running to prove that. Every geothermal heat pump is the same, every air source heat pump is the same, etc. My dryer is almost 300% overunity and it doesn't have to run itself to prove it is a free energy device. Self-running is a desirable characteristic if the COP is high enough but has no relevance in proving there is free energy.



6. Again, the saving humanity deal is nonsense. Don't talk to me about some machine that is needed to save humanity when I could bet money that you probably have a house or apartment that wastes over 50% of all its energy consumption and even if you used 100% solar, you will use over twice as many panels as you need compared to if you did the boring advanced insulation and weatherization methods. Conservation, stop the losses, then you only need 1/2 of the input needed to run your entire home. It costs less to stop the loss than it does to create 50% more power than needed! This is common sense and a fact but everyone does it backwards - install solar to waste 1/2 of everything produced?? Forget about the nonsense that some machine will save humanity, what needs savings are the minds dedicated to seeing the world through poverty-stricken eyes.



7. Already addressed the self-running nonsense.



8. Thank you but the root for me is not a passion for free energy, it is a passion for justice and free energy is only one of many means to an end.



9. Not everyone is lost in their purpose so I don't agree everyone is wondering why "we're here". I know why I'm here and my purpose is defined and very clear. Everyone needs to figure that out for themselves. I don't delete criticism against me. I've never censored anyone in this forum in the last 12 years that it's been online. I've only banned and kicked out people for name-calling, constant profanity and other things that violate the forum rules. I've deleted posts that contain the above and other people's opinions don't dictate how I feel about myself or what I do. I take into consideration feedback from others but there are various categories of what is to be taken seriously and what is not. Some of them who were booted claimed I'm censoring them but the records show that their posts are still here after all these years. So, absolutely nothing proves your point. There are no misleading claims with any of the books or videos. Look at the bullet-points of what is claimed and exactly that is delivered in the presentations. There is what there is and then there is what you turn it into. It is common for people to overlay their expectations on something even when that something's description does not jive with those expectations. That is just human nature - so be it. There have been customers for the Bedini chargers that complained because it didn't repair their batteries that had shorted cells that were warped from them overheating the batteries by pushing them too hard with conventional chargers. Unrealistic expectations - we tell everyone exactly what they're for and what to expect and some people make up their own ideas and and wind up blaming us for their own imagination.

[Aaron]

testimonials

Hi Aaron I was referring to systems that have verified comments about a product service or company. I work primarily with retailers. These systems greatly improve the ecomm conv rate. So people are used to trusting their systems. That's why, if some extraordinary claim or product appears in my newsfeed I immediately look for some verifiable endorsement. So these systems verify the testimonial is a real person. Not the claim itself.

Any testimonials we've posted are usually people we know that are active in the forums, come to the conference, etc. I understand that doesn't mean a lot to people who don't know who they are.



I can look into something like this for the websites. We get testimonials all the time, but I get so burnt out on the web page grind that I stopped posting them for a long time now. Need to pass this on to someone local so I can dedicate my time to putting devices into production.

Sounds like each person who gives a testimonial might have to register and validate their identity or something.

[Aaron]

response

Please accept my message with love, I sincerely do love all fellow humans and your passion for free energy!

Please don't take my response personal - I'm just laying it out as honest as I can and I highly disagree with most of your perspective.

[Iamnuts]

Simple.

If one person had a working device the whole scientific community would be in turmoil. Period.
End of debate.

[bobo36us]

[QUOTE=Aaron;316523]bobo36us

Hi Aaron, I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond to my post, I'm sure you're a very busy man! I certainly did set the stage for you to be defensive, but I promise you that wasn't my intent. I will respond to your answers below, and hopefully our debate will get me closer to seeing or owning a FE device first hand

1. You're grouping everyone so maybe haven't really listened to them. Blatant example - Eric Dollard, he doesn't believe in free energy and is very open about that. I've never heard him say that, but I'll take your word for it. Let me just ask you then, how much more time does he need to invest, or how many more books does he need to write simply to better "understand" if it isn't all leading somewhere? And, why is his material being marketed to people in the FE movement if he himself hasn't achieved it or doesn't believe in it?

Further, when I read a statement like "The explanation of why it is possible to synthesize electric power by manipulating the electric waves as they flow through the different quadrants of rotation." on your website promoting one of his books, it leads me to believe that there might actually be details on that subject in the book that could produce FE. Synthesize is a synonym for produce, so what was the real meaning of that statement then?

On that same promotional page of your website for that same book, you say: "he is also the only person since Tesla's death to successfully build a real Magnifying Transmitter." Perhaps others will interpret this statement differently, but to a novice like me is sounds like a OU device. That alone again leads me to want to buy the book, but also that Eric Dollard does believe in FE and has discovered a way to achieve it with his "Magnifying Transmitter"!

You also make references to your website to Dollard as the "Modern day Tesla". From everything I've heard or read about Tesla, he had multiple FE devices, so if Dollard is walking hand in hand with his work and considered a modern day version of him, isn't it easy to see why making a statement like that might lead one to believe there's more inside that book than what there actually is?

You've also referred to Dollard as the "most knowledgeable expert alive today on the true nature of electricity". Well, if we assume there are dozens (or more) electrical based FE devices in existence as you claim, and Dollard is the smartest man in the field, wouldn't one put 2 and 2 together and possibly have the belief that the information within the book might lead to a OU device before deciding whether or not to buy it?

His / your books also generally make references to "suppressed" technology", doesn't that even further lead one to believe there might be some kind of useful information in the book to make, build, or further understand a OU device? I mean, why else would the information ever have been "suppressed" if it wasn't game changing or useful?

Of course all of your books have a 100% money back guarantee, which is a brilliant marketing tool that I also use in my own business. After all, it's kind of difficult to be too hard on someone if they've offered you ALL of your money back, right?!?! False hopes and time wasted be damned though :-(

Sorry if that last comment seems snarky, but that truly is how I feel after reading a lot of your material.

Bedini did power his home off the grid when he lived in California and got harassed by the power company. If the President of the United States can say it, then so can I, Bull****! I don't mean necessarily that it didn't happen, just that he wasn't smart enough to find a way around it! Yes, we are all aware how the electric company doesn't want you messing with any of their equipment, but I stumbled across a brilliant idea on a FE website many years ago (might have even been here) to simply plug a UL approved motor into your home outlet, and then drive it with your FE motor, thus turning it into a generator. How much simpler could that possibly get, and the electric company couldn't say a damn thing about it! What a brilliant way to bring a open source FE device to the masses!

It may not have been 100% free, but running day and night and of the proper scale could make it pretty darn close. Please excuse me if I'm missing a technical step somewhere in there, but hopefully you get the idea of what I and the gentleman who originally had the idea mean.

But by no means is this the ONLY idea to beat the electric company! So again, working device aside, I don't buy into not being able to creatively sidestep any obstruction efforts from the electric company or other powers. In fact, how about open source the device that was powering your home and then let hundreds of millions of people help you out with your problem!

Bedini & Lindemann both showed a device capable of powering your home. The 10-coiler ran on a golf car battery bank while charging a very large cell phone tower battery bank at a COP of 5.0 or 500% above the draw from the small input battery bank. Will you please link me to that thread or video. And if that is the case, why isn't it the top thread here daily, and why hasn't anyone reproduced it and shown their results?

In the 3 battery thread, I said 10.0 COP but I was reminded of what the numbers were - my mistake. Proving a concept does not equal a responsibility to make it available to you to power your home and it is a faulty assumption to believe in such ideas. The information is there, you have the information so apply it as you see fit. That's EXACTLY the problem, there is definitely no shortage of "Proof of Concept" ideas floating around out there! But the simple fact STILL remains, and was the subject of my first message, for the love of god, just show me ONE that has real useful power! I'm not even saying it doesn't exist, just that I haven't found it yet. Could be my own ignorance, or could be Google and "The Man" filtering out all OU devices, so all I am asking is, if you are aware of one, PLEASE let me know!

Also as I mentioned yesterday, I'm not even looking for a free ride, I've got good money to spend! I would think a OU device that would power a home could probably be built for under 5k, or maybe 20k if some big company puts it into production with a big markup, but I would still be willing to pay 10x that just to actually have it power my home and see it work because I am so frustrated at this point!


2. People with working devices have brought them forward. Bedini's large Ferris Wheel motor produced a LOT of mechanical work while the input and output batteries stayed charged to the top - self running - demonstrated to hundreds of people who were free to take whatever measurements they wanted. I have seen a few of those Ferris Wheel type devices, but they ALL look like they could be stopped with a pinky finger, so please tell me what your / John's definition of a LOT of power is. Is it 100% open sourced and being successfully replicated by others? It looks like a huge pain in the ass to build and / or machine, but I did ask where to find a FE device, and you are telling me. Would you please point me to the most specific information on this device that you are aware of that aids one to build it with details and circuits. And if this does work as you claim, why aren't people on here putting kits together or parts of kits together to make it easier for everyone to build and power their homes?

Graham Gunderson showed two - one that was barely over 1.0 COP to prove the point and all replication details were given. And one that showed COP of 7.0 or so - the Magnetic Implosion Transformer. I don't know much about this guy, I'll take a look at his work. Again though, is he open sourcing or are people replicating?

Jim Murray and Paul Babcock showed COP of almost 50.0 lighting 50 watts of bulbs for a net loss of close to 1 watt from the input. Both of those guys piss me off possibly more than anyone else in the FE field! Either one of them alone could offer us all energy independence, but what is stopping them? Money? greed? Politics?

Unlike Tesla and many other famous inventors, these guys are actually ALIVE, but still they CHOOSE not to disclose the details of one single OU device when it appears that they actually have many! Don't get me wrong, that is their right, but seriously what is the F-ing point running around all over the place talking about them if you're never going to disclose the "magic" of the device???

There's a good chance these guys are never going to be billionaires from their devices, but if they chose to actually market their inventions instead of simply talking about them they could probably get many many millions pretty darn quick! Again, how much does one need to do what is in the best interest of the masses?

The principles of how it worked were given in their presentation and I only know of maybe one person who even tried to replicate it - I think Mario tried from what I recall and didn't get the same results but results or not, that is only one person I recall even making the attempt. Again, something I said in my first post. If guys way smarter than me cant do it, why would I even attempt such a complicated device?!?!

RS Stafford showed the 6 coiler Bedini machine powering loads while the batteries stayed charged up and the 2nd SG presentation Peter showed, he did the same thing with the automated battery swapper - mechanical work, making electricity with generator coils, operating on crappy Walmart garden batteries, but while doing all that work all weekend without being charged up, they kept themselves charged up. The Kromrey was demonstrated by Peter showing twice as much went to the battery as what left the input - all meters show different on that machine and it's not a power factor trick. The know-how on most of these has been provided. I've told everyone plenty of times exactly how I built my self-running-self-charging Bedini oscillator and after all these years, ZERO people have contacted me and said, "Aaron, I did what you said and it did work or it didn't work". I'm not responsible for what anyone does with the information and neither are any of the presenters. To all of that, is it open source? Is it for sale? Is it being duplicated by others? Is anyone actually powering a home?

Open source is irrelevant. Bedini and others have a right to patent and protect the commercial value of their inventions - it's there work and they do not owe anything to anyone. I NEVER said they did. I'm personally willing to buy a household unit from ANY of these guys at 10x fair market value! Again, if they're not going to disclose or sell their devices, with all due respect, just please stop talking!

[bobo36us]

What is equally true is that nobody owes you anything. Being that this is the case, they still openly shared their work and encouraged people to learn their work and build it for PERSONAL use. That disqualifies any belief that something has to be open source to be of benefit to people or the "layman" who you believe should be able to build these things. There are plenty of people who have patented game-changing technologies who have openly taught the public about them and encouraged them to learn and use it. That includes not just Bedini, but Babcock, Murray and others. Murray disclosed his Dynaflux Alternator and Transforming Generator that were patented, patents expired and he openly disclosed the details that were missing from the patents and gave everyone the blessing to do with it what they want. The list goes on...I'm not here to debate all of those facts with you, I was just asking yesterday, does anybody have a OU device powering a home, and if so is it being shared and replicated? Following up on that, is there a FE device being offered for sale? We are CONSTANTLY hearing about someting coming to market, but it never actually EVER appears! As to Babcock and Murray, I stated my humble opinion earlier :-)


3. Gotoluc - Luc Choquette is a liar, fraud, charlatan and more. He is the thief that claimed he invented my plasma ignition circuit and had himself listed on the patent for my invention. His replication of Skinner is garbage and so is his analysis. The input is elliptical, not circular, which keeps it an equilibrium machine - elliptical makes it non-equilibrium, which is required - otherwise, you're missing a large part of the gravitational input. Everyone is trying to do it with a circular input because they aren't able to comprehend or believe what is shown in the original Skinner video. Great, you've identified the problem, now build me a unit and I will pay you handsomely for it :-)

I know Skinner's daughter and learned more about it than most and I only know one single person who built a large scale 4 quadrant machine that is working on making an elliptical input because that is obviously how it works. The only thing gotoluc nailed is another nail in his coffin of disinformation, pretentiousness and lies. He claims to be some benevolent humanitarian (first of all someone who is will not share that with anyone but he shouts loudly about all his charitable work) - he is a greedy fraud that is only interested in money and I have all the emails to prove it. You are also acting as if the average layman can replicate these machines. There is a such thing as engineering and physics. If everything that is open and known could be made by the layman, everyone would be building their own cars, televisions, computers, homes, etc. but we don't see that for obvious reasons. Your argument doesn't hold any weight.I just used his work as a example, I actually don't know much about him other than it appeared he put a lot of effort into it to no avail.


4. If you don't think anything useful has been disclosed, then why are you still looking here? Because I can't stop thinking about it! I know in my heart of hearts FE exists, but again, I've yet to see a device powering a home and being open sourced or available for purchase"

Again, it is nobody's responsibility for what anyone does with the info (nor can they be!). There are a heck of a lot of people that watch this forum that are way smarter than you and I combined, they get what is presented and they stay very quiet behind the scenes. I regularly communicate with PhDs who do understand the validity of what is taught - some are very very well-known academics, engineers for NASA, Boeing, etc. that I have discussions with and even govt scientists from around the world - if you don't think they aren't taking this all seriously, you would be kidding yourself - usually I get to learn more from them than what they learn from our publications, etc. but they're not the run of the mill conformist academics. For those who come forward such as RS and others are clearly putting the information to use on a larger scale and for very practical applications and they have results. If everything was meant for a layman to replicate, then that invalidates the entire concept of having different trades. With respect to electrical or mechanical engineering, I'm a layman. Most people hire plumbers, electricians, auto mechanics, etc. because the average person isn't able to deal with those kind of things, most people can't even change their own sparkplugs - especially in new cars, yet you expect some explanation to be given to the layman so they can build their own machine that powers their home????? Bedini disclosed a circuit so people can replicate the RPX Sideband Generator - 100% disclosed - different from the production circuit but doe the same thing. One competent engineer tried it and it took 10 builds to get it tuned right. You have got to be kidding! Don't take offense, but there is no way that is a realistic expectation. And what crossroads for humanity? There is a lot of emotional propaganda for humanity right now, there is no energy crisis, even with oil, it self regenerates non-stop and even for conventional solutions - with serious insulation and weatherization and conventional solar done right - it solves almost all the energy problems for homes and businesses but it isn't sexy, doesn't feed the poverty consciousness narrative pushed by the radical nutjobs who are dedicated to convincing themselves and the naive that the sky is falling, etc. I just had to buy a new washer/dryer set and just got what is probably the world's most efficient set by Miele with a heat pump dryer that dries as fast as a heater element dryer - max load is about 900 watts or less to do the same drying as an electric heater element dryer of several thousand watts. The solutions to the "crossroads" of humanity as far as energy is concerned is boring old conservation whether you want to believe it or not and is not some advanced electromagnetic free energy machine. Those are important because they are a solution to many things including overturning erroneous scientific principles but don't be deceived that these are needed to save the world because they don't. We've put more into the public's hand regarding real "free energy" science, principles and know-how than all other publishers combined in history. I stand behind that. I can tell you really put a lot of thought into this entire post, and I'm not trying to win a argument here, but rather hopefully get one step closer to owning a OU device! To most of what you just said, I will repeat what I said yesterday......."I don't need to know what happens physically and microscopically in my body when I drink water, but I know where to find it and that I need it!", meaning that just because I may not understand how a device is built DOESN'T mean that I don't need it or won't benefit greatly from it!



5. I have never understood the obsession by some with the idea that something has to be self powered to prove or be free energy. It's complete nonsense. Refrigerators are free energy devices moving about 200% the amount of heat in electrical equivalent compared to what the compressor draws and it doesn't need to be self running to prove that. Every geothermal heat pump is the same, every air source heat pump is the same, etc. My dryer is almost 300% overunity and it doesn't have to run itself to prove it is a free energy device. Self-running is a desirable characteristic if the COP is high enough but has no relevance in proving there is free energy. There are a hundred different interpretations and opinions from gauges on just about any one single electronic device as to what is being consumed and what is being put out. Do you want to know the one simple test of OU that is NEVER questioned, SELF POWERED! True, a refrigerator may be OU, but if all energy is broken down into it's equivalent BTU's, then why can't we see a refrigerator or heat pump power itself??? I'm sure you / most on here probably don't have anything nice to say about Dennis Lee, but his early stage heat pump actually made a lot of sense to me: https://youtu.be/thyRWVWyVLo?t=1087 So if a refrigerator is already OU, and then you could make the evaporator and condenser 3X larger like Dennis Lee says, but keep the pump the same size, at what point can it power itself???

Please don't start picking apart all of Dennis's devices or alleged scams, that's not why I posted the link, but his science behind the heat exchanger seems to make a lot of sense. And actually, what got me thinking about all of this more than anything was listening to Peter talk about how efficient Geothermal heating and cooling was. So if Geothermal is so efficient using the temperatures inside the earth, why wouldn't the Dennis Lee evaporative panels make perfect sense to make that even more efficient or OU? But I digress! Out of curiosity though, what is everyone's opinion on the Dennis Lee heat pump theory?



6. Again, the saving humanity deal is nonsense. Don't talk to me about some machine that is needed to save humanity when I could bet money that you probably have a house that wastes over 50% of all its energy consumption and even if you used 100% solar, you will use over twice as many panels as you need compared to if you did the boring advanced insulation and weatherization methods. Conservation, stop the losses, then you only need 1/2 of the input needed to run your entire home. It costs less to stop the loss than it does to create 50% more power than needed! This is common sense and a fact but everyone does it backwards - install solar to waste 1/2 of everything produced?? Forget about the nonsense that some machine will save humanity, what needs savings are the minds dedicated to seeing the world through poverty-stricken eyes. Those are ALL great points, but at the same time, I live and believe in a reality of abundance and no shortage of energy whatsoever. True, mankinds greed may be it's own worst enemy, but the fact remains that free energy is around us all 24/7 in many different forms! And, I never said I was trying to save money, I just want to see a damn working device powering a home!

7. Already addressed the self-running nonsense. As did I :-)


8. Thank you but the root for me is not a passion for free energy, it is a passion for justice and free energy is only one of many means to an end. Whatever your driving force, good for you!


9. Not everyone is lost in their purpose so I don't agree everyone is wondering why "we're here". I know why I'm here and my purpose is defined and very clear. Let me change that to most people. I myself have thought I had it figured out several times, only to find myself wondering again! One of the biggest problems I still struggle with on a regular basis is whether or not I actually share a planet called Earth with 7 billion other people, or if it's all just in my head?!?!?! LOL

Everyone needs to figure that out for themselves. I don't delete criticism against me. I've never censored anyone in this forum in the last 12 years that it's been online. I've only banned and kicked out people for name-calling, constant profanity and other things that violate the forum rules. I've deleted posts that contain the above and other people's opinions don't dictate how I feel about myself or what I do. I take into consideration feedback from others but there are various categories of what is to be taken seriously and what is not. Some of them who were booted claimed I'm censoring them but the records show that their posts are still here after all these years. That is good to hear!

[bobo36us]

So, absolutely nothing proves your point. There are no misleading claims with any of the books or videos. Look at the bullet-points of what is claimed and exactly that is delivered in the presentations. There is what there is and then there is what you turn it into. It is common for people to overlay their expectations on something even when that something's description does not jive with those expectations. That is just human nature - so be it. There have been customers for the Bedini chargers that complained because it didn't repair their batteries that had shorted cells that were warped from them overheating the batteries by pushing them too hard with conventional chargers. Unrealistic expectations - we tell everyone exactly what they're for and what to expect and some people make up their own ideas and and wind up blaming us for their own imagination.[/QUOTE]

Aaron, and all, I'm looking to buy or build a device to power a home that is not based on whether the sun is shining, or the wind is blowing, or whether or not I have a waterfall on my property! Suggestions please and thank you!

[Aaron]

iamnuts' delusions and self-deception

If one person had a working device the whole scientific community would be in turmoil. Period.
End of debate.

That is a naive and immature opinion from someone who is wearing rose colored glasses.



If they had a cure for x, the medical system would embrace it. Same illogical, ill-informed opinion.


There is no end of debate because you're just blowing hot air. If you're that gullible, you will buy anything and probably voted for Hillary.



Anything that will jeopardize recurring/residual income for consumable energy products is not welcome, shareholder profits come first and for any company to support something that obsoletes what their investor's are banking on - long term profits, will be met with pitchforks and torches. It's not how the world works.


The scientific community does NOT embrace anything that challenges the established paradigm - that is an indisputable fact and I know many professors who are currently teaching at universities around the US and overseas that agree with this 100%. It is a slow, long-drawn out process to even let anything disruptive get its foot in the door let alone allowing it to be embraced. You really do sound like you just fell off the turnip truck.



Free energy has been demonstrated countless times in and out of the academic world for many years. You are simply completely dedicated to self-deception and ignorance.



https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstrac...ett.108.097403


Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes Operating above Unity Efficiency

Parthiban Santhanam, Dodd Joseph Gray, Jr., and Rajeev J. Ram

Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 097403 – Published 27 February 2012

See Synopsis: Optical Device is More Than 100% Efficient





The scale of this demonstration is very small but is irrelevant - it violates conventionally believed thermodynamics but is obviously perfectly in alignment with Nobel Prize winning thermodynamicist Ilya Prigogine's open dissipative system distinctions (non-equilibrium thermodynamics), which did not "extend" thermodynamics to include system that produce more than what we have to put into them, it CORRECTED thermodynamics. 30mw in with 70mw of measurable light - ambient heat is the free environmental input. At MIT, they apparently don't know the difference between efficiency and coefficient of performance - total in vs total out must include the heat input and will be under 100% efficient, but the COP is 2.33, which is 233% MORE work is being done than the operator has to input to the LED. Indisputable, violates your ignorant set of beliefs - Period. End of debate.



Yes, you certainly do have some mental issues - despite evidence to the contrary, you hold on to your ignorance because you are mentally and emotionally incapable of dealing with reality. It's too uncomfortable for you to come to terms with the fact that everything you thought you knew about physics is the real crackpot physics.

[spacecase0]

We already know that even most electrical engineers are not qualified to analyze input vs output. I personally know hundreds of people with electrical engineering degrees but could count all the ones that I trust and believe to give an authoritative assessment on validating input vs output claims on one hand because it is a dark art and is not as obvious as many think.

I agree that most can not test power accurately

I have spent quite a bit of time on this topic of power measurement,
and had a work project at a laser company where we needed to do this in real time to get the most out of the laser without breaking it. It was a group effort, and I learned lots more than what I learned in college.
if anyone needs help with the measuring, I will help if possible.
but not sure I am up for writing a book on the topic