Open letter to P. Lindemann

[dambit]

Boring ..... I second that.

Hi All,

I have to agree, this thread is getting "old".

Everyone has there own opinions and that is great, but recycling what appears to be the same arguments that ruined peoples experience at other forums seems pointless.

I for one have built many an SSG or SG and they all work great (apart from one, bad build), I am still figuring out the G-field and am enjoying every minute of the Tesla Switch thread. (Real progress is being made by those guys )

As far as people not giving out their "secrets" fast enough, well yes, it would be nice to have it all at once, but it's not going to happen plus it may be dangerous. Like giving fire to a child, home tinkerers all over the place could drop like flies from not knowing enough about the energy they are playing with.

That's all from me. I'm off bed.

Cheers,

Steve.

P.S John B, it would be great if you would allow the people on this forum to replicate you scalar wave detector. Cheers

[sebosfato]

are you really John C. Bedini?


what is the maximum ?energy gain factor of your invented electrical generator in patent n° 7,274,124

Seems a good idea!

[darkwizard]

This is 75% electric efficient, bad constructed Bedini SG

YouTube - My Bedini SG


Sorry is my old Moto Q celular phone, the quality of the video is bad.

TINY BATTERY

[John_Bedini]

Richard,
This is enough, you either have built a bad SG machine or you just do not understand for some reason how to make it work. If I wanted to invite you to my shop I would have. You could have traveled to see Rick a long time ago.
Remember Stan M the man who took my Radiant oscillator apart I never forgot that. If I wanted to give out the circuit then I would have done that, but it was nobody's business what I was doing. That is when my trust in people and some others was broken, I never forget, You can't come to my shop to see anything.

This is all a big game with you. You build your own devices, don't you?Two of the others involved built all the wrong timing circuits could not even turn on a SG3524 without Ricks help. Then they built circuit boards that did not work, so I know your SG claims are bogus. Stan M not only took my Radiant tube apart he jeopardize me on my patents and then gave out the circuits everywhere, he named the people involved to Rick along with posted pictures. Peter and I were kind to Stan M, he backstabbed us and caused us not to get the rest of the funding. This hurt Peter and I and caused the project to end early on the Solar Kick and Radiant charger, for solar. I had to report this to my investors who withdrew in terms of funding. Never mind about NDA they mean nothing with some people.
So now keep talking and get Dave involved, who should not be involved as you will kill that project too.

I have told everybody what to do in all these past years and so has Peter, some did and are very happy, some did not. Sterling has posted in the past he charged his kids swing batteries and gained a longer time I don't need anymore proof then that, that the machine worked, that was a poor built SG.

The other thing is It's at my discretion to answer if I want, do not make demands of me that I must give information on the G-field.
John B


QUOTE=linesrg;81177]John,

It may be getting boring but you are not answering the points being made.

Sterling's figures are taken from a battery being charged - this means nothing.

I am not the only one to get what you consider to be poor COP figures from machines following what you have posted for us to follow.

The EFTV DVD showing the 10 coil device was scientifically meaningless as there was no demonstration of how long the batteries were being charged and what energy was going into the machine to achieve this and there was certainly no measurement of the energy extracted.

I could have run much the same demonstration with my 6 coiler and two 1350AHr banks of batteries using a proportionally smaller set of lamps.

I am going to withdraw form this exchange now as there is nothing to be gained from it.

My offer to travel to see a working device remains. It has been around for some time now and nobody has taken the offer up. I would not say who or where if it happened but I would publicly concede that what is commonly understood to be OU does exist.

Regards

Richard[/QUOTE]

[baroutologos]

If i may speak, without being exccommunicated from this forum...

I long wanted to talk in person to Mr J. Bedini (via mail of course but no answer received ever), since it was your Simple School Girl device that i start being involved in this exciting yet sometimes frustrating field of alternative "solutions" research.

We the Greeks have a saying that goes.. "the good day can be seen from the morning.." and yet, my very first noobie steps in this exceedingly simple device as the SSG were met with complete failure regarding COP effieciency under any circumstance.

I have read almost any site on the net mentioning ur name. I have read back then every advice you gave (i remember a list of 40 points or so), even incomprehensible to me... almost anything... yet COP over 1 in battery (measurable) terms is nowhere near. I upgraded in materials of extraordinary material coil cores etc yet nada.

Then i naturally and with a bitter taste proceeded to other setups (equally disapointing so far for me), yet several anomalies were confronted enough to keep me interested that indeed something going on here...

Of course, no-one can blame you for my inability to replicate an easy device and yet achieve OU (batt in vs batt out). yet I could NOT meet anyone also potent at doing this. perhaps we are all a bunch of noobs that cannot handle a coil, a trasistor, 2 resistors and 2 batteries..

All milodrama (Greek word also aside, i need to know why? Why you motivate people at doing this, yet no-one can stand and report any explicit success? Or i have not met the right people?

Regards,
Baroutologos

[Aaron]

results and skeptics

Why you motivate people at doing this, yet no-one can stand and report any explicit success? Or i have not met the right people?

There are people that have claimed success, Kevin has, I have, Rick showed
increase in front side battery, my oscillator with ground rod increases
voltage in running cap (no batteries), there are others that claimed success
in a certain yahoo group - maybe a dozen and that is just the ones that
I've seen online.

Part of the secret in my oscillator is that the running cap was charged
with super high voltage from an ignition coil and that gives it some kind
of electret effect that maintains the dipole. But of course saying that
now, inevitably, a skeptic will try it, not build it right, will abuse that
front cap and will see that it lasts 5 seconds, goes flat and then I'll
get blamed for not giving the real answer. lol - can almost bet money on it.

On the heater project, I showed a resistor dropping temperature with
data to back it from a $10,000 scope. I even played the stupid games
with a "skeptic" on some tests that wanted to see if over my current
sensing resistor a volt meter would show negative... as foolish as it is
to use that for those frequencies, I did it and the meter showed a net
negative voltage - and of course it was "flawed" or whatever just because
it showed him exactly what he was hoping he wouldn't see. lol

And even more foolish was to ask to put a digital amp meter to see if it
would show negative amperage... they won't show negative amperage.
When it is negative, it will show a 0 with a minus sign. I did that test,
showed the 0 with minus sign showing there was NO POSITIVE CURRENT
leaving the battery as the dso showed. lol still not good enough - even
thought the correct way to do it was done and then foolish tests are
requested to prove it better.

I've shown a coil collapsing and giving back a wave with more area under
the line than the initial pulse showing a stronger CURRENT recharge to
the front side battery than what left. Many of us have seen that the
"skeptics" of that heater project made one excuse after another and
another and other each time they were proven wrong. They claimed that
100% of the input into an inductive resistor was dissipated in heat - is
that why it gave back and equal or more recharge to the battery after
the switch was turned off? lol - I mean the problem really is that satan
in between the ears. The primal reasoning mind - some are able to
exercise their choice and some are just committed to allowing it to
keep them in the dark.

I even showed that in an early test, the front side battery climbed almost
a volt while powering my initial small inductive resistor, making heat and
it took about 24 hours before the voltage came down to where it was
before I started the test! That was all FREE HEAT & FREE SWITCHING.

My friend that has a bunch of magnets that pick up gold, silver, etc...
has a degree in physics from a local university. Showed it to his
professor, he SAW IT WORK, went to the blackboard and started to
scribble a bunch of equations and told my friend not to bother with it
because it wouldn't work - AFTER HE SAW IT WORK.

This mindset is not an isolated case
and is the rule rather than the exception in most people that look at
something unconventional with conventional programming.

Most skeptics are not skeptics, they are cynics that are only trying to
maintain their pre-established view and there is no intention to see
if something else may be true. That isn't thinking, that is robotics.

Some of the skeptics at this forum appear to be honestly trying to learn
and figure out what the deal is but it is kind of rare. There is no such
thing as scientific skepticism because that bias automatic disqualifies
any objective analysis. The only objective way to see these things is
with no opinion at all regardless of past history, learning, etc...

There is a saying - Some will, some won't, so what, next!

Progress has never been made by convincing unbelievers. It's made by
moving along and capturing the imagination of those that are smart enough
to pay attention and believe and move forward and even if they don't
understand, they will inevitably be pulled along.

Nobody is at risk of being banned or anything from speaking their mind.
I just think it isn't too cool when someone makes demands of people that
have been generous with their proprietary information, time, effort, etc...
I'm not saying you're doing that Baroutologos - that is to those that
have.

What does everyone think the recovery really is? Are you storing potential
in the coil when charged or does it comes in fresh from the environment.
If it was stored, then how can anything be stored if a certain amount was
required to do the initial work to begin with because it would be dissipated
in work and losses.

If you get ANYTHING
back then the the "required" amount to do the work to begin with wasn't
really required was it? Actually it was required to do the work, that means
that any recovery is evidence that there is new input into the system
when it resets itself.

If it takes 1 joule of energy to lift an apple 10
cm's, when it is let go of, if there is anything that happens after that,
then it is a lie that the math said that amount was required to lift because
there should be zero recovery. Why does the apple fall and do work?
Because new potential enters the system and nothing was stored.

Anyway, there is a lot of documented skeptical communication here that
shows even when the facts are pointed out (dso data dumps), etc...
that each piece of evidence is either flawed, not good enough, etc...
to the skeptics... intellectual honesty goes a long way.

For the skeptics - it seems that any points of evidence are never
admitted, they're ignored so as not to bring attention to the fact they
contradict the skeptical belief, and another point is brought up that
is different from the already disproved point until it is also shown to be
wrong, no credit given, there is silence so as not to draw attention to
it, and then something else is brought up... this is the method of
politics and not progress. Never address the points, bring up things that
misdirect attention in another place. It's old.

As the saying goes - they don't erect statues to honor skeptics. It isn't
hard to guess why.

Anyway, the results I mention destroy the premise of every argument
every skeptic has regarding the possibility of these machines performing
MORE work than what was provided on the input not including
environmental input - according to protocols developed by British Petroleum
(the battery draw down tests that I have successfuly done and never
published) and the data dump tests required by the Academics as being
the authentic way to measure the input used.

[John_Bedini]

Darkwizard,
Make it bigger with no iron, yes, yes, yes. That simple machine does real good. This is what everybody need to see. The simple machine. The machine you have built will run down to 6 volts and still charge batteries. I have built Solar engines this way running off 1.2 V garden batteries, continues operation from just one charge. I have built big ones at home doing the same thing with much bigger batteries. I have done wagon wheel size units running on 42Ma the same way and charging 230 Ah batteries. So I can't understand what people are doing without energy. Never mind all these Skeptics there're lazy and will be the first to jump saying I know that worked. That is good work.
Thanks for that.
John Bedini

YouTube - My Bedini SG


Sorry is my old Moto Q celular phone, the quality of the video is bad.

TINY BATTERY

[Inquorate]

Inquorate

I'm not sure what you meant by your last post quoting me and 2 others. Are you saying that I'm wasting my time trying this or what?

Mark

@ Mark, sorry I should have clarified, I was pointing out that by combining the sg with the three battery tesla switch, overunity is theoretically and seems experimentally achievable.

The message was for those saying it can't be done, it's only 35% efficient, etc.

My apologies, hope no offence was given. IMHO you're on the right track.

[elias]

The difference between negative energy and positive energy charged batteries?

Hi Aaron
Thanks Aaron for the reply but, my problem is not over-charging.
I wanted to know what are the differences between a positive energy
charged battery and a negative energy charged battery, which is claimed
to be "time-charged". I have noted some differences, and it has turned
out to be a problem, these batteries although deliver good energy, but
seem to be destructive to some devices such as mp3 players. The mp3
player is dead after using an AAA battery charged with the SSG for several
times. Or maybe the circuitry for detecting battery charge level is dead
which refuses to keep the mp3 player on.

First time when I charged my shaver with Bedini SG and found out that
the circuitry of it is semi-killed I thought it is only a coincidence and it
had nothing to do with the battery, but now that the mp3-player has the
same problem, I am quite sure that there is something unusual about this
charge.

I would be thankful if someone could explain more clearly the "differences"
between positive energy charged and negative energy charged batteries.

I am completely convinced that negative charge lasts longer and has
different properties and it can also be harmful for some devices.

Also I remember that it was insisted that the negatively charged battery
must not be used in the front and you'd need to convert the energy to
positive to do this. So what is the difference? Please clarify this dear John
Bedini. Thanks.

Regards
Elias

[Joit]

I guess your Mp3 player didnt survive the Power from the better Batteries
Better get a good one, they have a lot sensitive Electronic inside.
And that Batteries or an other Cells get a better charge, i can only confirm that.
I see it at my Bicycle lamp, which can light double or more from the time,
as if its loaded with a conventional Charger.
The only different is the Ah, what you get out, because Plus will allways be Plus
and Minus is Minus at DC. Nothing else between.

[Aaron]

overcharging

my problem is not over-charging.

I wasn't implying that you were overcharging, just the 1au is all automatic
so we don't have to guess. I've never had an issue overcharging that I
can recall.

[elias]

I guess your Mp3 player didnt survive the Power from the better Batteries
Better get a good one, they have a lot sensitive Electronic inside.
And that Batteries or an other Cells get a better charge, i can only confirm that.
I see it at my Bicycle lamp, which can light double or more from the time,
as if its loaded with a conventional Charger.
The only different is the Ah, what you get out, because Plus will allways be Plus
and Minus is Minus at DC. Nothing else between.

It "was" a good one, a creative mp3 player. Has anyone tried these batteries on devices that have CMOS circuitry in them?

[Joit]

I didnt, but i know, that a lot Devices have her own Power supply,
when you use one, what is oversized or undersized, you will probatly it easy damage or it wont work.
And well, i think its pure intention from the Manufacture,
when you dont use 'her' Parts, that it will damaged the Device.
I blame the crap Circuits what they use in there, and that the single Parts are not better protected,
even when there Chips in there, what dont stand long against to much current.

[Aaron]

neg/pos

Not sure if there is any cmos in a digital multimeter but I use the 9v's
in there with no problem.

The neg/pos energy question is all through many of the yahoo groups.
You could always repost it here in one of the SSG threads.

[dambit]

The batteries on many mp3 players and the like have voltage spike protection built into the battery itself. Once the safty has been triggered it makes the battery pretty much useless. If you peel the plastic away from a Li-Po for example, you will find a tiny circuit. This is the circuit that causes problems when using pulse chargers.

Cheers,

Steve